1. Originally posted by Ricku2:[..]
    yes, indeed. Maybe they should stop trying to be the biggest band in the world. Get rid of their Live Nations contracts etc and just play for fun.

    If this is true then fair enough, they've been at the top of the game for over 30yrs. So good luck to them if they wish to call it a day. On the live nation senario, i just think they have never been quite the same band since they signed with LN. When it was paul mcguinness they had total control in what they did, but LN have taken that away from them, and i could be wrong but i think they regret ever signing up with them.
  2. Thank you
  3. same thing happening on a lot of bands forums. fake profiles set up to spin positive product messages. They are very easy to spot though especially when the product they are spinning is woeful.
  4. it is because there is NO real source, just someone said that someone said... Everyone can write anything and present it as "rumour" even if he just constructed that in his mind...
    If there is ANY trustworthy source, then we can discuss it... without that it's just nonsense
  5. Of course are "negative" opinions allowed. But on a U2 fan website one can expect that not everyone agrees.

    I think we all welcome critical reflections on a band we all love. And personally I think that retirement of U2 is neither a "negative," nor a "positive" thing. It will be another chapter if it happens. That's all. And it seems only natural that not everyone will feel the same about it. I think we should all accept and tolerate that from each other.

    But right now "U2 retirement" it is only speculation and not really substantiated other than the fact that they're not getting any younger. I wouldn't mind if they continue another twenty year. I had a great time last year seeing the Stones for instance. But I also know that there are die-hard Stones fans who would rather have seen them retire 20 years ago.
    And in fact speculation about the Stones retirement is even older than U2 is in buisiness

    So speculatate what you want, and feel however you want to feel about it.
  6. Last time I checked, Sir Paul was alive, contrary to King Elvis. Lately, on Abbey Road's crossing, I failed to recognize any bare feet (take that, speculators!). In my opinion, a band has reached imortality when speculations like these occur. It's a good sign!

    The Beatles' touring did not last long. Indeed, they produced more than two epic/historical albums per year while filming and doing other stuff too, harmful to themselves, but legal until 1966 (Portugal is the shit, now!). After that, they produced tons of fantastic Music which were to inspire bands like U2.

    If U2 were to retire, my take on any a rumour, would be that no announcement would be needed, that they have great fun playing and composing, that drummng in sessions takes less a burden of Mullen's back and hands compared to tours like the 360 one. Bands or politicians that announce their retirement often come back - lame rethorics!

    My take on the future of U2 is that they'll just do what pleases them, even if this means playing way less live gigs (and then again, perhaps to surprize us yet again, say in eight years time, who knows?) and that they will not be able to stop composing.

    On the physical apearance of the members, I think they all look great (in terms of shape) for their age! The only thing I noted was Larry's big vein on his forhead.

    On their eventueal retirement, and as I think I wrote somewhere on this Forum, when I was complaining (i.e. making my voice / words heard / known about ticket pricing, I meant that I was seriously not taking for granted to ever seeing U2 live again, whereas I accepted to pay to get screwed (not by the band itself, though).
  7. Breaking News! Keith Moon will replace Larry Mullen Jr as U2's drummer effective immediately.
  8. (giggles) . listenimg to the 13th track remembering - in Madrid. Some fail to really understand the magic marker---