HAPPYPERSON said:

Less than 5% of Apple users downloaded U2's free album

In Music by Joel FreimarkSep 11, 2014

7.6k

t

102

Ë

17

U2′s free album downloaded by less than 5% of users

Bono’s ego may soon be in need of its own charity, as the band’s free release of their new record “Songs Of Innocence” has been downloaded less than 200,000 times since being dropped into more than half a billion Apple iCloud accounts earlier this week. According to Billboard (but refuted by the band’s label), the record has been met with massive waves of criticism from both retailers and those who have actual taste in music.

While it is understandable that UMG was quick to refute Billboard’s claims that the record had been downloaded by less than 5% of those given the option, this is likely nothing more than hopeful marketing for a record they knew would perform poorly. Billboard makes much of their reputation on accurate charts, and since they have no vested interest in whether or not an album does well, their word is far more reliable than that of companies with big money involved in the U2 brand.

The band’s thirteenth formal studio album was sent free to the account of every iTunes user, but the users must opt to stream or download the record to experience the musical mediocrity. This move has infuriated retailers, as it will no doubt impact their bottom line when the album hits shelves next month. Target has a policy of not carrying records that have been released digitally beforehand, and they found themselves in a tough spot with Beyonce’s album late last year. Amazon also takes similar tactics, often denying such releases a strong presence or featured spot. In an effort to combat this, Universal Music Group says the physical release will include four tracks that iTunes will not get until November.

Quickly addressing a concern of many music fans, The Official Charts Company, who run the sales charts in the UK, have stated that the record wi...e eligible for chart performance. Perfectly explaining what millions are thinking, they said that they, “only count music which consumers have made an active choice to acquire.” Given the history between the two companies in terms of counting, it’s safe to assume that Billboard will operate the same way, ensuring that this album will not be able to jump over classic records that moved huge numbers because people actually wanted to hear the music.

So the question becomes: are people finally tired of tepid, predictable, soulless rock in general, or just U2’s version of it?

Joel Freimark hosts a daily music-related webseries HERE and you can follow his daily music musings and suggestions HERE as well.

Of course Billboard will print this, regardless if its true or not, which its not because Billboard has no way of personally tracking this, how do they have numbers that Apple itself can't get? remember soundscan is out of this equation too, and retail for the most part, a few are refusing to carry the cd in october, like Target i believe but Target is not even a music retailer, actually there are none. This is the same issue that went on with PRINCE and Musicology, technically he did sell 1.2 million still of an album with no hits at all, the other 1.8 were counted but called false because they were giveaways and he was allowed to do it and then rules changed. Billboard to me always has something it wants to change because to me its nothing more than a voice of a dead useless inustry, no one cares about you Billboard, hate to be so blunt.

ANd then to toss in "souless rock" really? what rock out there now outside of the FOO FIGHTERS has anything to offer? NONE Rock is beyond dead.

PatrickS77 said:

Scathing local review:

U2 Songs of Innocence Que con pra consequam, exeria words.

All well and good, right? Times have changed, and even bands as big as U2 can’t count on radio to support their new music. They can’t even count on fans being willing to pay for the stuff.

The thing is, if you’re going to pull a stunt like the one U2 and Apple collaborated on this week, the product you’re hawking better be of the highest quality. No one can be faulted for grabbing the spotlight and aiming it directly upon their own artwork, should they be in the position to pull it off. But they should do so with the full knowledge that the spotlight will reveal every defect and structural inadequacy, just as it illuminates the beautiful bits.

To borrow a line from Bob Dylan: “You’ve got my attention/Now go ahead, speak!”

Sadly, despite its rather awesome album title – a nod to William Blake – “Songs of Innocence” doesn’t have a whole lot to say. It is perhaps U2’s most tepid album. Certainly, it is the Irish quartet’s most self-conscious.

Right off the bat, the production is a major issue.

