Sharon Osbourne on U2

#2
#2
She sounds like a hater to me. She's wondering why her husband can't make money on new material the way they do, 30 years after they hit the scene.

I haven't liked U2 since Achtung Baby, but this is just petty. It's like that segment on the Carolla podcast, "What Can't Adam Complain About?". She's mad that they found a way to make money and simultaneously give their music away.

Take down Oprah for "giving" away cars when she never put skin in the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3
#3
n_huffhines said:
She sounds like a hater to me. She's wondering why her husband can't make money on new material the way they do, 30 years after they hit the scene.

I haven't liked U2 since Achtung Baby, but this is just petty. It's like that segment on the Carolla podcast, "What Can't Adam Complain About?". She's mad that they found a way to make money and simultaneously give their music away.

Take down Oprah for "giving" away cars when she never put skin in the game.
Click to expand...

Seems to me Sharon Osbourne MAKES money, as does the rest of the family, while still receiving revenue from old and new Ozzie record sales - see 'Scream' or 'Diary of A Madman.' I think she just wanted to air to the world that U2 sucks, in her opinion. Then again, I could be wrong..

Edit: pardon me, it's 'Memoirs of A Madman.'
 
Last edited:
#4
#4
I know she makes money. I know her husband makes money. I know he makes new albums. Scream sold 500,000, which is respectable. U2's last album sold like 8x that. It's no contest.

I think criticizing their music is fine. I do. But it seems she is more upset about their business model. Just my read on it.
 
#5
#5
n_huffhines said:
I know she makes money. I know her husband makes money. I know he makes new albums. Scream sold 500,000, which is respectable. U2's last album sold like 8x that. It's no contest.

I think criticizing their music is fine. I do. But it seems she is more upset about their business model. Just my read on it.
Click to expand...

You're probably right on that count. And Scream blows, no matter how many they sold. Typical Ozzie, come up with one good song and 9 filler tracks and call it a day..
 
#6
#6
U2 still sucks, though. If I had more money than god, just as U2 and Sharon and Ozzie, I would let my opinions fly.
 
#7
#7
Haha. It's funny because when I liked U2 (long time ago) I hated Bono cause of his politics. I grew up and stopped hating people for their politics, but I started hating him for his music.

Now I respect his politics because he has the integrity to change his stance on a lot of things he publicly championed. Most people, particularly celebrities, don't have the guts to do that. I wish I liked his music more.

BTW, this innovative album release reminds me, someone started a crowd-funding campaign to pay Weezer $10M to stop making music. That's funny as hell, and I'm a big Weezer fan.
 
#8
#8
n_huffhines said:
Haha. It's funny because when I liked U2 (long time ago) I hated Bono cause of his politics. I grew up and stopped hating people for their politics, but I started hating him for his music.

Now I respect his politics because he has the integrity to change his stance on a lot of things he publicly championed. Most people, particularly celebrities, don't have the guts to do that. I wish I liked his music more.

BTW, this innovative album release reminds me, someone started a crowd-funding campaign to pay Weezer $10M to stop making music. That's funny as hell, and I'm a big Weezer fan.
Click to expand...

Beverly Hills, that's where I want to be..
 
#9
#9
Weezer's singles aren't that great, and they always make it appear like they haven't musically evolved since the green album, but truth be told, if you listen to their albums beginning to end, they each have a very distinct identity (except for the green album, which sounds like they were trying to recreate the blue album).
 
#10
#10
I never studied much on their music, and don't have any albums, although I have an obscene amount of music on my laptop and external hard drive. If you are RIAA, they were all legitimately paid for.. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
I hate U2, but I'm a bit confused over Sharon's comments. She's accusing U2 of being business moguls instead of artists, despite the fact they are giving their album away for free. What am I missing here?
 
