[The bigger problem is illegal downloading & file sharing that is rampant]

We're in a single-loving instant gratification individual song for the mp3 player society, that's one reason why dross like htdaab can outsell a better work like nloth

I agree with nolinehere's comment on the mp3s, Bono's "diet of pop" statement, as well as the stats from renno ( source please!).  The 'full album' concept that bono refers to - is not challenging by any previous standards,  as that was how albums were made; however it may seem "challenging" by today's standards of album making, short attention spans and digital downloaded singles.    I'd add that it is NOT poor sales comparatively to other bands at this time nor is it lack of advertising and "poor album".  The bigger problem is illegal downloading & file sharing that is rampant ( not talking boots but regular commercial releases).   Just compare album sales today, pre-digital/ pre-download/ pre-filesharing-stealing!  I think the monopoly and increased ticket pricing & revenue from Ticket Promoters & Brokers also are getting a huge chunk that they weren't getting before, that maybe bands were better benefiting from.  I don't have a source for that but its just an instinct given over a three decades of concert going.  

Thriller - which is best all time/ best seller - 110 MILLION copies, most of which were sold around its release not over time.  
Joshua Tree - 25 Million sold around its release.  

Source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_albums_worldwide

If you look at a list like wikipedia's - You can clearly see that albums sold MUCH higher amounts for all top bands, and MOST ALL of which occurred when industry was not digital and they could better measure and control distribution.  You didn't pay, you didn't get music ( aside from slow taping & snail mail trades).    

So when one compares "today's sales" ( and income generated) you cannot compare with pre-digital age.  Period.  Everyone knows that touring used to help promote album sales and now Tours support the diminished or lack of album sales.  That drop in income is shell shock that all musicians face especially a band like U2 that has worked in both eras but it makes it much harder for younger bands to survive and sustain themselves artistically.  

Now - look at U2's 360 tours - U2 have the cash and credit to pull off such an extravaganza & costly production and they're filling stadiums but they're not breaking even yet. They stand to make a very thin margin of profit for 3 legs after 2 years of touring ( $300M USD gross - less Operating costs of $750K per date,  = approx $17M net before taxes , split by 5 = $ 2-3.5M after 2 years).  So how many bands could put a show like this and would want to?  Maybe a handful of artists/ bands could afford to do this and even less might want to.

Back to the article & Adam's comments - I do think  the industry and state of whole albums, has changed dramatically as have other traditional industry media due to the internet.  I agree that they have to better rethink how musicians and artists can make money to not only sustain their creativity and careers but to provide a very valuable artform.  

Marketing, touring, producing albums, and all the associated business of music  - it all costs.  Someone has to pay and artists have to make respectively enough money for their art and efforts.  While U2 has their amassed fortunes, the current industry environment & revenue streams will be a major factor for many bands if they cannot create and generate reasonable income for themselves, their art, music, and efforts.   There's a sense of entitlement by those who illegally download and it has hurt the industry, no question.  I think the industry either gets that under control somehow, or the music industry will die like the News Print media is dying.  There'll be less quality new bands out there with any longevity and more "diet pop" throwaway music ( Hello Lady Gaga?) which would be very disappointing if not disheartening.  

["U2 Disappointed by No Line only going Platinum Once"]

First off- the interview is with AP and can be located here:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gF22idat1O1yi7KZ1BQ3XPcbupxAD9BGS90O0

@U2 link here, "U2 Disappointed by No Line only going Platinum Once":  http://www.atu2.com/news/u2-disappointed-by-no-line-only-going-platinum-once.html

p8ru2....well said mate. I agree with your analysis

p8ru2....well said mate. I agree with your analysis

thanks!   

Let's stay away from the whole "the album is good or isn't good" statement for right now.  I think a lot of it has to do with advertising.  This album wasn't heavily advertised like HTDAAB, no radio play, nothing.  You can have the best album in the universe but if no one knows its out there, no one will hear or buy it.  Yes, GOYB isn't up there with Beautiful Day or Vertigo, but how is the mainstream supposed to know if its not in heavy rotation.  The whole Blackberry thing came after the third single and should've came with the release of the album.  The band still has this 1987 mentality of selling records.  U2 has to change with the times, advertising wise.

Your having a laugh arent you , No Line on The Horzion was the biggest promoted album in u2's history [ in the uk and the usa anyway i aint sure about anywhere else]

Firstly you had the live performances at the grammys and the birt awards which shouldnt have really happened

In the Uk U2 were everywhere , The main tv channel in the uk the BBC ran a U2 week , everytime a show finished there was bono and co , they had tv shows dedicated to u2 on every night of the week. They were on every bbc radio channel , they did a live set on tv and radio , they also did a free gig in regent street london. This was everywhere , every paper , news channel etc etc etc

All the bbc promotion actually got mentioned in the houses of parilament , you cannot get any bigger then that ,

u2's album is the fastest selling album in first week sales of the year, this would not of happend if it was badly promoted

You also had the blackberry advert

plus many more things that happened the week before the album came out

In the usa , you had letterman , Saturday night live , Good Morning America , various radio and tv apperances the list goes on

The album has the 2nd highest first week sales in the USA again this would not happen if nobody knew about it

This album was promoted to hell the singles juts havent done well enough

Everybody has low album sales. It's all about how you get the online community to adopt your music! And concerts will always bring in money

Let's stay away from the whole "the album is good or isn't good" statement for right now.  I think a lot of it has to do with advertising.  This album wasn't heavily advertised like HTDAAB, no radio play, nothing.  You can have the best album in the universe but if no one knows its out there, no one will hear or buy it.  Yes, GOYB isn't up there with Beautiful Day or Vertigo, but how is the mainstream supposed to know if its not in heavy rotation.  The whole Blackberry thing came after the third single and should've came with the release of the album.  The band still has this 1987 mentality of selling records.  U2 has to change with the times, advertising wise.