Taking a page from the modern pop music playbook, several producers commingle throughout “Songs of Innocence,” most prominent among them Danger Mouse, who has made great-sounding recordings with the Black Keys, Beck and Gnarls Barkley, but is clearly not the man for U2. (The “man for U2” is actually two men – Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois, both of whom are still highly prolific, and both of whom are surely still in Bono’s iPhone contact list. But I digress.)

With Danger Mouse in the house, U2 falls victim to a perfect storm, one where a lousy mix and mediocre songwriting crash together and submerge the several decent ideas scattered throughout the album. Bono’s vocals are overly prominent in that mix, and they are dry and in-your-face to the point of distraction. (A little reverb on the voice would’ve gone a long way toward “couching” the singing – which is excellent throughout – within the mix. As it stands, Bono sits on top of the music, and that gets old before you’ve made it through opener “The Miracle (of Joey Ramone)”.

Just as Bono is featured far too prominently in the mix, so is guitarist the Edge underserved by arrangements that find him either buried in that mix, or mimicked by cloying, nigh-on-cheesy keyboard sounds. A major part of the U2 sound has always been Edge’s brilliant manipulation of ping-ponged, digitally delayed guitar figures that bounce freely around the mix, lending muscle and an otherworldly ambience to the band’s music. Sadly, “Songs of Innocence” doesn’t give us anywhere near enough Edge until the album’s midway point, the rather excellent “Volcano.” And no Edge equals no edge.

Equally disturbing is the fact the each of the album’s first five tunes start out with much promise and then run out of steam by the time they get to the chorus. The ideas sound either half-baked, or overcooked – it’s hard to tell which. But something is definitely wrong here.

Following the throwaway that is opener “The Miracle (of Joey Ramone)” – which is about as believable a tune as would be a tribute to the Sex Pistols, courtesy of Coldplay – “Every Breaking Wave” offers hope at its outset, as a classic Adam Clayton bass figure is bathed in airy, sustained guitar tones, a la “With or Without You.” But it all heads south so quickly come chorus time, when those annoying keyboard sounds return, as if U2’s greatest influence is Florence & the Machine, not Joey Ramone and Joe Strummer, as Bono seems at pains to claim.

“California (There Is No End to Love)” is a paean to the band’s first visit to the American West Coast. The tune begins with an embarrassing stacked vocal figure that finds Bono attempting to channel Brian Wilson, via a looped “Ba-Ba-Barbara, Santa Barbara.” Then the tune arrives in full, and fails to distinguish itself as anything special, before completely falling apart during one of the album’s many “Whooa-oh-ay-oh-whoa” chant vocals. It’s interesting that U2 doesn’t sound like a band of older men here; it sounds like a young band whose first exposure to music came via Coldplay’s “Viva la Vida.” And that’s just sad.

Things do improve at midpoint, with the rockabilly-esque Edge guitar figure propelling “Volcano,” and the positively sensual and riff-heavy “Cedarwood Road” suggesting that a pulse still beats beneath U2’s overproduced and aurally Botoxed exterior. “Sleep Like a Baby Tonight” and “The Troubles” are strong songs as well, but by the time they arrive, it’s too little, too late.

Lyrically, “Songs of Innocence” is a bit of a stinker. Bono likes to have a central theme when writing lyrics for a U2 album, and often in the past, this has worked out well for him. This time, he seems to be laboring, though. “Songs of Innocence” is ostensibly a love letter to the music that U2 fell in love with when its members were still kids, the stuff that inspired them to become a band, and has continued to offer them sustenance over the years. Unfortunately, this conceit backfires; if Bono is hoping we will be reminded of U2’s early days, he’s asking for trouble, because there is not single song on this album that is anywhere near as strong as, say, “An Cat Dubh” or “Twilight,” from the band’s barely post-teenage debut, “Boy.” Similarly, throwing around the names of Joey Ramone and the Clash’s Joe Strummer only serves to highlight how little U2 shares in common with either of them.

So what went wrong? How did one of the biggest rock bands of all time morph from leading the way to following the pack?

