Author Topic: Guy Oseary  (Read 1756 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wons

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 669
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #30 on: August 10, 2018, 12:50:08 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
since he came on board the ticket prices have become too over priced..............haven't missed a concert since 1987 and didn't attend the last one because the prices are just too high to listen to mainly new material that is sub par IMO

That's not fair when there are tickets priced at $40, $76, and $106 dollars. There are ticket prices for every budget on this tour. You can't judge prices just by the ones that are most expensive.

I agree. I donít think the ticket prices are at all out of line for an act like U2, compared to other artists.  I do find it hard to believe Coldplay is the only artist that can beat $400MM.  Surely Taylor Swift beat that for the tour alone.

I also think the EI setlist decision could have a long-term detrimental effect on future ticket sales to casual fans, which are the majority of ticket buyers.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, realize I'm talking about a non-nostalgia tour, non-reunion tour. A tour for a new album of music. Coldplay are the only band or artist that are still active that has done that recently and could possibly do it again. Taylor Swift has never grossed 400 million on tour. She'll come close on the current tour. Her problem is that 80% of her fanbase is in the United States and its very difficult to get to $400 million, let alone the $700+ plus million U2 did on 360, when most of your fans are in the United States.

As for casual U2 fans, most of them sat out the recent tours for the band. Last time you had a lot of casuals at a U2 show was on the 360 tour.


Hmmm... I remember reading projections that it would top $400MM for the tour alone.  Then you have to add album sales.  But, I donít track music sales so you would probably know.

Well, I donít know how you define ďcasualsĒ, let alone know what percentage of them are at a show, but I felt like a lot of the people at the show I attended did not know the new songs, which would make them casual in my book.  Most of the people I know who went to the show are definitely casual.  I think if you reduced the audience to people who were not disappointed with the EI setlist, it would be a small audience.  Any band thatís been as popular for as long as U2, people are going to expect to hear the big songs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concert grosses are compiled strictly from ticket sales and ticket sales only. U2 has the highest grossing tour of all time with the 360 tour at $736 million gross. But all of that comes from just ticket sales. Merchandise and album sales or other things are not included.

Taylor Swift so far is averaging about $7 million gross per show, but she is only doing 53 shows. She will fall just shy of the $400 million mark. Not bad though for only having a strong following in 7 countries.

U2 played songs from all their albums, except 3, and many of them were big songs, on the current tour. Casual fans are the ones that skip the tours and albums that are not mega popular. The Vertigo Tour and 360 tour were massive tours playing to many of U2's largest audiences ever. The casual fans came out for those tours. The E&I tour is a tour that only dedicated fans would go to since it is based around a new album that is not widely popular. Sadly, this is the first time that even what would be regarded as dedicated fans did not listen to or buy the album.
I think you are vastly oversimplifying when you say:

he E&I tour is a tour that only dedicated fans would go to since it is based around a new album that is not widely popular.

This tour had some smaller stops they hadnít been to for many years.  They hadnít played Tulsa since War.  I am sure there were casual fans that went to the Tulsa show because it was the first show they could go to without traveling in 35 years.  Omaha hadnít been played since 2005.  The fans sitting at the shows?  Those are casual fans, and as you have pointed out, they are there.

Casual fans donít care about the new album.  They assume a U2 show will include the hits plus 3 or 4 new songs during which they can go to the bathroom.  They arenít listening to the new album, evaluating it, and then deciding whether or not to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's true. Back when I used to go to concerts, I didn't necessarily say "so-and-so's new album is fantastic, let's go." It was more, "so-and-so's in town, let's go." Obviously I would have been a casual fan already or I wouldn't have wanted to go at all. But when I went to see Elton John or Jethro Tull, I honestly don't even know (to this day) if they were touring a new album or not. I knew the Stones had a new album when I saw them, but I never bought it. And that wasn't even a diss; I just was a casual fan, enjoyed seeing them play, didn't really feel the need to acquire the new album. I was happy with my experience, still remember Mick and Keith and Ron and their blow-up dolls all these years later.

There are individuals like that at every show. I'm talking about a very broad analysis of who goes to certain tours and not others when it comes to U2. There is a pattern that has developed as U2 became a big band. When the new music is popular, the band is playing sellout shows in stadiums. When its not, they get the huge 50% cut in demand seen on POPMART. The casuals come out when the new music is popular, they generally stay home when its not as seen on POPMART and now the I&E and E&I tours. Die Hards stick with the band through thick and thin. The casuals come out when they like the new music or the band is somehow generating a lot of positive media. Absent things like that, the casuals stay home.


You enjoy analyzing things which is cool.  Its what I do for a living.  But IMHO, you get one comparison factor in your mind, like the Popmart thing and you base your whole analysis on that one thing, leaving out all the other factors.  This leads you to have to explain things like large areas of people sitting as the result of everyone suddenly growing too old and fat to standup in the space of literally one year since the JT tour.

I donít have the interest level in this topic to analyze why your popmart analogy doesnít make sense.  TBH, I had to force myself to read all that long post.  But I know for a fact that many tickets were sold before the album even came out and I know a lot of people who went that have no clue what U2 has been up to lately.  ďDie-hardĒ fans are so rare that the only way to meet one is at some gathering or on a forum like this.   I donít see how there could be enough to even half-fill an arena in Omaha or Tulsa.

