Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2011 14:50:12 GMT -5
^ Invincible sold 13 million worldwide versus Janet's 9 million with All For You. They are both certified 2x platinum in the US so even Janet's last successful album could not topple his overall sales.
|
|
HEADOFTHEPACK
5x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2008
Posts: 5,916
|
Post by HEADOFTHEPACK on Jun 17, 2011 14:52:25 GMT -5
Oh, we understand. You're just wrong. Nobody 'wins' and there is in fact a world outside of CHR radio. Their careers were not the same length of time, thus she did not last longer. If they'd released their debuts on the same day, you'd be onto a winner, potentially. They didn't, so it's immeasurable in the way that you seem to be trying to make work for your argument.
|
|
PDC1987
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by PDC1987 on Jun 17, 2011 14:54:20 GMT -5
^ Invincible sold 13 million worldwide versus Janet's 9 million with All For You. They are both certified 2x platinum in the US so even Janet's last successful album could not topple his overall sales. LOL. Invincible and All For You are at 8 million and 6 million tops. The market-by-market breakdowns are in their threads at UKMix.
|
|
PDC1987
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by PDC1987 on Jun 17, 2011 14:55:27 GMT -5
you people are impossible. for the last time, I'm NOT talking about total years in the business. When have i ever said anything even remotely close to that? MJ could've totally been making #1 smashes past You Are Not Alone, but his mainstream music career ended THERE. Janet's lasted until 2001. Any big star can go on a tour and sellout, all the big names do it (relatively speaking, of course). And no, you can't say Katy Perry vs. The Rolling Stones because they aren't even remotely comparable. The Rolling Stones stopped having mainstream hits years and years ago. MJ stopped having mainstream hits in 1995. Janet in 2001. I'm not talking about total years, MJ clearly wins that. If MJ would've had a #1 hit in 2002 than he would win. But he didn't. I don't care what re-issues of albums occurred, cuz that is not the point. That didn't mean you'd hear an MJ song on CHR radio. I'm not saying "who's career started earlier and lasted the longest." In the early to mid-90's, both MJ and Janet were having mainstream success on radio. Then MJ fizzled away and Janet kept having success. SHE LASTED LONGER. Why is that so hard to understand? Who had success more recently is not the same thing as whose career lasted longer. MJ lasted longer, end.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2011 14:57:42 GMT -5
^ Invincible sold 13 million worldwide versus Janet's 9 million with All For You. They are both certified 2x platinum in the US so even Janet's last successful album could not topple his overall sales. LOL. Invincible and All For You are at 8 million and 6 million tops. The market-by-market breakdowns are in their threads at UKMix. I guess the source I read had incorrect numbers. Anywho, the point is that MJ's last studio album prior to his death still sold more than Janet's last successful album.
|
|
PDC1987
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by PDC1987 on Jun 17, 2011 15:00:15 GMT -5
LOL. Invincible and All For You are at 8 million and 6 million tops. The market-by-market breakdowns are in their threads at UKMix. I guess the source I read had incorrect numbers. Anywho, the point is that MJ's last studio album prior to his death still sold more than Janet's last successful album. Oh of course. I was just saying. If you're interested though, UKMix is a wonderful source and MJDangerous has a brilliant archive of sales for all the Jacksons.
|
|
₫anny Jerz ♔
Diamond Member
Irrelevant
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 10,939
|
Post by ₫anny Jerz ♔ on Jun 17, 2011 15:04:45 GMT -5
SHE LASTED LONGER. Why is that so hard to understand? It's so hard to understand because you're not making sense. She most certainly did not last 'longer.' She lasted later then he did, maybe. 'Longer' implies a length of time and in that regard, MJ's career spanned a longer period. Fact. You're arguing that Janet's career kept going when MJ's essentially slowed down. Still, even if that were true, that doesn't mean her career lasted longer. It just went later. Big difference. Later =/= longevity.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,744
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Jun 17, 2011 15:07:24 GMT -5
then substitute all my "longer's" for "later's" and you'll see what i'm getting at.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2011 15:15:45 GMT -5
Okay so you've established that Janet's most recent #1 hit was "later" than Michael's most recent #1 hit. Now remind us why that has anything to do with the topic at hand.
|
|
Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815...
