HITS 11-2 Taylor Swift 975-1000K

[applechic]

Anyone with working brain cells should be able to figure out the fact that selling 1M in this day is MUCH more difficult than it was 10 years ago. It's not rocket science.

[Deleted]

Nov 1, 2010 21:22:59 GMT -5 1shot said:

Of course it's possible, but are you even reading the other people's posts? My God!

They are simply saying that one million today is probably much more difficult to accomplish than it MIGHT have been in 2000 because that's when sales were at their peek!

Yes. Are you reading my posts?

It has happened eight times since 2000 and it happened eight times 2000 and prior

How is it more difficult today than in 2000 when it has only happened 16 times in total and just as many times after 2000 as 2000 and before?

[Deleted]

I would agree that 500,000 or some number lower than 1 million is "harder to achieve today than 10 years ago when sales were at their peak"

But not 1 million

1 million was as rare then as it is today

[Cerbius]

Nov 1, 2010 21:40:34 GMT -5 @2m said:

How is it more difficult today than in 2000 when it has only happened 16 times in total and just as many times after 2000 as 2000 and before?

Sales patterns were different in the early to mid 90s; albums back then rarely opened big. Instead, sales remained relatively consistent week-to-week.

[1shot]

Nov 1, 2010 21:38:25 GMT -5 applechic said:

Anyone with working brain cells should be able to figure out the fact that selling 1M in this day is MUCH more difficult than it was 10 years ago. It's not rocket science.

True that. I think ignorance and short-sightedness is to blame.

When album sales are decreasing 20% year after year, it is surprising to see ANYONE do this well in 2010. Sure, in absolute terms a million in 2010 is the same as in 2000 but that's such a short-sighted argument. That's like saying a dollar now is worth the exact same as a dollar in 1900 with complete disregard for inflation, trends, etc.

[Deleted]

Nov 1, 2010 21:50:53 GMT -5 1shot said:

Nov 1, 2010 21:38:25 GMT -5 applechic said:

Anyone with working brain cells should be able to figure out the fact that selling 1M in this day is MUCH more difficult than it was 10 years ago. It's not rocket science.

True that. I think ignorance and short-sightedness is to blame. When album sales are decreasing 20% year after year, it is surprising to see ANYONE do this well in 2010. Sure, in absolute terms a million in 2010 is the same as in 2000 but that's such a short-sighted argument. That's like saying a dollar now is worth the exact same as a dollar in 1900.

Which is why I said I agree a number less than 1 million is harder to reach but 1 million has ALWAYS been a rare number to hit. Sales markets and inflation and 1 album today = 1.5 albums or whatever then is irrelevant. 1 million didn't happen all that often even 10 years ago

[when the pawn...]

6 albums have 1 million plus weeks in 2000, 3 of which over 1.5 million, 1 of them nearly 2.5 million. 1 has in 2010. How is it the same?

[Deleted]

Going by billboard chart dates, 8 total 2000 and prior (5 in 2000)

8 since 2000

[Carriefan1190]

People aren't realizing how hard it is now to get a 500k+ first week in sales and now Taylor does double that in one week.....that's what makes her million more important, that despite this economic slowdown that we're in, people are still able to buy albums and the amount of marketing Taylor had to do for this album is insane.

[when the pawn...]

Nov 1, 2010 22:06:01 GMT -5 @2m said:

Going by billboard chart dates, 8 total 2000 and prior (5 in 2000)

8 since 2000

Creative way to push your point. Who cares about billboard year vs. calendar year? It's completely irrelevant. In the year 2000, 6 albums posted 1 million+ weeks. As I said earlier, Speak Now is the first to do so in nearly two and a half years. Please tell me how a million-plus week in 2010 is the same as a million-plus week in 2000.