U2 are a legacy act now.  They werenít yet in 1997.  So Iím afraid Iíll have to do the crummy thing of telling you that you havenít convinced me but Iím losing interest in the discussion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, the box office results from POPMART and other tours are solid factual information that cannot be disputed. So that is an excellent place to start. Start with something factual. So yes, its a good place to base analysis on, something solid. Other factors you mention are not necessarily facts or something as concrete as actual boxoffice results. I have every Boxscore for every U2 concert from POPMART tour all the way through the current tour.

I don't have a good explanation for people suddenly sitting down on this current tour. I did not see the I&E tour and although I don't remember anyone sitting down on the Joshua Tree tour, I was on the floor and did not get as good a look at the crowd in the upper levels of a massive stadium. Perhaps the "sit down thing" started as early as I&E tour in 2015. Either way, I was just taking a stab at explaining that. I don't think someone sitting down by itself is proof of a casual fan.

As for the definition of a DIE HARD fan, its nearly everyone that was willing to buy a ticket to the POPMART tour. The Edge even stated this. The casual fans are the ones that do not go to every tour. So:


Die Hard fan: sees the band on every tour

Casual Fan: does not see the band on every tour


           Those are the definitions that I use and that the band has used in the past.


U2 have been considered legends or a legacy act since just after the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987. Take VH1 and their Behind The Music series as well as their Legends series. Same programs essentially, but only a few artist were labled as LEGENDS. U2 were one of those artist along with the Rolling Stones, Beatles, Led Zeppelin and a few others. They were labled that back in 1998 when the show was first started. U2 Legends program on VH1 was released in the fall of 1998.

Anyways, I don't think whether they are or are not a Legacy act has anything really to do with the discussion. All artist have their die hard fans and casual fans. Its clear from U2 Boxcore concert history that when the casual fans come out, the band does record breaking business like on ZOO TV Tour, Vertigo Tour, and the 360 tour. When the casual fans do not come out like on POPMART tour, I&E tour, E&I tour, then attendance numbers go way down.

ZOO TV Tour - October 21, 1992 - Denver Colorado - Mile High Stadium - Attendance: 54,450 (casual fans attend the show)

Popmart Tour - May 1, 1997 - Denver Colorado - Mile High Stadium - Attendance: 28,540 (casual fans stay home)

360 Tour - May 21, 2011 - Denver Colorado -  Invesco Field - Attendance: 77,918 (casual fans attend the show)

Innocence And Experience Tour - June 6-7, 2015 - Denver Colorado - Pepsi Center - Attendance: 28,141 (casual fans stay home)


See the pattern? Its pretty obvious. The people who go to see every tour, The Die Hard's, rescue the band on the less popular tours. The casuals fans, those that don't go to every tour, cause the band to have record breaking business when they come out.

One important thing that is keeping the casual fan away is ticket price in the US.
Zoo TV: average ticket price was about $30 - ($54 today)
PopMart - ticket price $52.50 - ($82 today)
360 - GA tickets were $55 ($62-$64 today)
I&E - Average ticket price - around $115 depending on city - ($122 today)
JT30 - Average ticket price - around $120 depending on the city
E&I - Average ticket price - around $170 depending on city

In the case of E&I, U2 had also oversaturated the US touring market by having 3 tours in 3 years.

They have to let us miss them a bit and lower prices.

The above is not correct. Plus, I was looking at one city, Denver. Denver had only one stop recently in 2015 for two shows, so it was not over-saturated.


Here are the average ticket prices in Denver on each tour based on the actual gross from ticket sales divided by the attendance.

All average ticket prices adjusted for inflation.

There is no boxscore information available for the first three U2 tours that stopped in Denver.

Unforgettable Fire Denver: $28.79

Joshua Tree Denver: $39.01

ZOO TV Denver: $53.82

POPMART Denver: $78.47

Elevation Denver: $116.52

Vertigo Denver: $122.32

360 Denver: $96.08

Innocence And Experience Denver: $115.20


So as you can see, Innocence And Experience was actually not as expensive as Elevation Tour or the Vertigo Tour. Its only more expensive than 360 due to the fact that it failed to sell several thousand cheap seats while 360 soldout of everything which included a large number of cheaper tickets in the upper deck. Had The Denver innocence show soldout all of the cheap seats that it didn't, its average ticket price would be even lower than it is now.

Denver POPMART had only 28,000 people but was 20 dollars cheaper than Denver 360 which had 78,000 people.

Ticket prices were NOT the issue.

Offline achtungx

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 521
  • Lillywhite Called Me a Naughty British Slang Word
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #31 on: August 14, 2018, 07:34:41 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
since he came on board the ticket prices have become too over priced..............haven't missed a concert since 1987 and didn't attend the last one because the prices are just too high to listen to mainly new material that is sub par IMO

That's not fair when there are tickets priced at $40, $76, and $106 dollars. There are ticket prices for every budget on this tour. You can't judge prices just by the ones that are most expensive.