Diamond Member
All Lives Can’t Matter Until Black Lives Matter
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 18,337
|
Post by Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815... on Jun 17, 2011 15:26:19 GMT -5
Ever since Beth released that video SPREE hasn't been like himself.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,744
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Jun 17, 2011 15:32:46 GMT -5
Okay so you've established that Janet's most recent #1 hit was "later" than Michael's most recent #1 hit. Now remind us why that has anything to do with the topic at hand. it doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand. My initial post was simply commending Janet for lasting longer later than Michael.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2011 15:33:56 GMT -5
^... and why does that deserve commending?
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,744
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Jun 17, 2011 15:38:53 GMT -5
^... and why does that deserve commending? because she adapted to pop culture and was able to remain relevant on mainstream radio, in the same way Mariah adapted to pop culture with TEOM. MJ, in his later years, failed to do that. So that's why I'm commending Janet. *waits to be bullied and bashed again*
|
|
HEADOFTHEPACK
5x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2008
Posts: 5,916
|
Post by HEADOFTHEPACK on Jun 17, 2011 15:40:23 GMT -5
Well... you asked for it...
ADAPTED to pop culture? The reason she's been in the fucking dumpster for the last ten years is her lack of ability to do just that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2011 15:46:07 GMT -5
^... and why does that deserve commending? because she adapted to pop culture and was able to remain relevant on mainstream radio, in the same way Mariah adapted to pop culture with TEOM. MJ, in his later years, failed to do that. So that's why I'm commending Janet. *waits to be bullied and bashed again* But Janet failed in her later years too. Keep in mind Michael was 8 years older than Janet. "You Are Not Alone" was a #1 hit for Michael when he was 37. "All For You" was a #1 hit for Janet when she was 34. Janet had her last Top 10 hit when she was 35. Michael had his last Top 10 hit when he was 43. You just can't compare them based on chronological years. Janet was almost a decade younger than Michael and started her music career over a decade after he did.
|
|
MikeCheck12
Diamond Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 15,880
|
Post by MikeCheck12 on Jun 17, 2011 16:06:46 GMT -5
MJ was amazing. And JJ rocks, too.
Carry on.
|
|
David
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 16,804
|
Post by David on Jun 17, 2011 17:54:52 GMT -5
Okay so you've established that Janet's most recent #1 hit was "later" than Michael's most recent #1 hit. Now remind us why that has anything to do with the topic at hand. it doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand. My initial post was simply commending Janet for lasting longer later than Michael. IA. Good job not dying Janet!
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Jun 17, 2011 18:05:46 GMT -5
it doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand. My initial post was simply commending Janet for lasting longer later than Michael. IA. Good job not dying Janet! You missed his point She should be commended on the fact that MJ died.
|
|
Night Senses
4x Platinum Member
Processing…
Joined: November 2004
Posts: 4,603
|
Post by Night Senses on Jun 17, 2011 20:43:47 GMT -5
MJ was amazing. And JJ rocks, too. Carry on. Yet another reason why you are one of my favorite people.
|
|
Mr. Wonder
Platinum Member
Joined: August 2009
Posts: 1,583
|
Post by Mr. Wonder on Jun 18, 2011 13:49:59 GMT -5
^^^Michael lasted longer. Speaking on their break out albums, OTW - Invincible - 22 years; Control - All For You - 15 years. What has helped Janet in the past few years is her acting, which has helped elongate her overall success while her music success is lacking as of now. Off the Wall may have been Michael's first hugely successful album but he had top 5 hits in the US (as a solo artist) dating back 8 years before Off the Wall was released. His first 4 solo albums are also estimated to have sold somewhere in the neighborhood of 15M worldwide. If you were to look at top 10 hits on the Hot 100, Michael's streak was from 1971-2001 (30 years). Janet's was from 1986-2001 (15 years). Michael's period of success lasted much longer. I don't see how people can even debate that. You gotta read sis.