Your having a laugh arent you , No Line on The Horzion was the biggest promoted album in u2's history [ in the uk and the usa anyway i aint sure about anywhere else]

Firstly you had the live performances at the grammys and the birt awards which shouldnt have really happened

In the Uk U2 were everywhere , The main tv channel in the uk the BBC ran a U2 week , everytime a show finished there was bono and co , they had tv shows dedicated to u2 on every night of the week. They were on every bbc radio channel , they did a live set on tv and radio , they also did a free gig in regent street london. This was everywhere , every paper , news channel etc etc etc

All the bbc promotion actually got mentioned in the houses of parilament , you cannot get any bigger then that ,

u2's album is the fastest selling album in first week sales of the year, this would not of happend if it was badly promoted

You also had the blackberry advert

plus many more things that happened the week before the album came out

In the usa , you had letterman , Saturday night live , Good Morning America , various radio and tv apperances the list goes on

The album has the 2nd highest first week sales in the USA again this would not happen if nobody knew about it

This album was promoted to hell the singles juts havent done well enough

I think this is right.

The promotion was massive - the singles were weak - very weak. Bono in typical bono fashion has decided that it's not U2's fault. It's the demographic of the music buying public:

'Bono and company see factors such as the lack of a hit song and the fickle public's need for a "diet of pop" are contributing to this so-called slump.'

NLOTH is a mixture of singles material (Boots, Magnificent, Crazy, Stand up) that isn't very good and 'artier' material (Unknown, Fez, Breathe, No Line) that also isn't very good.

Bono, you made a crap record - that's why it hasn't sold. Get over it and make a brilliant record again like you used to.

 NLOTH is by no means a bad record.  In fact I would even wager that it is named album of the year by several music publications and it wins the Grammy for album of the year. 

I would say several factors have led to its "poor sales."  First is the aging of U2's fans. Fans of U2 from the beginning are now probably approaching their late 40's to 50's.   A lot of these people are not that internet savvy, and since the album hasn't been playing on the radio, I am sure that a lot of them didn't even know that U2 had a new album coming out.  I think first single selection had a lot to do with the lack of radio play.   

Second, I see a lot of validity in the statement that people now days are on a steady diet of pop music. Music has changed.  My parents grew up listening to stuff like zeppelin,  I grew up listening to U2, and now my kids will grow up listening to Lady Gaga or Miley Cirus.   There is something most definitely wrong with that picture. When was the last time that you heard a song on the radio that was longer than 3 minutes.  If you release a song that doesn't fit nicely into 3 minutes, it won't get radio play. For example, Breathe is one of the best songs U2 is written in a really long time, but we will never hear it on the radio because it clocks in at 5 minutes.  Any given radio station in many US markets would rather play 20 3 minute long Lady Gaga crap songs a day, than a few  5 minute songs a day.   I think that factors such as these led to poor exposure of the album, and many people probably didn't buy it because the had very large misconceptions of what the album was like based on BOOTS.   (BTW, boots took me a while to warm up to, but it is a great song.    It has very poignant multi layered lyrics, and it kicks ass live.)

It is really too bad that a lot of people didnt buy this album, because it really is a gem, but that is their loss for being a slave to pop culture. 

I don't really buy that.  No band is more pop culture than U2.  The reason Bomb was so much more successful than the album before or after it even though it's much worse than both is because the single was in an ipod commercial that played a million times a day.

"U2 is upset with the sales... "

The title of this thread is misleading.

Read the ENTIRE article, and point out the quote where this is stated.  

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gF22idat1O1yi7KZ1BQ3XPcbupxAD9BGS90O0

It's not possible because not a single member of the band is quoted as being "upset" with "only
going platnum."

I dont like the quote, they wanted to make a beginning middle and end,  its probably why it selected songs it did and placed them in order....

It is really too bad that a lot of people didnt buy this album, because it really is a gem, but that is their loss for being a slave to pop culture. 

NLOTH is the worst selling record of the year whilst also being one of the best selling albums of the year.

It's a dill of a pickle.

It is really too bad that a lot of people didnt buy this album, because it really is a gem, but that is their loss for being a slave to pop culture. 

NLOTH is the worst selling record of the year whilst also being one of the best selling albums of the year.

It's a dill of a pickle.

ok ill say they are selling well compared to everyone else, but they should be killing them all in sales

ok ill say they are selling well compared to everyone else, but they should be killing them all in sales

why? Record sales are going away. For good.

The next U2 record will be lucky to hit Gold.

And it'll be a top 10 seller.

ok ill say they are selling well compared to everyone else, but they should be killing them all in sales

why? Record sales are going away. For good.

The next U2 record will be lucky to hit Gold.

And it'll be a top 10 seller.

because if it was U2 vs Lady Gaga ten years ago, they would have killed her, and had been winning by a lot...

so even if they are second, in the past, they would have been ahead of these guys by a lot....

im not one to get concerned with sales, but it questions relativity, and if there losing it slowly