I agree. I donít think the ticket prices are at all out of line for an act like U2, compared to other artists.  I do find it hard to believe Coldplay is the only artist that can beat $400MM.  Surely Taylor Swift beat that for the tour alone.

I also think the EI setlist decision could have a long-term detrimental effect on future ticket sales to casual fans, which are the majority of ticket buyers.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, realize I'm talking about a non-nostalgia tour, non-reunion tour. A tour for a new album of music. Coldplay are the only band or artist that are still active that has done that recently and could possibly do it again. Taylor Swift has never grossed 400 million on tour. She'll come close on the current tour. Her problem is that 80% of her fanbase is in the United States and its very difficult to get to $400 million, let alone the $700+ plus million U2 did on 360, when most of your fans are in the United States.

As for casual U2 fans, most of them sat out the recent tours for the band. Last time you had a lot of casuals at a U2 show was on the 360 tour.


Hmmm... I remember reading projections that it would top $400MM for the tour alone.  Then you have to add album sales.  But, I donít track music sales so you would probably know.

Well, I donít know how you define ďcasualsĒ, let alone know what percentage of them are at a show, but I felt like a lot of the people at the show I attended did not know the new songs, which would make them casual in my book.  Most of the people I know who went to the show are definitely casual.  I think if you reduced the audience to people who were not disappointed with the EI setlist, it would be a small audience.  Any band thatís been as popular for as long as U2, people are going to expect to hear the big songs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concert grosses are compiled strictly from ticket sales and ticket sales only. U2 has the highest grossing tour of all time with the 360 tour at $736 million gross. But all of that comes from just ticket sales. Merchandise and album sales or other things are not included.

Taylor Swift so far is averaging about $7 million gross per show, but she is only doing 53 shows. She will fall just shy of the $400 million mark. Not bad though for only having a strong following in 7 countries.

U2 played songs from all their albums, except 3, and many of them were big songs, on the current tour. Casual fans are the ones that skip the tours and albums that are not mega popular. The Vertigo Tour and 360 tour were massive tours playing to many of U2's largest audiences ever. The casual fans came out for those tours. The E&I tour is a tour that only dedicated fans would go to since it is based around a new album that is not widely popular. Sadly, this is the first time that even what would be regarded as dedicated fans did not listen to or buy the album.
I think you are vastly oversimplifying when you say:

he E&I tour is a tour that only dedicated fans would go to since it is based around a new album that is not widely popular.

This tour had some smaller stops they hadnít been to for many years.  They hadnít played Tulsa since War.  I am sure there were casual fans that went to the Tulsa show because it was the first show they could go to without traveling in 35 years.  Omaha hadnít been played since 2005.  The fans sitting at the shows?  Those are casual fans, and as you have pointed out, they are there.

Casual fans donít care about the new album.  They assume a U2 show will include the hits plus 3 or 4 new songs during which they can go to the bathroom.  They arenít listening to the new album, evaluating it, and then deciding whether or not to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's true. Back when I used to go to concerts, I didn't necessarily say "so-and-so's new album is fantastic, let's go." It was more, "so-and-so's in town, let's go." Obviously I would have been a casual fan already or I wouldn't have wanted to go at all. But when I went to see Elton John or Jethro Tull, I honestly don't even know (to this day) if they were touring a new album or not. I knew the Stones had a new album when I saw them, but I never bought it. And that wasn't even a diss; I just was a casual fan, enjoyed seeing them play, didn't really feel the need to acquire the new album. I was happy with my experience, still remember Mick and Keith and Ron and their blow-up dolls all these years later.

There are individuals like that at every show. I'm talking about a very broad analysis of who goes to certain tours and not others when it comes to U2. There is a pattern that has developed as U2 became a big band. When the new music is popular, the band is playing sellout shows in stadiums. When its not, they get the huge 50% cut in demand seen on POPMART. The casuals come out when the new music is popular, they generally stay home when its not as seen on POPMART and now the I&E and E&I tours. Die Hards stick with the band through thick and thin. The casuals come out when they like the new music or the band is somehow generating a lot of positive media. Absent things like that, the casuals stay home.


You enjoy analyzing things which is cool.  Its what I do for a living.  But IMHO, you get one comparison factor in your mind, like the Popmart thing and you base your whole analysis on that one thing, leaving out all the other factors.  This leads you to have to explain things like large areas of people sitting as the result of everyone suddenly growing too old and fat to standup in the space of literally one year since the JT tour.

I donít have the interest level in this topic to analyze why your popmart analogy doesnít make sense.  TBH, I had to force myself to read all that long post.  But I know for a fact that many tickets were sold before the album even came out and I know a lot of people who went that have no clue what U2 has been up to lately.  ďDie-hardĒ fans are so rare that the only way to meet one is at some gathering or on a forum like this.   I donít see how there could be enough to even half-fill an arena in Omaha or Tulsa.

