Chainsmoker Praises Gaga

[ThatAsianGuy 2,365]

I forgive him cause thats the cute one.

[Dexxx 1,363]

Long story short, Chainsmokers don't like Gaga. That's it. 

[Speechless94 545]

I think the reason people think its still shady is because Amazon clearly knew they were going to lose money and was, for some reason, okay with it. They wouldn't have allowed that deal otherwise. There must have been something else in it for them. 

Going by the same math someone posted above, she would have had to sell almost 4 million copies under that promotion for amazon to make money. 

I.e. the chain smokers guy didn't know what he was talking about back then. 

[monsterdino 31,813]

He f*cked up and now he's trying to fix it. Not working for me! They still have s*itty "music" and shitty attitude 

[dopega 3,530]

 

[Bebe 16,562]

1 hour ago, Speechless94 said:

I think the reason people think its still shady is because Amazon clearly knew they were going to lose money and was, for some reason, okay with it. They wouldn't have allowed that deal otherwise. There must have been something else in it for them. 

Going by the same math someone posted above, she would have had to sell almost 4 million copies under that promotion for amazon to make money. 

I.e. the chain smokers guy didn't know what he was talking about back then. 

But obviously Amazon knew they were going to lose money, they saw it as an investment and they saw it as advertising.... The chainsmoker guy doesn't say anything different. He literally just says what is true and what was reported, it's no reason to attack the guy  

[Chris Evans 8,903]

53 minutes ago, Bebe said:

But obviously Amazon knew they were going to lose money, they saw it as an investment and they saw it as advertising.... The chainsmoker guy doesn't say anything different. He literally just says what is true and what was reported, it's no reason to attack the guy  

Yikes I can definitely see this now although I can still see it as shade seeing as in 2011 haters were quick to throw out the fact that they lost money but failed to mention it was to promote their new service- it really depends on what his intentions were 

[Bebe 16,562]

4 minutes ago, Chris Evans said:

Yikes I can definitely see this now although I can still see it as shade seeing as in 2011 haters were quick to throw out the fact that they lost money but failed to mention it was to promote their new service- it really depends on what his intentions were 

Well he did mention that she sold 1.2 mill in her first week  I think it's hard to make the argument that he is dissing her when he acknowledges straight away that she sold over a million. I doubt his argument is "Flop Lady Gaga only sold 1.2 mill and therefore Amazon lost 3.2 mill" if it is, then it's clearly a dumb argument.

The only way I can legitimately see this as a diss (which nobody else angry at this 'diss' has mentioned) was if his point was "Amazon spent 3.2 million on Gaga so she could sell 1.2 and get a #1".  I personally think that's a stretch to make it that though, it certainly doesn't seem clear to me that the tweet is shady or an attack.

If I had a twitter, I could have made the same point 5 years ago like "Gaga HA power, she sold 1.2 and Amazon had to dish out 3.2 million. Their site crashed too, bet they didn't expect that much traffic". The tweet is way to ambiguous to ignite any legitimate drama. He just tweeted the facts, you can interpret it as shady, you can interpret it as praise or you can interpret it as neutral. The five year old tweet certainly doesn't seem like that big a deal regardless.

I could probably dig through the posts of everyone in this thread and find some post from years ago where you didn't like something Gaga did and criticised her. Hopefully none of you score a #1 song sometime in the future while Gaga is also releasing.