Well, there are simply too many cooks fighting to take their turn at the stove here. Danger Mouse, Paul Epworth, (Adele, Florence and the Machine, Bruno Mars, Coldplay) Ryan Tedder (One Republic) – all are part of the production team, and all must take partial blame for the overcooked nature of “Songs of Innocence.”

But U2 must shoulder the majority of the blame. The band could easily have produced this album themselves, or called old friends Eno and Lanois to give them a hand. The fact that names like pop hit-makers Tedder and Epworth appear on a U2 album smacks of desperation on the band’s part. Unsure of where they stand in a music industry that bears absolutely no resemblance to the one in which they first became a major player, U2 decided to imitate the contemporary bands that have had the most success. They want to be “big” so bad it’s killing them. Where U2 once set trends simply by being itself, it now chases trends, and embarrasses itself and its older fans in the process.

Perhaps “Songs of Innocence” was given away for free because, in its heart of hearts, U2 knows that it’s not really worth anything anyway.

I'm a long time U2 fan, have all their albums, but for the third time in a row i'm a little dissapointed. It's not that the albums are terrible, it's just that the hooks aren't there anymore, and the band just seems to sound out of ideas or uninspired and like they're are trying to force things too much, there's a couple decent songs for me, but that's it...Definately much prefer the last 2 releases by Simple Minds, a similar band who got their mojo back.

[Edited 9/13/14 19:49pm]

Use to love U2 back in the early days of Boy, October, War, etc....

...but but they seriously need to lighten up. Bono takes himself waaaaaay to seriously, and its so off-putting when you put their music on now, a massive distraction.

U2's golden era ended after the ZOO TV...

no line on the horizon was soooooo immaculate, sooooo pointless, sooooo maddeningly...nothing...

I haven't downloaded this new album either, U2 are DONE in the studio

but perhaps they will still sell stadiums, we'll see...The Rolling Stones, uptight irish style, coming to your capital city for 150 bucks, lol

I think the main selling point of U2 in the past was that they were transcendent and spiritually inspirational, if not now on record then they certainly still are live. They are not 20 years old anymore. maybe those records aren't in them anymore and it's understandable. Like Fran lebowitz said you're lucky to get a genius piece of work from someone once in a lifetime. The media culture expects people to churn them out.

Look who the Superbowl hired to do the halftime show on the eve of 9-11. No other group can do what U2 does with such grandiousity. There will always be parts of a U2 show where it just goes there. Where is there?:

HAPPYPERSON said:

Less than 5% of Apple users downloaded U2's free album

In Music by Joel FreimarkSep 11, 2014

7.6k

t

102

Ë

17

U2′s free album downloaded by less than 5% of users

Bono’s ego may soon be in need of its own charity, as the band’s free release of their new record “Songs Of Innocence” has been downloaded less than 200,000 times since being dropped into more than half a billion Apple iCloud accounts earlier this week. According to Billboard (but refuted by the band’s label), the record has been met with massive waves of criticism from both retailers and those who have actual taste in music.

While it is understandable that UMG was quick to refute Billboard’s claims that the record had been downloaded by less than 5% of those given the option, this is likely nothing more than hopeful marketing for a record they knew would perform poorly. Billboard makes much of their reputation on accurate charts, and since they have no vested interest in whether or not an album does well, their word is far more reliable than that of companies with big money involved in the U2 brand.

The band’s thirteenth formal studio album was sent free to the account of every iTunes user, but the users must opt to stream or download the record to experience the musical mediocrity. This move has infuriated retailers, as it will no doubt impact their bottom line when the album hits shelves next month. Target has a policy of not carrying records that have been released digitally beforehand, and they found themselves in a tough spot with Beyonce’s album late last year. Amazon also takes similar tactics, often denying such releases a strong presence or featured spot. In an effort to combat this, Universal Music Group says the physical release will include four tracks that iTunes will not get until November.

