jlw44:
I just heard from a 20 something today who was in Las Vegas for the iHeartradio show. Her assessment of Paul was that he was absolutely awful. He tried to shove 'new' songs down their throats (I only thought there were 2?, although I'm thinking she was also thinking that a song like Another Day and maybe others was new as well) and didn't enjoy his set at all. Now she only knew I was a Paul fan, and may have overstated the awful part, but it sounded more like anger that he wasted their time with his new songs. I would pretty much guess that would be the feeling for most 20, 30 and 40 year olds who wouldn't be interested in buying anything new by a 70 year old. It's just not something they would do and why the marketing tried to target those age groups is still mind boggling to me. And again why a Rolling Stone cover? People mag would have more of an impact. Are his marketing people really fooled by the younger audiences and think they would be interested in the new music? I think the whole marketing thing was misguided. His audience is the older set who may have been interested in something new if they were aware of it.
Looking from the outside the IHeart Festival crowd were the most boring lot you'd ever see. I was surprised he did new songs to an audience that wasn't his own, but it makes a change for him to do that rather than the usual Beatles stuff. I agree though that anybody under 30 isn't really going to buy Paul's music no matter how good it is, it's not their bag.