U2 are a legacy act now.  They werenít yet in 1997.  So Iím afraid Iíll have to do the crummy thing of telling you that you havenít convinced me but Iím losing interest in the discussion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, the box office results from POPMART and other tours are solid factual information that cannot be disputed. So that is an excellent place to start. Start with something factual. So yes, its a good place to base analysis on, something solid. Other factors you mention are not necessarily facts or something as concrete as actual boxoffice results. I have every Boxscore for every U2 concert from POPMART tour all the way through the current tour.

I don't have a good explanation for people suddenly sitting down on this current tour. I did not see the I&E tour and although I don't remember anyone sitting down on the Joshua Tree tour, I was on the floor and did not get as good a look at the crowd in the upper levels of a massive stadium. Perhaps the "sit down thing" started as early as I&E tour in 2015. Either way, I was just taking a stab at explaining that. I don't think someone sitting down by itself is proof of a casual fan.

As for the definition of a DIE HARD fan, its nearly everyone that was willing to buy a ticket to the POPMART tour. The Edge even stated this. The casual fans are the ones that do not go to every tour. So:


Die Hard fan: sees the band on every tour

Casual Fan: does not see the band on every tour


           Those are the definitions that I use and that the band has used in the past.


U2 have been considered legends or a legacy act since just after the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987. Take VH1 and their Behind The Music series as well as their Legends series. Same programs essentially, but only a few artist were labled as LEGENDS. U2 were one of those artist along with the Rolling Stones, Beatles, Led Zeppelin and a few others. They were labled that back in 1998 when the show was first started. U2 Legends program on VH1 was released in the fall of 1998.

Anyways, I don't think whether they are or are not a Legacy act has anything really to do with the discussion. All artist have their die hard fans and casual fans. Its clear from U2 Boxcore concert history that when the casual fans come out, the band does record breaking business like on ZOO TV Tour, Vertigo Tour, and the 360 tour. When the casual fans do not come out like on POPMART tour, I&E tour, E&I tour, then attendance numbers go way down.

ZOO TV Tour - October 21, 1992 - Denver Colorado - Mile High Stadium - Attendance: 54,450 (casual fans attend the show)

Popmart Tour - May 1, 1997 - Denver Colorado - Mile High Stadium - Attendance: 28,540 (casual fans stay home)

360 Tour - May 21, 2011 - Denver Colorado -  Invesco Field - Attendance: 77,918 (casual fans attend the show)

Innocence And Experience Tour - June 6-7, 2015 - Denver Colorado - Pepsi Center - Attendance: 28,141 (casual fans stay home)


See the pattern? Its pretty obvious. The people who go to see every tour, The Die Hard's, rescue the band on the less popular tours. The casuals fans, those that don't go to every tour, cause the band to have record breaking business when they come out.

One important thing that is keeping the casual fan away is ticket price in the US.
Zoo TV: average ticket price was about $30 - ($54 today)
PopMart - ticket price $52.50 - ($82 today)
360 - GA tickets were $55 ($62-$64 today)
I&E - Average ticket price - around $115 depending on city - ($122 today)
JT30 - Average ticket price - around $120 depending on the city
E&I - Average ticket price - around $170 depending on city

In the case of E&I, U2 had also oversaturated the US touring market by having 3 tours in 3 years.

They have to let us miss them a bit and lower prices.

The above is not correct. Plus, I was looking at one city, Denver. Denver had only one stop recently in 2015 for two shows, so it was not over-saturated.


Here are the average ticket prices in Denver on each tour based on the actual gross from ticket sales divided by the attendance.

All average ticket prices adjusted for inflation.

There is no boxscore information available for the first three U2 tours that stopped in Denver.

Unforgettable Fire Denver: $28.79

Joshua Tree Denver: $39.01

ZOO TV Denver: $53.82

POPMART Denver: $78.47

Elevation Denver: $116.52

Vertigo Denver: $122.32

360 Denver: $96.08

Innocence And Experience Denver: $115.20


So as you can see, Innocence And Experience was actually not as expensive as Elevation Tour or the Vertigo Tour. Its only more expensive than 360 due to the fact that it failed to sell several thousand cheap seats while 360 soldout of everything which included a large number of cheaper tickets in the upper deck. Had The Denver innocence show soldout all of the cheap seats that it didn't, its average ticket price would be even lower than it is now.

Denver POPMART had only 28,000 people but was 20 dollars cheaper than Denver 360 which had 78,000 people.

Ticket prices were NOT the issue.

Yes, they are AN issue. I didn't say they were THE issue. You are not looking at the past ticket prices in 2018 dollars. Look at PopMart. Every ticket was a flat $52.50 in Pittsburgh, plus fees. In 2018 dollars, that is $82 + fees. For a stadium show. For a lackluster selling album (another issue). Few casual fans were going to spend close to the equivalent of $100 per person to see U2 in a stadium for 600 Level, nosebleed seats with crappy sound. Attendance for PopMart Pittsburgh was 27,785. For Zoo TV Pittsburgh, attendance was 39,586. Cheaper tickets, even accounting for inflation (1st reason). More popular album (2nd reason).

Offline wons

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 669
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #32 on: August 14, 2018, 08:51:45 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
since he came on board the ticket prices have become too over priced..............haven't missed a concert since 1987 and didn't attend the last one because the prices are just too high to listen to mainly new material that is sub par IMO

That's not fair when there are tickets priced at $40, $76, and $106 dollars. There are ticket prices for every budget on this tour. You can't judge prices just by the ones that are most expensive.

