TJT
Active topics
  1. They will tour if their contract with live nation demands a tour . Bit like TJTT2017 was squeezed in to fulfil contractual obligations.
  2. I still refuse to believe that u2 are dictated to by live nation. Until there’s clear proof then I don’t think a band as big as u2 need to be signing a contract that allows a promoter to dictate to them. U2 are doing livenation the favour making them money not the other way round. I do believe u2 and there management and livenation will probably work on maximising profits once a tour is planned (pricing, venues, etc) but prior to that u2 are not going to have there schedule dictated by anyone.
  3. Ha.

    Believe it on the JT 2017 tour. They talked about for years how they didn't want to be a retread act, always go out on new material...and then they do a retread show on a 30 year old album. Something they wouldn't have done if they had SOE finished.
  4. AB tour 2021/22 will happen. Put that in the paper.
  5. Dean, I have to disagree mate. U2 signed a BUMPER contract with LN. No one can tell me that they wanted to tour JT17 for the hell of it. LN told them to do it because SOE wasn't finished. I also think that the production we see nowadays doesn't vary too much from night to night because LN insist on a 'polished' product. U2 took the money up front and now basically do what their told (within reason of course).
  6. Originally posted by hoserama:Ha.

    Believe it on the JT 2017 tour. They talked about for years how they didn't want to be a retread act, always go out on new material...and then they do a retread show on a 30 year old album. Something they wouldn't have done if they had SOE finished.
    Maybe I'm being naive but I believe them when they said it was their choice to do JT30 to reflect on the similarities between then and now and how the album is still so relevant.
  7. Originally posted by thefly07:[..]
    Maybe I'm being naive but I believe them when they said it was their choice to do JT30 to reflect on the similarities between then and now and how the album is still so relevant.
    I believe the band’s explanations for the tour as well. Maybe the band were also happy to cash in on a very profitable tour also, they haven’t stated that but I can imagine making money is still important to the band. As I’ve said I won’t change my view unless given proof, I’m happy to hear others opinion but we don’t have any facts on the matter. We have a lot of dot joining and coming to our own conclusions and I think that’s how it will remain. For me livenation benefit greatly out of the u2 deal and will be happy enough to have the band tied down to playing there venues, having there branding everywhere and making money on tickets, they’re not there to tell them when to tour but maybe can dictate certain aspects to maximise profits when they do tour, that makes complete sense to me. Just to add an additional comment, perhaps it was live nation or Guy Oseary who convinced the band to do last year’s tour, not forced but talked them into the idea, that I could see being the case, but that’s just another scenario to throw into the mix.
  8. Originally posted by thefly07:[..]
    Maybe I'm being naive but I believe them when they said it was their choice to do JT30 to reflect on the similarities between then and now and how the album is still so relevant.
    They had tour dates scheduled and locked in for Fall 2016. Rehearsals were going to be in New Jersey if I recall. It got scrapped because they couldn't get the album together that summer.

    Cue the mad scramble as they had to put together something. Originally they talked about doing JT as a few isolated gigs, but I bet that talk lasted 30 seconds before it got expanded to a full tour (economy of scale requires it).

    It's a business. Lots of people's paychecks depend on this.
  9. I agree that the business side of things probably played a big part of last year’s shows as well. The tour grossed more than the I&E and E&I tours put together, maybe with them being arena tours that were expensive to put on the band thought it would be wise to put on a show that made more business sense.
  10. It is a business , U2 have over 200 full time staff on the payroll. That's a lot of mouths to feed so they need to keep the til ringing. Happy days for us fans as it keeps them active and they rarely disappoint
  11. 1. The band always wanted to do some Joshua Tree shows. A couple in Europe and a couple in America.
    2. LiveNation nearly or probably even booked crew staff and transport etc, so they definitely needed a tour that year. SOE wasn't ready, so they told the band they would have to do the JT instead.
    3. LiveNation knew that they were going to do EI after JT. They've probably even worked out the costs for EI before JT even started. They needed a money maker to help increase profits because EI was so expensive.

    All my own speculation of course.
  12. Originally posted by deanallison:I still refuse to believe that u2 are dictated to by live nation. Until there’s clear proof then I don’t think a band as big as u2 need to be signing a contract that allows a promoter to dictate to them. U2 are doing livenation the favour making them money not the other way round. I do believe u2 and there management and livenation will probably work on maximising profits once a tour is planned (pricing, venues, etc) but prior to that u2 are not going to have there schedule dictated by anyone.
    From 10 years ago: U2 signs twelve-year deal with Live Nation Artists that includes worldwide touring

    That's just how it works dude, their contracts have terms that guarantee a certain amount of tours before its end.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.