Quickly addressing a concern of many music fans, The Official Charts Company, who run the sales charts in the UK, have stated that the record wi...e eligible for chart performance. Perfectly explaining what millions are thinking, they said that they, “only count music which consumers have made an active choice to acquire.” Given the history between the two companies in terms of counting, it’s safe to assume that Billboard will operate the same way, ensuring that this album will not be able to jump over classic records that moved huge numbers because people actually wanted to hear the music.

So the question becomes: are people finally tired of tepid, predictable, soulless rock in general, or just U2’s version of it?

Joel Freimark hosts a daily music-related webseries HERE and you can follow his daily music musings and suggestions HERE as well.

It took me a few minutes to find the album and download it. Most people will probably not even realize that it is there. Like Prince, I don't expect to be blown away by U2 anymore. Bono's voice is still there and sounds better than ever. They are rich and happy and they sound like it. A tad boring but still pretty decent.

This album starts out a bit sterile and boring, but it holds up IMO. The second half is maybe better than the first, which is always a good sign.

Still, I way that as a man with very few expectations from U2. I just listened out of curiosity.

I couldn't help but think of Prince as I listened to this. First off, because he pioneered the "free album" gimmick. Second of all, because they're peers and he has new music coming out.

I couldn't help but think of the biggest difference between the two, and why U2 always seems to come out on top. They still focus on the songs. They as a collective are not a fraction of the musician that he is by himself, but his seeming unwillingness to spend a lot of time on melody and lyrics leaves his lush arrangements kind of flat. U2 is obviously past their prime, but their songs still have some substance.

I'm still excited to hear what Prince has in store for us, but I don't expect anything profound.

Askani said:

This will backfire on U2. They've made their first album in 5 years (after one that was fairly lackluster) a footnote to someone else's launch. It will be completely forgotten by the time it goes on sale to the 5 people in the world without an iTunes account.

That said, I finally gave the album a listen this afternoon. Pretty good. Not one of their best, but definitely something of a return to form (in that it is comprised entirely of songs and not mostly of noodling fuzziness).

They're definitely getting some backlash, but then, they have ever since Rattle & Hum

But I don't totally agree about the album being a footnote. It's not to me, at least, and I am far from a huge fan of theirs. To me, the album was the biggest news of the day from Apple. It was the only news that I was actually kind of excited to hear about, and I am enjoying the album and not thinking much about the watch & phones

ChickenMcNuggets said:

PatrickS77 said:

^^Just another example for how stupid people truly are. "Boohoo, they gave me the album for free. How dare they?". You don't even have to download it, if you're not interested. So where's the harm?

I wouldn't have had an issue with it if it was simply a free album available to collect from the iTunes Store for all who were interested in it. It's the presumption of interest of adding it automatically to everyone's music libraries that I object to. It feels needlessly invasive to me.

It was not automatically added to my iTunes library. I see it in my list of purchases, but it won't be added to my library unless I download it from the purchases page. Maybe your iTunes settings are different from mine.

sexton said:

ChickenMcNuggets said:

I wouldn't have had an issue with it if it was simply a free album available to collect from the iTunes Store for all who were interested in it. It's the presumption of interest of adding it automatically to everyone's music libraries that I object to. It feels needlessly invasive to me.

It was not automatically added to my iTunes library. I see it in my list of purchases, but it won't be added to my library unless I download it from the purchases page. Maybe your iTunes settings are different from mine.

I think that U2 was placed in my Artist section, and it had not been before, so it was in my library. I think there's a setting for "automatically download purchases" that puts it there that I had checked in my itunes

i don't really see the problem, though. If someone mailed me a free U2 cd or I got one as a party favor, I might not listen to it, but I wouldn't really be mad at them

the thing is that as someone mentioned they are not 20 years old anymore. I dont really get why people think that ANYONE can still give you the feeling you had when you listened to such and such album from eons ago, it is just not going to be. You can re-create a feeling inside yourself, it is not possible and you are lieing to yourself thinking you can.

CynicKill said:

Scathing local review:

You get what you pay for with U2’s new iTunes album

U2 Songs of Innocence Que con pra consequam, exeria words.