I agree. I donít think the ticket prices are at all out of line for an act like U2, compared to other artists.  I do find it hard to believe Coldplay is the only artist that can beat $400MM.  Surely Taylor Swift beat that for the tour alone.

I also think the EI setlist decision could have a long-term detrimental effect on future ticket sales to casual fans, which are the majority of ticket buyers.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, realize I'm talking about a non-nostalgia tour, non-reunion tour. A tour for a new album of music. Coldplay are the only band or artist that are still active that has done that recently and could possibly do it again. Taylor Swift has never grossed 400 million on tour. She'll come close on the current tour. Her problem is that 80% of her fanbase is in the United States and its very difficult to get to $400 million, let alone the $700+ plus million U2 did on 360, when most of your fans are in the United States.

As for casual U2 fans, most of them sat out the recent tours for the band. Last time you had a lot of casuals at a U2 show was on the 360 tour.


Hmmm... I remember reading projections that it would top $400MM for the tour alone.  Then you have to add album sales.  But, I donít track music sales so you would probably know.

Well, I donít know how you define ďcasualsĒ, let alone know what percentage of them are at a show, but I felt like a lot of the people at the show I attended did not know the new songs, which would make them casual in my book.  Most of the people I know who went to the show are definitely casual.  I think if you reduced the audience to people who were not disappointed with the EI setlist, it would be a small audience.  Any band thatís been as popular for as long as U2, people are going to expect to hear the big songs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concert grosses are compiled strictly from ticket sales and ticket sales only. U2 has the highest grossing tour of all time with the 360 tour at $736 million gross. But all of that comes from just ticket sales. Merchandise and album sales or other things are not included.

Taylor Swift so far is averaging about $7 million gross per show, but she is only doing 53 shows. She will fall just shy of the $400 million mark. Not bad though for only having a strong following in 7 countries.

U2 played songs from all their albums, except 3, and many of them were big songs, on the current tour. Casual fans are the ones that skip the tours and albums that are not mega popular. The Vertigo Tour and 360 tour were massive tours playing to many of U2's largest audiences ever. The casual fans came out for those tours. The E&I tour is a tour that only dedicated fans would go to since it is based around a new album that is not widely popular. Sadly, this is the first time that even what would be regarded as dedicated fans did not listen to or buy the album.
I think you are vastly oversimplifying when you say:

he E&I tour is a tour that only dedicated fans would go to since it is based around a new album that is not widely popular.

This tour had some smaller stops they hadnít been to for many years.  They hadnít played Tulsa since War.  I am sure there were casual fans that went to the Tulsa show because it was the first show they could go to without traveling in 35 years.  Omaha hadnít been played since 2005.  The fans sitting at the shows?  Those are casual fans, and as you have pointed out, they are there.

Casual fans donít care about the new album.  They assume a U2 show will include the hits plus 3 or 4 new songs during which they can go to the bathroom.  They arenít listening to the new album, evaluating it, and then deciding whether or not to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's true. Back when I used to go to concerts, I didn't necessarily say "so-and-so's new album is fantastic, let's go." It was more, "so-and-so's in town, let's go." Obviously I would have been a casual fan already or I wouldn't have wanted to go at all. But when I went to see Elton John or Jethro Tull, I honestly don't even know (to this day) if they were touring a new album or not. I knew the Stones had a new album when I saw them, but I never bought it. And that wasn't even a diss; I just was a casual fan, enjoyed seeing them play, didn't really feel the need to acquire the new album. I was happy with my experience, still remember Mick and Keith and Ron and their blow-up dolls all these years later.

There are individuals like that at every show. I'm talking about a very broad analysis of who goes to certain tours and not others when it comes to U2. There is a pattern that has developed as U2 became a big band. When the new music is popular, the band is playing sellout shows in stadiums. When its not, they get the huge 50% cut in demand seen on POPMART. The casuals come out when the new music is popular, they generally stay home when its not as seen on POPMART and now the I&E and E&I tours. Die Hards stick with the band through thick and thin. The casuals come out when they like the new music or the band is somehow generating a lot of positive media. Absent things like that, the casuals stay home.


You enjoy analyzing things which is cool.  Its what I do for a living.  But IMHO, you get one comparison factor in your mind, like the Popmart thing and you base your whole analysis on that one thing, leaving out all the other factors.  This leads you to have to explain things like large areas of people sitting as the result of everyone suddenly growing too old and fat to standup in the space of literally one year since the JT tour.

I donít have the interest level in this topic to analyze why your popmart analogy doesnít make sense.  TBH, I had to force myself to read all that long post.  But I know for a fact that many tickets were sold before the album even came out and I know a lot of people who went that have no clue what U2 has been up to lately.  ďDie-hardĒ fans are so rare that the only way to meet one is at some gathering or on a forum like this.   I donít see how there could be enough to even half-fill an arena in Omaha or Tulsa.

