19 albums that sold more than a million in a week in the US

[brizoda 3,109]

A horrid combination of rock and rap.

what is horrid is 'N Sync and Backstreet Boys

puah

[Sugarfall 3,723]

If BTW was released w/o 99 cent deal it would be at 700 k tho

[StrawberryBlond 13,286]

There's a few things we can learn from this list:

1. The idea that pop is the only genre that sells big isn't completely true.

2. As only 3 albums on the list were before the digital era, it proves that piracy isn't completely to blame for reduced album sales.

3. Appealing to the young is a great way to get sales.

4. Just because you've managed to get onto this hallowed list, doesn't mean that you'll be successful forever.

5. Your album won't make this list if it doesn't have a massive hype machine behind it.

6. Taylor Swift's genius marketing certainly makes up for her limited talent.

 

If BTW was released w/o 99 cent deal it would be at 700 k tho

 

You could make a similar argument about the albums released before the digital era by saying that had illegal downloading been around, they wouldn't have hit a million either. Which I do believe is the case, bar the No Strings Attached album. When I look back at some of the albums in the pre-digital era that sold millions of copies, I wonder how many of those people actually liked the album once they took it home and listened to it, because for a lot of them, the lead single was the only great song on them. At least today, you're more guaranteed that everyone who buys your album actually likes it. Albums that sold milions years ago have been forgotten about by now because sales were definitely no indication of quality in a time when the only way you could listen to music was to buy it. I once heard someone say that Britney's 20 million+ selling debut CDs are probably in landfill, second hand shops and in long-forgetten boxes in dusty attics now, and they're probably right.

[vertigostick 2,007]

If BTW was released w/o 99 cent deal it would be at 700 k tho

And you have absolutely NO idea how many people who bought it through the 99 cent deal would have bought the album anyway.

Your argument is invalid, now wash your mouth and take a SEAT sis!

[Bordeciel 323]

HDD/Bilboard/Whatever changed the rules because of Gaga messy amazon 0,99$ sales, now it's 3,99$ or more for being counted as sales

 

Gaga played it but there can be a discussion about those sales and if they are legitim or not

[Mills 446]

HDD/Bilboard/Whatever changed the rules because of Gaga messy amazon 0,99$ sales, now it's 3,99$ or more for being counted as sales

 

Gaga played it but there can be a discussion about those sales and if they are legitim or not

Yes, they did introduce a pricing policy, 5 months after BTW's release, disallowing any new album being offered below $3.49 during its first four weeks of availability to be counted towards SoundScan's tally. However, the 1M+ debut of BTW is "official", and therefore "legitimate" because it occurred before the pricing policy. Also, Billboard didn't change its decision to count BTW as the 17th album to sell more than a million in one week since SoundScan began tracking album sales. I've explained this before, so I'm just going to re-post what I've earlier written regarding the pricing policy and BTW:

 

440k from the 1.108M first-week sales came from Amazon's 99 cent 2-day offer. Billboard recognizes that, and they also still recognizes BTW as the 17th album in SoundScan history to sell more than a million in a week. Some tend to either forget, or worse, ignore that fact. It sold more than a million in its first week, regardless if it was offered by one retailer for 99 cents for 2 days. "Sold" implies that there's an intent to purchase from the consumers. It wasn't offered for "free", for its sales to not be counted. Not to mention, SoundScan / Billboard didn't have any policy regarding first-week sales discounts back then.

 

To prevent future releases to use the type of sales promo Amazon did for BTW in pursuit of manipulating the charts, a pricing policy was introduced, after BTW's release. That pricing policy disallows any album priced below $3.49 during their first 4 weeks of availability to be counted by SoundScan, and therefore will not reflect on the Billboard charts. That's what happened to Microsoft's 99-cent offer for Taylor's 1989. Its sales were NOT counted by SoundScan, and are excluded from 1989's 1.287M US debut.

 

However, that policy does NOT alter or affect BTW's first week sales. Hence, the all-time record of the biggest one-week US digital album sales still stands and belongs to BTW. Only the ignorant and the misinformed would refute that.

[GagaMyBlood95 9,808]

The slayage

If BTW was released w/o 99 cent deal it would be at 700 k tho

And you know that - how?