By Jeff Miers | News Pop Music Critic | Google+

on September 13, 2014 - 12:01 AM

, updated September 13, 2014 at 12:12 AM

• in Share

• 

ADVERTISEMENT

In a grand, highly publicized gesture that came in the guise of a gift to fans but was in fact just a major publicity stunt, U2 teamed with Apple on Tuesday to marry the release of its first album in five years, “Songs of Innocence,” to Apple’s unveiling of the iPhone 6 and that freaky, Big Brother-like iWatch contraption. The band gave the album away for free to iTunes subscribers, but quite likely took the check Apple proffered upon it directly to the bank, following the news conference.

All well and good, right? Times have changed, and even bands as big as U2 can’t count on radio to support their new music. They can’t even count on fans being willing to pay for the stuff.

The thing is, if you’re going to pull a stunt like the one U2 and Apple collaborated on this week, the product you’re hawking better be of the highest quality. No one can be faulted for grabbing the spotlight and aiming it directly upon their own artwork, should they be in the position to pull it off. But they should do so with the full knowledge that the spotlight will reveal every defect and structural inadequacy, just as it illuminates the beautiful bits.

To borrow a line from Bob Dylan: “You’ve got my attention/Now go ahead, speak!”

Sadly, despite its rather awesome album title – a nod to William Blake – “Songs of Innocence” doesn’t have a whole lot to say. It is perhaps U2’s most tepid album. Certainly, it is the Irish quartet’s most self-conscious.

Right off the bat, the production is a major issue.

Taking a page from the modern pop music playbook, several producers commingle throughout “Songs of Innocence,” most prominent among them Danger Mouse, who has made great-sounding recordings with the Black Keys, Beck and Gnarls Barkley, but is clearly not the man for U2. (The “man for U2” is actually two men – Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois, both of whom are still highly prolific, and both of whom are surely still in Bono’s iPhone contact list. But I digress.)

With Danger Mouse in the house, U2 falls victim to a perfect storm, one where a lousy mix and mediocre songwriting crash together and submerge the several decent ideas scattered throughout the album. Bono’s vocals are overly prominent in that mix, and they are dry and in-your-face to the point of distraction. (A little reverb on the voice would’ve gone a long way toward “couching” the singing – which is excellent throughout – within the mix. As it stands, Bono sits on top of the music, and that gets old before you’ve made it through opener “The Miracle (of Joey Ramone)”.

Just as Bono is featured far too prominently in the mix, so is guitarist the Edge underserved by arrangements that find him either buried in that mix, or mimicked by cloying, nigh-on-cheesy keyboard sounds. A major part of the U2 sound has always been Edge’s brilliant manipulation of ping-ponged, digitally delayed guitar figures that bounce freely around the mix, lending muscle and an otherworldly ambience to the band’s music. Sadly, “Songs of Innocence” doesn’t give us anywhere near enough Edge until the album’s midway point, the rather excellent “Volcano.” And no Edge equals no edge.

Equally disturbing is the fact the each of the album’s first five tunes start out with much promise and then run out of steam by the time they get to the chorus. The ideas sound either half-baked, or overcooked – it’s hard to tell which. But something is definitely wrong here.

Following the throwaway that is opener “The Miracle (of Joey Ramone)” – which is about as believable a tune as would be a tribute to the Sex Pistols, courtesy of Coldplay – “Every Breaking Wave” offers hope at its outset, as a classic Adam Clayton bass figure is bathed in airy, sustained guitar tones, a la “With or Without You.” But it all heads south so quickly come chorus time, when those annoying keyboard sounds return, as if U2’s greatest influence is Florence & the Machine, not Joey Ramone and Joe Strummer, as Bono seems at pains to claim.