U2 are a legacy act now.  They werenít yet in 1997.  So Iím afraid Iíll have to do the crummy thing of telling you that you havenít convinced me but Iím losing interest in the discussion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, the box office results from POPMART and other tours are solid factual information that cannot be disputed. So that is an excellent place to start. Start with something factual. So yes, its a good place to base analysis on, something solid. Other factors you mention are not necessarily facts or something as concrete as actual boxoffice results. I have every Boxscore for every U2 concert from POPMART tour all the way through the current tour.

I don't have a good explanation for people suddenly sitting down on this current tour. I did not see the I&E tour and although I don't remember anyone sitting down on the Joshua Tree tour, I was on the floor and did not get as good a look at the crowd in the upper levels of a massive stadium. Perhaps the "sit down thing" started as early as I&E tour in 2015. Either way, I was just taking a stab at explaining that. I don't think someone sitting down by itself is proof of a casual fan.

As for the definition of a DIE HARD fan, its nearly everyone that was willing to buy a ticket to the POPMART tour. The Edge even stated this. The casual fans are the ones that do not go to every tour. So:


Die Hard fan: sees the band on every tour

Casual Fan: does not see the band on every tour


           Those are the definitions that I use and that the band has used in the past.


U2 have been considered legends or a legacy act since just after the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987. Take VH1 and their Behind The Music series as well as their Legends series. Same programs essentially, but only a few artist were labled as LEGENDS. U2 were one of those artist along with the Rolling Stones, Beatles, Led Zeppelin and a few others. They were labled that back in 1998 when the show was first started. U2 Legends program on VH1 was released in the fall of 1998.

Anyways, I don't think whether they are or are not a Legacy act has anything really to do with the discussion. All artist have their die hard fans and casual fans. Its clear from U2 Boxcore concert history that when the casual fans come out, the band does record breaking business like on ZOO TV Tour, Vertigo Tour, and the 360 tour. When the casual fans do not come out like on POPMART tour, I&E tour, E&I tour, then attendance numbers go way down.

ZOO TV Tour - October 21, 1992 - Denver Colorado - Mile High Stadium - Attendance: 54,450 (casual fans attend the show)

Popmart Tour - May 1, 1997 - Denver Colorado - Mile High Stadium - Attendance: 28,540 (casual fans stay home)

360 Tour - May 21, 2011 - Denver Colorado -  Invesco Field - Attendance: 77,918 (casual fans attend the show)

Innocence And Experience Tour - June 6-7, 2015 - Denver Colorado - Pepsi Center - Attendance: 28,141 (casual fans stay home)


See the pattern? Its pretty obvious. The people who go to see every tour, The Die Hard's, rescue the band on the less popular tours. The casuals fans, those that don't go to every tour, cause the band to have record breaking business when they come out.

One important thing that is keeping the casual fan away is ticket price in the US.
Zoo TV: average ticket price was about $30 - ($54 today)
PopMart - ticket price $52.50 - ($82 today)
360 - GA tickets were $55 ($62-$64 today)
I&E - Average ticket price - around $115 depending on city - ($122 today)
JT30 - Average ticket price - around $120 depending on the city
E&I - Average ticket price - around $170 depending on city

In the case of E&I, U2 had also oversaturated the US touring market by having 3 tours in 3 years.

They have to let us miss them a bit and lower prices.

The above is not correct. Plus, I was looking at one city, Denver. Denver had only one stop recently in 2015 for two shows, so it was not over-saturated.


Here are the average ticket prices in Denver on each tour based on the actual gross from ticket sales divided by the attendance.

All average ticket prices adjusted for inflation.

There is no boxscore information available for the first three U2 tours that stopped in Denver.

Unforgettable Fire Denver: $28.79

Joshua Tree Denver: $39.01

ZOO TV Denver: $53.82

POPMART Denver: $78.47

Elevation Denver: $116.52

Vertigo Denver: $122.32

360 Denver: $96.08

Innocence And Experience Denver: $115.20


So as you can see, Innocence And Experience was actually not as expensive as Elevation Tour or the Vertigo Tour. Its only more expensive than 360 due to the fact that it failed to sell several thousand cheap seats while 360 soldout of everything which included a large number of cheaper tickets in the upper deck. Had The Denver innocence show soldout all of the cheap seats that it didn't, its average ticket price would be even lower than it is now.

Denver POPMART had only 28,000 people but was 20 dollars cheaper than Denver 360 which had 78,000 people.

Ticket prices were NOT the issue.

Yes, they are AN issue. I didn't say they were THE issue. You are not looking at the past ticket prices in 2018 dollars. Look at PopMart. Every ticket was a flat $52.50 in Pittsburgh, plus fees. In 2018 dollars, that is $82 + fees. For a stadium show. For a lackluster selling album (another issue). Few casual fans were going to spend close to the equivalent of $100 per person to see U2 in a stadium for 600 Level, nosebleed seats with crappy sound. Attendance for PopMart Pittsburgh was 27,785. For Zoo TV Pittsburgh, attendance was 39,586. Cheaper tickets, even accounting for inflation (1st reason). More popular album (2nd reason).

