Good op-ed IMO. U2 have a record of sustained sucess that no band can match, no doubt. They've attracted a lot of haters along the way, but even the most strident critics would have to concede that U2 has managed to outlast most of the legendary rock acts, and produced good music along the way. I do think that U2 has been trading on a legacy for at least the last 8 years. I like SOI - it's a solid album, but I don't think it has any run beyond U2's core fanbase. The band ducked any real sales measurement by giving the thing away - and attracted the ire of annoying hipsters the world over.
I am anticipating the release of SOE, but I am curious about what it will portend for the band. If sales are discouraging, or it fades quickly from the public attention span...how does the band respond? As for the companion tour - will it stand based on the merits of the underlying album, or is it simply more trading on past glories? I saw two Joshua Tree shows in 2017: the first was exciting but even as a hardcore fan I had to admit that Bono's energy was fading a bit. The second show was fun as an event but rather dull as a concert - largely because of the static setlist and predictible arrangement of the entire production.
Honestly, I am ready for a winding-down over the next few years. First, at some point we have to deal with simple entropy of the matter; every going concern faces the eventuality of ever diminishing returns. Second, the longer this thing goes on the greater the chance it tarnishes before our eyes. Do we want to see this devolve into a crappy product (meanwhile trying to convince ourselves that nothing has changed)? Do we want to see U2 become the Rolling Stones? It's better to go out gracefully...always leaving the fans wanting more. That doesn't mean it has to be the end of music for Bono and the boys - a solo album here or there, a compilation, some studio work...etc, would be great. But at some time we have to consider the choice between a soft landing a hard thud.