|
|
Mr. Wonder
Platinum Member
Joined: August 2009
Posts: 1,583
|
Post by Mr. Wonder on Jun 18, 2011 13:53:23 GMT -5
And SPRΞΞ I see what you're saying, but you have to account for the fact that MJ broke out 6 years before Janet. If you add those 6 years to when you believe MJ fizzled out (1995 - YANA), then you get to 2001, which is when Janet last had a top 10 with "Someone To Call My Lover".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2011 15:26:04 GMT -5
Off the Wall may have been Michael's first hugely successful album but he had top 5 hits in the US (as a solo artist) dating back 8 years before Off the Wall was released. His first 4 solo albums are also estimated to have sold somewhere in the neighborhood of 15M worldwide. If you were to look at top 10 hits on the Hot 100, Michael's streak was from 1971-2001 (30 years). Janet's was from 1986-2001 (15 years). Michael's period of success lasted much longer. I don't see how people can even debate that. You gotta read sis. I did read so slap some duct tape on that snarky mouth. Michael's pre-Off the Wall albums had some major hits on them even if the albums themselves aren't on the level of his later albums. Janet's pre-Control albums were total bombs with no crossover hits. She certainly had nothing anywhere near a "Ben" on those albums.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,744
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Jun 18, 2011 15:42:48 GMT -5
And SPRΞΞ I see what you're saying, but you have to account for the fact that MJ broke out 6 years before Janet. If you add those 6 years to when you believe MJ fizzled out (1995 - YANA), then you get to 2001, which is when Janet last had a top 10 with "Someone To Call My Lover". i was never talking about "years added up". I was commending Janet for being able to keep making smash hits through the late 90's-early 2000's as her brother (who is related to her and is comparable, not someone like Katy Perry, who obviously is not comparable) was NOT able to do. At least not on mainstream US CHR radio, and that's the format i'm talking about. He had every opportunity to keep throwing out hit after hit, but he just fizzled away and became a weirdo. Look at Madonna (who is 1 month older/younger than MJ) who DID in fact keep churning out hit after hit all the way thru the end of the 90's and into today (for the most part, she is still relevant for someone her age). please forget about the "number of years" argument because that is not what i was getting at, nor am i stupid. I can add.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2011 15:49:50 GMT -5
I would like to commend Michael on being born earlier than Janet. Great job Michael!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2011 17:29:46 GMT -5
And SPRΞΞ I see what you're saying, but you have to account for the fact that MJ broke out 6 years before Janet. If you add those 6 years to when you believe MJ fizzled out (1995 - YANA), then you get to 2001, which is when Janet last had a top 10 with "Someone To Call My Lover". i was never talking about "years added up". I was commending Janet for being able to keep making smash hits through the late 90's-early 2000's as her brother (who is related to her and is comparable, not someone like Katy Perry, who obviously is not comparable) was NOT able to do. At least not on mainstream US CHR radio, and that's the format i'm talking about. He had every opportunity to keep throwing out hit after hit, but he just fizzled away and became a weirdo. Look at Madonna (who is 1 month older/younger than MJ) who DID in fact keep churning out hit after hit all the way thru the end of the 90's and into today (for the most part, she is still relevant for someone her age). please forget about the "number of years" argument because that is not what i was getting at, nor am i stupid. I can add. The point is that no one understands why it's some huge accomplishment that Janet "outlasted" Michael when he started his career over a decade before Janet and he was born 8 years before her. It's also not like Janet's career lasted that much longer anyway. If we're strictly going by #1 hits, than yeah, Michael had his last #1 hit 6 years before Janet had her last. However, Michael actually had his last Top 10 Hot 100 hit after Janet's last Top 10 Hot 100 hit even if it's a flop in your eyes. The numbers don't lie. It's really not like Janet went on having huge success while Michael was bombing. Aren't worldwide sales estimates for Invincible actually higher than worldwide sales estimates for All For You? If not, they're very close last time I heard. After 2001, neither of them had another hit album. Michael died before releasing another studio album, and Janet's next 3 albums all sold under a million in the US (none of which scored a Top 10 hit).
|
|
halo19
4x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 4,683
|
Post by halo19 on Jun 18, 2011 18:53:29 GMT -5
Three pages on and we're still using figures to answer this question; Janet is definitely up there, no two ways about it, but the simple answer is no. Nor is she on par with Madonna. I don't want to downplay her influence (it's there), just to put it in perspective. Her success seems very condensed into a shorter period of time when you start throwing Madonna and MJ into the mix ie. potentially the most influential solo pop artists. It's just not the same, but that's hardly a criticism. This is the absolutely correct response to the thread.