“California (There Is No End to Love)” is a paean to the band’s first visit to the American West Coast. The tune begins with an embarrassing stacked vocal figure that finds Bono attempting to channel Brian Wilson, via a looped “Ba-Ba-Barbara, Santa Barbara.” Then the tune arrives in full, and fails to distinguish itself as anything special, before completely falling apart during one of the album’s many “Whooa-oh-ay-oh-whoa” chant vocals. It’s interesting that U2 doesn’t sound like a band of older men here; it sounds like a young band whose first exposure to music came via Coldplay’s “Viva la Vida.” And that’s just sad.

Things do improve at midpoint, with the rockabilly-esque Edge guitar figure propelling “Volcano,” and the positively sensual and riff-heavy “Cedarwood Road” suggesting that a pulse still beats beneath U2’s overproduced and aurally Botoxed exterior. “Sleep Like a Baby Tonight” and “The Troubles” are strong songs as well, but by the time they arrive, it’s too little, too late.

Lyrically, “Songs of Innocence” is a bit of a stinker. Bono likes to have a central theme when writing lyrics for a U2 album, and often in the past, this has worked out well for him. This time, he seems to be laboring, though. “Songs of Innocence” is ostensibly a love letter to the music that U2 fell in love with when its members were still kids, the stuff that inspired them to become a band, and has continued to offer them sustenance over the years. Unfortunately, this conceit backfires; if Bono is hoping we will be reminded of U2’s early days, he’s asking for trouble, because there is not single song on this album that is anywhere near as strong as, say, “An Cat Dubh” or “Twilight,” from the band’s barely post-teenage debut, “Boy.” Similarly, throwing around the names of Joey Ramone and the Clash’s Joe Strummer only serves to highlight how little U2 shares in common with either of them.

So what went wrong? How did one of the biggest rock bands of all time morph from leading the way to following the pack?

Well, there are simply too many cooks fighting to take their turn at the stove here. Danger Mouse, Paul Epworth, (Adele, Florence and the Machine, Bruno Mars, Coldplay) Ryan Tedder (One Republic) – all are part of the production team, and all must take partial blame for the overcooked nature of “Songs of Innocence.”

But U2 must shoulder the majority of the blame. The band could easily have produced this album themselves, or called old friends Eno and Lanois to give them a hand. The fact that names like pop hit-makers Tedder and Epworth appear on a U2 album smacks of desperation on the band’s part. Unsure of where they stand in a music industry that bears absolutely no resemblance to the one in which they first became a major player, U2 decided to imitate the contemporary bands that have had the most success. They want to be “big” so bad it’s killing them. Where U2 once set trends simply by being itself, it now chases trends, and embarrasses itself and its older fans in the process.

Perhaps “Songs of Innocence” was given away for free because, in its heart of hearts, U2 knows that it’s not really worth anything anyway.

Source, please?

[img:$uid]http://i.imgur.com/mlWBww2.jpg?1?3322[/img:$uid]


U2's Manager Responds to Backlash: ''If You Don't Like This Gift, Delete It''
September 14

Read here

NDRU said:

sexton said:

It was not automatically added to my iTunes library. I see it in my list of purchases, but it won't be added to my library unless I download it from the purchases page. Maybe your iTunes settings are different from mine.

I think that U2 was placed in my Artist section, and it had not been before, so it was in my library. I think there's a setting for "automatically download purchases" that puts it there that I had checked in my itunes

i don't really see the problem, though. If someone mailed me a free U2 cd or I got one as a party favor, I might not listen to it, but I wouldn't really be mad at them

I thought the post was a joke at first. If that person is really that concerned about invasions into their library then they should have another look at their settings. It's like complaining about stray animals in your house after leaving all the doors and windows open.

this site now claims that the album has been downloaded 2.000.000 times, that means double platinum if this was retail...

http://recode.net/2014/09/12/some-of-you-wanted-the-u2-album-after-all-apples-itunes-giveaway-leads-to-two-million-downloads/

I just wanna hear a single or something to peak my interest. They play a great concert full of old hits, but so far I haven't listened to this.

Cinny said:

I just wanna hear a single or something to peak my interest. They play a great concert full of old hits, but so far I haven't listened to this.

