U2's New Album: â??In The Home Straightâ??

[poorlulu]

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
  Hey Markie,
 
 Do you have a source for that?

http://www.bullymag.com/6.6.02/u2-060802.asp
 
 put the first line or so in a google search and you will always find out where Markie has been.

[kosmo vinyl]

Originally posted by lily1:
  btw, anyone agree or disagree that u2 has done little to promote their own homegrown talent?
 
 considering the popularity of prayerboat (before they split) and the frames (in ireland, and partly in the uk), for example, those bands were never asked to tour with them, even in ireland proper.

there was at one point their label mother records... cactus world news was one of their first signings, there are others

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by Jaguär:
  they've always sounded too mainstream or something for me.  

i didnt really know mainstream was a sound.  Apparently you are mainstream enough to have been told what "mainstream" sounds like.  
   does U2 sound just like everyone else? please tell me, cause i would LOVE to hear that one, queen jag.

[kosmo vinyl]

i realize that this isn't the populist opinion of u2... but for me they peaked for "war" and began going down hill with the release of "under a blood red sky".  and as far as their output in the 90's.  at least they didn't release "sapling of joshua tree", "return to war", etc.  the band was aware that the edge's limited guitar sound was only going to take them so far...

[brennser]

btw, anyone agree or disagree that u2 has done little to promote their own homegrown talent?
 
 considering the popularity of prayerboat (before they split) and the frames (in ireland, and partly in the uk), for example, those bands were never asked to tour with them, even in ireland proper.

hard to say really - they have picked Irish bands to support them, Fatima Mansions for instance back in the early 90s, maybe they were put off when Cathal Coughlan almost sparked a riot at a concert in Rome when he pretended to sodomize himself with a statue of the Virgin Mary
 
 At Slane in 2001 they had JJ72 and Relish on the bill and they had Ash a few years earlier at Lansdowne
 
 to be honest, after a ton of bands in the 80s were marketed as the "next U2" and failed miserably a lot of bands actualyl tried to steer clear of direct association with them, at least until they'd made a name for themselves

[mustourdman]

Originally posted by BLANK:
  U2 is really a bad 80s band that never should have become as popular as they did.  But they were easy to market, after all they made poppy little diddies that sent college kids into a tizzy and gave pseudo-intellectuals a new hero to rave about.  

Why is it that whenever one of the popular groups with "mainstream" success out there (U2, REM, Nirvana, etc.) gets talked about in music snob circles, some know-it-all has to point out what a worthless, overrated band they are? Yet go check out the artists in *this* snob's catalogue and (if we could) actually talk to the supposedly cooler-than-thou bands -- I'm sure many of *them* would modestly and genuinely point to U2, REM, etc. as some of their biggest influences.
 
 Criticize their later music for not sounding like the early stuff or pass on phony and illogical tax rumors all you want... heck, even venture that you never liked them in the first place -- fine with me. But it irks me to no end when people think they can get cool points with music snobs by revealing the "shocking truth" of a band's ever-present suckiness even though nearly everyone in the world of *actually playing rock music* cites that band as an influence or example of a good band.
 
 Sorry for sounding off -- I know I'm a lurker. If anyone cares, I actually think All That You Can't Leave Behind was maybe their best record, followed closely by Achtung Baby, War, October, and Joshua Tree.

[Mobius]

For some reason a lot of what U2 does seems brilliant in the moment, or at least works in the moment, and ridiculous looking back. For example, I thought the Zoo TV tour was a phenomenol show, but looking at footage today of the crap like the TVs and props, and Bono making phone calls to the President, it seems ridiculous.  Their albums don't hold up great over time, but they were pretty awesome in the mid-late '80's, '91-92, and '00-01.

[mankie]

Originally posted by lily1:
  btw, anyone agree or disagree that u2 has done little to promote their own homegrown talent?
 
 

And aren't they too busy doing benefit concerts for Africa to do any benefit concerts for their home country? They should do a concert for the Romanian immigrants in Ireland that I see in the middle of Cork begging for money every day.
 
 
 As for artists and tax laws....one of the most noble statements I ever heard was from a British artist who refused to move the US for tax purposes when it seemed to be the thing to do....he said "I got my free milk at school when I was a kid, so now it's my turn to pay for the free milk for the kids today"...having said that, they don't get milk anymore. The artist is Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull fame. Yes, take the piss all you want, but he did get rich and didn't abandon the country that paid for his education etc. Not sure were he lives now, so GGW no need to visit all your search engines to find out, it doesn't matter, he more than paid back, which is more than we can say for many of them.

[brennser]

And aren't they too busy doing benefit concerts for Africa to do any benefit concerts for their home country?
 

jesus I never thought I'd find myself defending U2 but here goes - they have done benefits for their home country - they headlined Self Aid, one of the Live Aid knockoff concerts in the 80s when unemployment was 25% and practically everyone was broke - I'm not saying it did a whole lot of good but at least they (and others) tried
 
 "Self-Aid" R.D.S. Arena, Dublin 17th May 1986.
 