[Sugarfall 3,723]

The slayage

And you know that - how?

'440k from the 1.108M first-week sales came from Amazon's 99 cent 2-day offer. Billboard recognizes that, and they also still recognizes BTW as the 17th album in SoundScan history to sell more than a million in a week.'

Math

[Fish 6,086]

There's a few things we can learn from this list:

1. The idea that pop is the only genre that sells big isn't completely true.

2. As only 3 albums on the list were before the digital era, it proves that piracy isn't completely to blame for reduced album sales.

3. Appealing to the young is a great way to get sales.

4. Just because you've managed to get onto this hallowed list, doesn't mean that you'll be successful forever.

5. Your album won't make this list if it doesn't have a massive hype machine behind it.

6. Taylor Swift's genius marketing certainly makes up for her limited talent.

 

 

You could make a similar argument about the albums released before the digital era by saying that had illegal downloading been around, they wouldn't have hit a million either. Which I do believe is the case, bar the No Strings Attached album. When I look back at some of the albums in the pre-digital era that sold millions of copies, I wonder how many of those people actually liked the album once they took it home and listened to it, because for a lot of them, the lead single was the only great song on them. At least today, you're more guaranteed that everyone who buys your album actually likes it. Albums that sold milions years ago have been forgotten about by now because sales were definitely no indication of quality in a time when the only way you could listen to music was to buy it. I once heard someone say that Britney's 20 million+ selling debut CDs are probably in landfill, second hand shops and in long-forgetten boxes in dusty attics now, and they're probably right.

 

[GagaMyBlood95 9,808]

'440k from the 1.108M first-week sales came from Amazon's 99 cent 2-day offer. Billboard recognizes that, and they also still recognizes BTW as the 17th album in SoundScan history to sell more than a million in a week.'

Math

Yeah, but my point is - how do you know that BTW wouldn't sell 1M first week without the 0.99$ offer? The hype was huge and I'm sure those people would pay more for the album..

[Wet Fire 5,687]

But where's Prism?

:derpga:

[fede ARTPOP 5,815]

I cant at Taylor Swifts..like WTF   

[GagaisHotAF 343]

I remember when Rolling Stones named Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga the new Queens of Pop. True! 

[Merier Care 27]

There's a few things we can learn from this list:

1. The idea that pop is the only genre that sells big isn't completely true.

2. As only 3 albums on the list were before the digital era, it proves that piracy isn't completely to blame for reduced album sales.

3. Appealing to the young is a great way to get sales.

4. Just because you've managed to get onto this hallowed list, doesn't mean that you'll be successful forever.

5. Your album won't make this list if it doesn't have a massive hype machine behind it.

6. Taylor Swift's genius marketing certainly makes up for her limited talent.

You could make a similar argument about the albums released before the digital era by saying that had illegal downloading been around, they wouldn't have hit a million either. Which I do believe is the case, bar the No Strings Attached album. When I look back at some of the albums in the pre-digital era that sold millions of copies, I wonder how many of those people actually liked the album once they took it home and listened to it, because for a lot of them, the lead single was the only great song on them. At least today, you're more guaranteed that everyone who buys your album actually likes it. Albums that sold milions years ago have been forgotten about by now because sales were definitely no indication of quality in a time when the only way you could listen to music was to buy it. I once heard someone say that Britney's 20 million+ selling debut CDs are probably in landfill, second hand shops and in long-forgetten boxes in dusty attics now, and they're probably right.

I highly doubt the Britney part. Her albums are legendary and unforgotten! Not among old people, but among back-then-teens. And they're still jamming to the songs once they hear them on party.

[PlasticHo 696]

Yeah, but my point is - how do you know that BTW wouldn't sell 1M first week without the 0.99$ offer? The hype was huge and I'm sure those people would pay more for the album..

This is my opinion as well. You couldn't GIVE me a Taylor, Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande, or One Direction album for FREE. The list goes on. (And yes this is just my opinion. I'm not attacking anyone's faves. ) So I definitely wouldn't take the time to buy it...not for 99 cents and not even for free. I'm sure I'm not the only fan like this either.