I adjusted all the prior ticket prices into 2017 dollars which is good enough. In 2018 dollars the figures for the Vertigo Tour and Elevation tour would be even greater compared to the E&I tour ticket prices. Most tickets on POPMART were flat 52.50, but not all. There were 37.50 tickets available for the upper deck at the back of each stadium.

            There was a big price increase on POPMART compared to ZOO TV even after adjusting for inflation. About a 55% increase in ticket price. But if the POP album had sold like Achtung Baby did, fans would have swallowed it. They accepted a 25% price increase after adjusting for inflation between the Joshua Tree Tour and ZOO TV tour. Pittsburgh attendance at both was the same. The key difference is Achtung Baby selling 4.5 million copies in its first year of release in the United States VS. the 1.3 million that Pop sold.

            But then look at the additional tours where average ticket price swamps POPMART prices after adjusting for inflation yet the band is doing record business. Look at the 360 tour VS. the POPMART tour. Its not ticket prices, but the popularity of the band and their new music. If it were ticket prices, then the 360 tour would have been a distaster worse than POPMART. Instead its the highest attended, highest grossing tour in the history of the world!

            Just ask any ticket scalper. Its not the price of the ticket but the level of demand for the artist. Thats how ticket scalpers are able to charge double face value even in todays market and still sell their tickets.

Offline Mr. Sarajevo 20

  • Intellectual Tortoise
  • *
  • Posts: 465
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #33 on: August 14, 2018, 09:21:55 AM »
Crappy sound?
Sounded fine to me.

Offline Tortuga

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 254
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #34 on: August 14, 2018, 10:31:26 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Crappy sound?
Sounded fine to me.

Since it came up, crappy sound is a big reason I donít go to as many arena shows as I used to.  For the life of me, I have never understood why rock concerts are so loud it literally distorts your ear drum.  Edge carries 100s of guitars and gear so the tone is ďjust rightĒ?  Please, the sound where I was sitting at EI was one of the worst Iíve experienced.  I donít know if it was because I was behind the stage or there was a problem but everyone I was with said the same thing as soon as it was over.  There were specific times when it would really go south and we would all just exchange WTH looks.  No way in hell I could tell a Les Paul from a strat in that environment.  I think its a disgrace to pay $140 for a ticket and get that kind of sound.  Quit obsessing on video walls and augmented reality and just play a good show with good sound.  Its a rock concert not a theme park ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline wons

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 669
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #35 on: August 15, 2018, 03:58:12 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Crappy sound?
Sounded fine to me.

Since it came up, crappy sound is a big reason I donít go to as many arena shows as I used to.  For the life of me, I have never understood why rock concerts are so loud it literally distorts your ear drum.  Edge carries 100s of guitars and gear so the tone is ďjust rightĒ?  Please, the sound where I was sitting at EI was one of the worst Iíve experienced.  I donít know if it was because I was behind the stage or there was a problem but everyone I was with said the same thing as soon as it was over.  There were specific times when it would really go south and we would all just exchange WTH looks.  No way in hell I could tell a Les Paul from a strat in that environment.  I think its a disgrace to pay $140 for a ticket and get that kind of sound.  Quit obsessing on video walls and augmented reality and just play a good show with good sound.  Its a rock concert not a theme park ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've never experienced bad or crappy sound at any of the shows I have been to. I have been using musician ear plugs since 2005 which reduces the sound level by 25 decibels and does improve sound quality a bit. But even before that, things generally always sounded good to me regardless of artist or type of concert venue. But I also realize that concerts are different from listening to a studio album on your head phones. The artist often will also change things in a live setting both in terms of music played and the sound production. Its a rock concert where things are more about energy, passion, having fun, than musical precision or perfection. Its not the opera, a classical music concert, or a recording studio. Plus the audience will add a lot which can from time to time block out some of the more subtle things going on musically.

Offline Tortuga

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 254
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #36 on: August 15, 2018, 06:45:41 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Crappy sound?
Sounded fine to me.

Since it came up, crappy sound is a big reason I donít go to as many arena shows as I used to.  For the life of me, I have never understood why rock concerts are so loud it literally distorts your ear drum.  Edge carries 100s of guitars and gear so the tone is ďjust rightĒ?  Please, the sound where I was sitting at EI was one of the worst Iíve experienced.  I donít know if it was because I was behind the stage or there was a problem but everyone I was with said the same thing as soon as it was over.  There were specific times when it would really go south and we would all just exchange WTH looks.  No way in hell I could tell a Les Paul from a strat in that environment.  I think its a disgrace to pay $140 for a ticket and get that kind of sound.  Quit obsessing on video walls and augmented reality and just play a good show with good sound.  Its a rock concert not a theme park ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've never experienced bad or crappy sound at any of the shows I have been to. I have been using musician ear plugs since 2005 which reduces the sound level by 25 decibels and does improve sound quality a bit. But even before that, things generally always sounded good to me regardless of artist or type of concert venue. But I also realize that concerts are different from listening to a studio album on your head phones. The artist often will also change things in a live setting both in terms of music played and the sound production. Its a rock concert where things are more about energy, passion, having fun, than musical precision or perfection. Its not the opera, a classical music concert, or a recording studio. Plus the audience will add a lot which can from time to time block out some of the more subtle things going on musically.