|
|
flo
New Member
Joined: November 2008
Posts: 46
|
Post by flo on Jun 18, 2011 19:57:27 GMT -5
^ Invincible sold 13 million worldwide versus Janet's 9 million with All For You. They are both certified 2x platinum in the US so even Janet's last successful album could not topple his overall sales. All For You outsold Invincible (which only released one single) when it was released. you people are impossible. for the last time, I'm NOT talking about total years in the business. When have i ever said anything even remotely close to that? MJ could've totally been making #1 smashes past You Are Not Alone, but his mainstream music career ended THERE. Janet's lasted until 2001. Any big star can go on a tour and sellout, all the big names do it (relatively speaking, of course). And no, you can't say Katy Perry vs. The Rolling Stones because they aren't even remotely comparable. The Rolling Stones stopped having mainstream hits years and years ago. MJ stopped having mainstream hits in 1995. Janet in 2001. I'm not talking about total years, MJ clearly wins that. If MJ would've had a #1 hit in 2002 than he would win. But he didn't. I don't care what re-issues of albums occurred, cuz that is not the point. That didn't mean you'd hear an MJ song on CHR radio. I'm not saying "who's career started earlier and lasted the longest." In the early to mid-90's, both MJ and Janet were having mainstream success on radio. Then MJ fizzled away and Janet kept having success. SHE LASTED LONGER. Why is that so hard to understand? I'd say after her All For You tour and being asked to headline the Superbowl, 2004 was looking to be another good year for Janet's career. I wonder where her career would be now had the FCC controversy happened to say, someone else, and not her.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2011 19:59:12 GMT -5
Invincible had more than 1 single. "Butterflies" was the second single in the US, and "Cry" was the second single internationally.
|
|
Mr. Wonder
Platinum Member
Joined: August 2009
Posts: 1,583
|
Post by Mr. Wonder on Jun 18, 2011 21:43:44 GMT -5
I did read so slap some duct tape on that snarky mouth. Michael's pre-Off the Wall albums had some major hits on them even if the albums themselves aren't on the level of his later albums. Janet's pre-Control albums were total bombs with no crossover hits. She certainly had nothing anywhere near a "Ben" on those albums. Clearly you did not read, because if you did, you wouldn't still be hitting that "Post Reply" button as if what you're saying is relevant. I am speaking on their breakout albums. Ben is NOT Michael's breakout album. Neither is Got To Be There, Music And Me, or Forever, Michael regardless of WHAT they sold. Janet's releases prior to Control each featured a top ten R&B song, which was a hit considering she wasn't marketed as a crossover artist, but an R&B artist. Furthermore, her focus was not music, it was acting.
|
|
Mr. Wonder
Platinum Member
Joined: August 2009
Posts: 1,583
|
Post by Mr. Wonder on Jun 18, 2011 21:47:02 GMT -5
And SPRΞΞ I see what you're saying, but you have to account for the fact that MJ broke out 6 years before Janet. If you add those 6 years to when you believe MJ fizzled out (1995 - YANA), then you get to 2001, which is when Janet last had a top 10 with "Someone To Call My Lover". i was never talking about "years added up". I was commending Janet for being able to keep making smash hits through the late 90's-early 2000's as her brother (who is related to her and is comparable, not someone like Katy Perry, who obviously is not comparable) was NOT able to do. At least not on mainstream US CHR radio, and that's the format i'm talking about. He had every opportunity to keep throwing out hit after hit, but he just fizzled away and became a weirdo. Look at Madonna (who is 1 month older/younger than MJ) who DID in fact keep churning out hit after hit all the way thru the end of the 90's and into today (for the most part, she is still relevant for someone her age). please forget about the "number of years" argument because that is not what i was getting at, nor am i stupid. I can add. But the premises of your argument was the Janet lasted longer than Michael. Well yeah, she started AFTER him. If Control had been released in 1979, she would have fizzled out around the same time you claim Michael did. You also have to account for the fact that Michael released a studio album once ever 4 years, compared to Madonna and Janet who released every 2 to 3 years. Also, I'm sure you're aware that Invincible had a top 10 hit and sold nicely for an album that wasn't promoted. That said, Michael has lasted longer, musically, than Janet.
|
|