US Charts Discussion (Part 2)

[Americano 31,061]

If Adele didn't come by (which she barely did since she doesn't even promote), 2011 would've been Gaga's headline year so far.

[boysboysboys 278]

Nope.

Why?

[Americano 31,061]

Why?

Because the albums are scanned in the US when purchased, it's not estimated shipments. Labels can't inflate those numbers.

It's checked by multiple sources, and it's against US law to distort commercial information for public-traded corporations. (Which labels are.) It'd be misleading to investors to say your artists are bringing in larger profit margins than they actually are, which is corruption and a felony.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Americano

[craig 680]

If Adele didn't come by (which she barely did since she doesn't even promote), 2011 would've been Gaga's headline year so far.

I think Monsters are more pressed about Katy's singles success than about Adele.

Adele, like Taylor Swift, if not really a direct competitor.

[Americano 31,061]

I think Monsters are more pressed about Katy's singles success than about Adele.

Adele, like Taylor Swift, if not really a direct competitor.

I agree.

She has even said herself, multiple times, that she has no desire to attain the same kind of superstar status people like Lady Gaga and Rihanna have.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Americano

[boysboysboys 278]

Because the albums are scanned in the US when purchased, it's not estimated shipments. Labels can't inflate those numbers.

It's checked by multiple sources, and it's against US law to distort commercial information for public-traded corporations. (Which labels are.) It'd be misleading to investors to say your artists are bringing in larger profit margins than they actually are, which is corruption and a felony.

Yeah, but what if some private buyers are plants? And what if some retail outlets are buying the albums in situ?

I've been thinking about this and it maybe could be in the best interest of multinational recording companies to do so, to protect traditional music and the countless people relying on it. Of course, once demand has been generated the ball will start rolling by itself.

I guess it's weirder for me here since I know more people that own a 4 album than a 21 album.

She has even said herself, multiple times, that she has no desire to attain the same kind of superstar status people like Lady Gaga and Rihanna have.

We all know better than that. She's playing.

Edited May 15, 2012 by boysboysboys

[Americano 31,061]

Yeah, but what if some private buyers are plants? And what if some retail outlets are buying the albums in situ?

I've been thinking about this and it maybe could be in the best interest of multinational recording companies to do so. Of course, once demand has been generated the ball will start rolling by itself.

I guess it's weirder for me here since I know more people that own a 4 album than a 21 album.

Company's don't do that. It's against the law, and the government isn't corrupt enough to let those practices happen in the United States.

Any form of corruption is illegal, look at the ENRON scandal.

Labels are known to inflate numbers abroad, because they can distort the number of shipments etc. (which I think is the case with Lady Gaga's 8-9 million figure and Adele's highly inflated total sales number), but US numbers are accurate.

I'll add that there's no proof that any of these numbers are inaccurate.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Americano

[boysboysboys 278]

Company's don't do that. It's against the law, and the government isn't corrupt enough to let those practices happen in the United States.

Any form of corruption is illegal, look at the ENRON scandal.

Labels are known to inflate numbers abroad, because they can distort the number of shipments etc. (which I think is the case with Lady Gaga's 8-9 million figure and Adele's highly inflated total sales number), but US numbers are accurate.

I'll add that there's no proof that any of these numbers are inaccurate.

Then how did it work?

[Americano 31,061]

Then how did it work?

How did what work

[Klou 2,414]

Skrillex g/f at #20 on iTunes :clap:

[boysboysboys 278]

How did what work

How could she sell so much with little marketing and a narrow initial audience? How is she selling at such a consistent rate, a year after the album was released?

[Americano 31,061]

How could she sell so much with little marketing and a narrow initial audience? How is she selling at such a consistent rate, a year after the album was released?

She has public demand. Simple as that.

[boysboysboys 278]

She has public demand. Simple as that.

That's not enough. People hardly cared, even after she won Best New Artist.

-sigh- Anyway, it's pointless to argue about Adele. It's not like she's worth it to me, and Gaga's not rallying right now.

[Americano 31,061]

Will you stop with your theories? There is no reason. People just like her.

Way too paranoid.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Americano

[Deacon 5]

Adele has the advantage of having very positive word-of-mouth advertising. People hear great things about the album, they hear a song or two and it creates a natural hype as opposed to a promotional blitz.