#13
#13
Brave Volunteer said:
I hate U2, but I'm a bit confused over Sharon's comments. She's accusing U2 of being business moguls instead of artists, despite the fact they are giving their album away for free. What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

She's an idiot. They aren't giving their album away. Apple paid them for it and is giving it away to their customers. If you don't have iTunes you have to pay for it. It's quite brilliant. Apple can use it to gain new customers, create positive pr and U2 gets guaranteed "sales" with minimal risk. It's not a hard concept unless your shrill airhead who's married to an unintelligible druggie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#16
#16
tri_vol said:
She's an idiot. They aren't giving their album away. Apple paid them for it and is giving it away to their customers. If you don't have iTunes you have to pay for it. It's quite brilliant. Apple can use it to gain new customers, create positive pr and U2 gets guaranteed "sales" with minimal risk. It's not a hard concept unless your shrill airhead who's married to an unintelligible druggie.
Click to expand...

You are spot on but that PR kind of back fired on Apple. Seems like more people were upset, vocally at least, about it being forced into their library.

I gave it a listen. It wasn't horrible but I doubt I'll listen to a second time. It annoys me they are using the Ramones the commercial to promote their album though. I'm sure the family signed off on it but it still bothers me for some reason.
 
#17
#17
I have never seen so many people complain over a free thing that you aren't even forced to use. I don't have an Apple device at the moment, so I don't know how it worked on iPads and iPhones, but I felt like I had to run in circles to find it on iTunes on my computer.
 
#18
#18
burntorangeVOLffle said:
You are spot on but that PR kind of back fired on Apple. Seems like more people were upset, vocally at least, about it being forced into their library.

I gave it a listen. It wasn't horrible but I doubt I'll listen to a second time. It annoys me they are using the Ramones the commercial to promote their album though. I'm sure the family signed off on it but it still bothers me for some reason.
Click to expand...

Conan had a great bit about the folks complaining about getting free music. It's worth a watch.

As for the Ramones: U2 are/were very good friends with all of the Ramones. Joey was listening to All That You Can't Leave Behind when he passed. Whatever you think of U2's sound, they grew up on punk rock, and it still means something to them.
 
#19
#19
DynamiteMcGhee said:
I have never seen so many people complain over a free thing that you aren't even forced to use. I don't have an Apple device at the moment, so I don't know how it worked on iPads and iPhones, but I felt like I had to run in circles to find it on iTunes on my computer.
Click to expand...

I just randomly noticed it in my recently added playlist.

My initial reaction was "where the hell did that come from?" then I thought "why did my wife download that? She's never expressed interest in U2."

Then I realized it was forced into my library and I thought that was a bit much. I didn't run to the Internet whining about it though.
 
#20
#20
First of all, let me throw my hat into the "U2 sucks" circle. They haven't been good since the 80s.

Secondly, I don't remember anyone getting pissed when Radiohead released Hail to the Thief for....whatever you wanted to pay. (basically free)
 
#21
#21
SWIL said:
First of all, let me throw my hat into the "U2 sucks" circle. They haven't been good since the 80s.

Secondly, I don't remember anyone getting pissed when Radiohead released Hail to the Thief for....whatever you wanted to pay. (basically free)
Click to expand...

Louis CK did that too. He made a bundle by cutting out the production/distribution company and recording it himself and putting it up "for sale" but available at no cost.

He made so much money he just decided for no damn reason to give his sound engineer a $250k bonus.
 
#22
#22
In sort of a life imitates South Park moment:

The iTunes terms and conditions allow Apple to push product to all iTunes users whenever they want. People griping about getting this album dropped into their library agreed to it long ago.
 
#23
#23
Was a big U2 fan back in the day, but post Joshua Tree and Rattle and Hum, their **** sucks. Now they're just some massive marketing entity that care nothing about anything but getting a buck. It amazes me that they're still relevant today despite not producing anything worth note in over 20 years.

The South Park episode had Bono nailed.
 
#24
#24
Godfatha said:
Was a big U2 fan back in the day, but post Joshua Tree and Rattle and Hum, their **** sucks. Now they're just some massive marketing entity that care nothing about anything but getting a buck. It amazes me that they're still relevant today despite not producing anything worth note in over 20 years.

The South Park episode had Bono nailed.
Click to expand...

I'm with you. Some people changed my mind about a few things on here, but I HATE their music of that last decade or so. And Sharon Osbourne probably has some knowledge that we don't.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top