Yeah, I get that its not a Norah Jones concert.  I also wear earplugs.  The venues hand them out (not musicians ones though.). That should tell the rock bands something right there.  Its supposed to be loud but not THAT loud.  Hereís the evidence.  I listen to a youtube video of the same show I went to and its clear.  That tells me the sound was not distorted coming from the PA.  The camera mic and input limiter had the dynamic range to handle it.  My ears did not.  Maybe my ears are damaged but that would be from years of loud rock music.  I also think there was a locaized problem where I was sitting at this particular U2 show.

Offline hollywoodswag

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 160
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #37 on: August 16, 2018, 02:28:59 PM »
I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt like the sound was just too loud. I could barely understand most of the songs. I've seen arena and stadium shows by Paul McCartney and the sound is absolutely on point. It has enough volume to give you that rock concert experience, but every note is clear and and distinct. As much as I've enjoyed the U2 concerts I've attended (TJT30 and E&I), I know I missed out on a lot of the experience because the volume was just deafening. It would take a few days for the ringing to stop.

Offline wons

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 669
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #38 on: August 16, 2018, 03:27:47 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Crappy sound?
Sounded fine to me.

Since it came up, crappy sound is a big reason I donít go to as many arena shows as I used to.  For the life of me, I have never understood why rock concerts are so loud it literally distorts your ear drum.  Edge carries 100s of guitars and gear so the tone is ďjust rightĒ?  Please, the sound where I was sitting at EI was one of the worst Iíve experienced.  I donít know if it was because I was behind the stage or there was a problem but everyone I was with said the same thing as soon as it was over.  There were specific times when it would really go south and we would all just exchange WTH looks.  No way in hell I could tell a Les Paul from a strat in that environment.  I think its a disgrace to pay $140 for a ticket and get that kind of sound.  Quit obsessing on video walls and augmented reality and just play a good show with good sound.  Its a rock concert not a theme park ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've never experienced bad or crappy sound at any of the shows I have been to. I have been using musician ear plugs since 2005 which reduces the sound level by 25 decibels and does improve sound quality a bit. But even before that, things generally always sounded good to me regardless of artist or type of concert venue. But I also realize that concerts are different from listening to a studio album on your head phones. The artist often will also change things in a live setting both in terms of music played and the sound production. Its a rock concert where things are more about energy, passion, having fun, than musical precision or perfection. Its not the opera, a classical music concert, or a recording studio. Plus the audience will add a lot which can from time to time block out some of the more subtle things going on musically.

Yeah, I get that its not a Norah Jones concert.  I also wear earplugs.  The venues hand them out (not musicians ones though.). That should tell the rock bands something right there.  Its supposed to be loud but not THAT loud.  Hereís the evidence.  I listen to a youtube video of the same show I went to and its clear.  That tells me the sound was not distorted coming from the PA.  The camera mic and input limiter had the dynamic range to handle it.  My ears did not.  Maybe my ears are damaged but that would be from years of loud rock music.  I also think there was a locaized problem where I was sitting at this particular U2 show.

Well, a certain amount of amplification is needed just to be able to hear the bass, guitar and vocals over the drums. When it comes to rock music, even in a club, that's where the high noise levels start, the drums. Then there is the size of the venue and crowd size as well. Crowd noise drowned out the Beatles sound in 1965 at Shea Stadium. People struggled to even hear the music at all above the crowd. The Beatles had a decent sound system for a club, theater, maybe even in an arena, but it was too small for a massive stadium like Shea Stadium. So these are all reasons why louder volume at these big shows is needed.


U2 in general have always played at the same sound volume since I started seeing them on ZOO TV. I doubt this will change and I think they are very good at it, probably the best in the industry or near the top. Joe O'Herlihy is a great soundman.


Musicians ear plugs are the way to go though. They only cost $100 dollars or so and will last for decades if not more and will give you protection no matter the artist, Metallica, U2, Sting, etc.

Offline Mr. Sarajevo 20

  • Intellectual Tortoise
  • *
  • Posts: 465
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #39 on: August 17, 2018, 08:05:34 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt like the sound was just too loud. I could barely understand most of the songs. I've seen arena and stadium shows by Paul McCartney and the sound is absolutely on point. It has enough volume to give you that rock concert experience, but every note is clear and and distinct. As much as I've enjoyed the U2 concerts I've attended (TJT30 and E&I), I know I missed out on a lot of the experience because the volume was just deafening. It would take a few days for the ringing to stop.
JT30 was not crazy loud...Popmart and 360 were much louder...even Zoo TV.

JT30 seemed reserved to me on the volume.

Offline hollywoodswag

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 160
Re: Guy Oseary
« Reply #40 on: August 17, 2018, 01:43:05 PM »
TJT30 was crazy loud at least relative to any other act I've ever seen, and that includes Trans-Siberian Orchestra at the Amway Center just a few rows back from the front. Ditto E&I. Some parts of those concerts sounded like sustained explosions instead of discernible music.

Thank you to those who recommended musician earplugs, though! I wish I'd have known about them ahead of time.