Originally posted by ZoopGun:[..]
Good point, and Why U2 should give something for free if they can earn lots of money some years later? If you have a house and nobody pays what you want and you thing you deserves, so you don't sells, U2 don't need begging money at the moment, so they can play with it.
Nobody knows the day after today, that's why people made investments,saves and etc. also that's why U2 tryed to running away from taxes, that's Why Bono was in the lists of Offshores in Panamá Papers and many other stuffs.
Just give a look about the earns of The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Elvis after their end, it was higher and higher in sales and auctions. U2 can clearly are preparing their future and their generations future with these material.
And don't pretend we know about the future of all their children, we don't do, Adam's children for example just born, we don't know anything about them, so let's be fair.
About Apple, welll:
How many copies they should selled to get this money? They would not be able do it
ANyway, I think this subject is going far from where should be, so I will try to finish in here.
The Apple thing I don’t see the relevance. They were always going to release SOI so it wasn’t like the money forced their hand. They then released SOE a more old fashioned way and made next to no money with it. So it proves that making money isn’t really a big factor when it comes to releasing new material. Will they accept the money when they can get it? Yes under the right circumstances, but it clearly isn’t that important to them.
I think what the band aren’t happy to do is throw significant sums of money away or gamble with large sums of their own money like they did with zoo tv. That’s where the business savvy bit comes in to play.