It's not terrible but it's not great either. It's decent but it's not anything you'll keep on regular rotation. Out of the 11 songs, I only keep listening to one of them. And this is coming from a U2 fan. But at the same time, I can appreciate the offer.

Cinny said:

I just wanna hear a single or something to peak my interest. They play a great concert full of old hits, but so far I haven't listened to this.

Volcano and Raised by Wolves are pretty good. I would check those out

Great album!! LOVE IT!! 3rd best album this year behind Body Count's Manslaughter number 1 and Hart's Daydreamer #2!! I have to say though I expect Lenny to most likely bump U2 down to number 4 though after Thursday when I listen to it!! Getting Mellencamp also. I am HOPING for his to be good but not expecting much from John but always hope. Will report back on this Thursday night or Friday after it digests a little.

[Edited 9/15/14 21:41pm]

Found on Twitter, made me titter...

.

Evolution of music sales:
1. Pay a lot
2. Pay a little
3. Pay anything
4. OK fine, just pay once a month
5. Fuck you, now you own a U2 album

NDRU said:

Cinny said:

I just wanna hear a single or something to peak my interest. They play a great concert full of old hits, but so far I haven't listened to this.

Volcano and Raised by Wolves are pretty good. I would check those out

Thanks

SoulAlive said:

what do you guys think....is that a smart promotional idea? U2 is getting tremendous media attention right now and with a world tour on the way,this seems to be a very effective idea,imo.

It annoyed me. I saw it on my computer and thought someone had hacked my computer until I saw the story on the news. I don't have anything against U2. I'm not a fan. But, now I'm scared because they have one-upped Beyonce by discovering a whole new way of forcing themselves on the public. Lord only knows what she's going to do to try to top that! And, mark my words, she will!

this article says.......Epic Fail.......http://www.smh.com.au/ent...0i2yc.html

I'm a big U2 fan and the only song I can take right now is Volcano because it reminds me of something that might be on one of their first albums.

I also like the bass on it.

stillwaiting said:

Javi said:

U2 are receiving millions from Apple because of this. Bono is the dirtiest capitalist in the pop world, his hands already filthy as a pig's ass. What is nauseating is Bono's political and humanitarian speeches, when he is as nasty as Bill Gates.

---

Frankly, this is just the internet culture, the culture of inmediacy. I much prefer to know an album of one of my favourite artists will be released in two months and to wait with expectancy until that moment to buy it than to wake up one day and know it's up there in an electronic cloud. I like U2's music a lot, and I'll wait until this record has an old school release, as I did with Beyoncé.

I am not exactly crazy about Bill Gates as a person,

but Gates, and Bono have likely given more money to charity than you and I combined will in 50 lifetimes.

It's also likely they have given a larger percentage of their fortune to charity than you and I combined have. Both have also spent large amounts of time working for charity. Yes they are both disgustingly rich, get over it. They're successful.

How did they get the money in the first place?

What's the percentage of their total capital that they 'give' away?

Bill Gates is succesfull because he established a monopoly, in order to raise prices.

Gates never showed any sense of compassion or mercy in his character, untill he was one of the riches of planet earth.


It's easy to pretend you'r the good guy, if you are a member of the 0.005% richest folks on earth.



Do not forget what measures he took in order to become a member of that elite 0.005% rich club!

If Bill Gates had any sense of justice, he would not be in the position to play the act of charitable guy now.

I have morals and have respect for every living organism. Therefore, abusing a monopoly position for my personal gain, would go against my personal values.

Bill Gates did not have personal morals, he just wanted to become rich.

It's easy to pretend to be a good guy, after squeezing the last penny out of the poorest student...

3rdeyedude said:

this article says.......Epic Fail.......http://www.smh.com.au/ent...0i2yc.html

I'm a big U2 fan and the only song I can take right now is Volcano because it reminds me of something that might be on one of their first albums.

I also like the bass on it.

It's a good deal for U2 and their fans.

Clever and efficient strategy. If you don't want to hear it, delete it. Don't be a windbag.