 Line Up: U2, Van Morrison, Chris de Burgh, Elvis Costello & The Attractions, Christy Moore, Rory Gallagher, Moving Hearts, Auto da Fe, The Boomtown Rats, Paul Brady, The Fountainhead, De Dannan, Scullion, Cactus World News, The Pogues, Those Nervous Animals, Freddie White, Chris Rea, The Chieftains, Les Enfants, Big Self, Clannad, In Tua Nua, Stockton's Wing, Blue In Heaven, Bagatelle, Brush Shields.
 
 Attendance: 30,000
 
 and on all the tax stuff, they have so much friggin money I don't think it would matter what they are taxed - other people seem to have done more research on this but I do dimly recall some kind of tax exemption for artists in Ireland which is why a lot of English singers (the Def Leppard fella, Lisa Stansfield) and film types have homes in Ireland
 
 bottom line, they've had more than their fair share of opporunities to leave Ireland and set up somewhere else and they haven't

[mankie]

Originally posted by brennser:
   

And aren't they too busy doing benefit concerts for Africa to do any benefit concerts for their home country?
 

jesus I never thought I'd find myself defending U2 but here goes - they have done benefits for their home country - they headlined Self Aid, one of the Live Aid knockoff concerts in the 80s when unemployment was 25% and practically everyone was broke - I'm not saying it did a whole lot of good but at least they (and others) tried
 
 [/b]

No need to defend them, my question was genuine. Thanks.

[brennser]

having nothing better to do heres what I found on the irish tax exemption for artists - of course some smartarse is going to say that U2 shouldn't qualify because their work is neither original nor creative!
 
 The artist and tax
 Monday, May 15, 2000
 
 By Tom Conachy
 
 If you are an aspiring rock singer, writer or painter the good news is that you do not have to pay any income tax on certain profits made from your work if you are resident in Ireland.
 
 The catch is that your work must be original and creative, as defined by the Revenue Commissioners. This tax legislation is more commonly known as the artists' exemption.
 
 What type of artistic work qualifies?
 
 The profits from the publication or sale of an original and creative work exempts an Irish resident from income tax if it falls under one of the following five categories:
 
 1. A book or other writing
 
 2. A play
 
 3. A musical composition
 
 4. A painting or other like picture
 
 5. A sculpture.
 
  http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2000/05/15/story292447.asp

[mankie]

I think some board members owe Jag an apology, I wonder if they will be big enough to do it?
 
 "Never question woman"

[kosmo vinyl]

yes but it dosen't mention anything about profits made from touring which is where u2 probably gets most of the dough...

[brennser]

I'm not going to get into whether or not people should apologize - they may not pay taxes on some of their income, but they do on others (see below), and by staying in Ireland, buying big houses, opening hotels, restaurants etc they do pump money in the economy, and tourism as well.
 
 Which royalties are exempt?
 
 Royalties from the sale of records are not exempt unless they are composition royalties. For example, if a singer is singing somebody else's song, the singer's royalties are taxable but the composer's are tax-free.
 
  All other income such as concert fees, TV show appearances and merchandising profits are taxable in the normal manner.

[vansmack]

Originally posted by brennser:
  having nothing better to do heres what I found on the irish tax exemption for artists - of course some smartarse is going to say that U2 shouldn't qualify because their work is neither original nor creative!
 
 The artist and tax
 Monday, May 15, 2000
 
 By Tom Conachy
 
 If you are an aspiring rock singer, writer or painter the good news is that you do not have to pay any income tax on certain profits made from your work if you are resident in Ireland.
 
 The catch is that your work must be original and creative, as defined by the Revenue Commissioners. This tax legislation is more commonly known as the artists' exemption.
 
 What type of artistic work qualifies?
 
 The profits from the publication or sale of an original and creative work exempts an Irish resident from income tax if it falls under one of the following five categories:
 
 1. A book or other writing
 
 2. A play
 
 3. A musical composition
 
 4. A painting or other like picture
 
 5. A sculpture.
 
   http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2000/05/15/story292447.asp

When Jag wakes up am I ever going to get a ration of shit (well deserved I might add).
 
 Jag I now bow to you....
 
 I sent an email last night to my Irish lawyer friend and he said that there is in fact an exemption for artists, but it applies only to CD's/records/tapes sold in Ireland.  Merchanidising and tours are still subject to taxation, and U2 pays a lot of tax.  
 
 He said it was passed in 1969 and that it was passed by the Taoiseach at the time, Charles Haughey, and that it is widely regarded as a good move for Irish culture.  He said it has gone a long way to moving Irish culture from the pub songs and celtic art to modern art.  When asked specifically about U2 and the exemption, he said that there are people who have used U2 as an example of why it should be changed, but that it will likely never be changed because it is thought of as a key peice of legislation for making the Temple Bar area so popular in the early 90's.  He also mentioned (without details) that U2 do a lot for Ireland when in Ireland.
 
 So Jag I apologize.  I was wrong on all aspects of the tax scheme (in 2000 they implemented a Capital Gains tax, though it is still lower than most developed countries).