[Love Plastic Love]

Nov 1, 2010 22:10:11 GMT -5 when the pawn... said:

Nov 1, 2010 22:06:01 GMT -5 @2m said:

Going by billboard chart dates, 8 total 2000 and prior (5 in 2000)

8 since 2000

Please tell me how a million-plus week in 2010 is the same as a million-plus week in 2000.

It isn't-but 2M takes a very, very concrete by the word understanding of everything. I actually quite like that in him, but sometimes it leads to me disagreeing such as in this case. Sometimes there are outside contexts and socioeconomic forces at play that affect the concrete black and white letter of the law. I think this is one of those cases. 2M and others are, of course, free to disagree with me. It would be boring if we all agreed all the time.

[Deleted]

Nov 1, 2010 22:10:11 GMT -5 when the pawn... said:

Nov 1, 2010 22:06:01 GMT -5 @2m said:

Going by billboard chart dates, 8 total 2000 and prior (5 in 2000)

8 since 2000

Creative way to push your point. Who cares about billboard year vs. calendar year? It's completely irrelevant. In the year 2000, 6 albums posted 1 million+ weeks. As I said earlier, Speak Now is the first to do so in nearly two and a half years. Please tell me how a million-plus week in 2010 is the same as a million-plus week in 2000.

I just did


8 times since 2000 8 times 2000 and prior

Even if you want to call 7 times and 9 times, the point is still the same

It has always been a RARE occurence

Even without inflation or sales declines or whatever. There hasn't been a market ever, where 1 million happened all the time.

Now if we start talking lower numbers then I agree but 16 times in 20 years 8 (or 9) up to 2000 and 8 (or 7) since, seems to me like the magic of 1 million has never changed.

[when the pawn...]

But we're comparing the sales climate for million-plus weeks in 2010 with the sales climate for million-plus weeks in 2000. It wasn't rare in 2000 - NSYNC sold 2.4 million, Eminem sold 1.7 million, BSB did 1.6 million, Britney did 1.3 million and Limp Bizkit & The Beatles sold 1m+. It's very rare in 2010 - only Taylor has done it (though unofficially) (and likely no one else will this year).

[Deleted]

Thought I would bring this list back up since it is relevant to this week.

Soundscan all-time top 15 sales weeks

1 4/8/2000 No Strings Attached 'N Sync 2,415,859
2 8/11/2001 Celebrity 'N Sync 1,879,955
3 6/10/2000 The Marshall Mathers LP Eminem 1,760,049
4 12/9/2000 Black & Blue Backstreet Boys 1,591,191
5 6/15/2002 The Eminem Show Eminem 1,321,799
6 6/3/2000 Oops...I Did It Again Britney Spears 1,319,193
7 1/6/2001 1 The Beatles 1,258,667
8 3/19/2005 The Massacre 50 Cent 1,140,638
9 6/5/1999 Millennium Backstreet Boys 1,133,505
10 4/10/2004 Confessions Usher 1,096,213
11 12/5/1998 Double Live Garth Brooks 1,085,373
12 1/2/1993 The Bodyguard Soundtrack 1,061,000
13 11/4/2000 Chocolate Starfish Limp Bizkit 1,054,511
14 2/28/2004 Feels Like Home Norah Jones 1,022,149
15 6/28/2008 Tha Carter III Lil' Wayne 1,005,545

[BadRomance]

I'm shocked she's selling so much but remember that she have a HUGE fan base.

[microcuts]

Nov 1, 2010 22:06:03 GMT -5 Carriefan1190 said:

People are still able to buy albums and the amount of marketing Taylor had to do for this album is insane.

If the excessive media attention from last year's VMA debacle and a $3.99 price tag at Amazon are considered insane marketing, then yeah.

[musicrocks]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I think both points are correct. It HAS always been rare to sell a million in a week. Although it happened more in 2000, it was still rare in an overall sense. But I will also say that that selling a million today and in 2000 are NOT the same thing. As several people said, there are many factors that weren't in play back then, making it more rare (rarer? lol) to achieve selling a million. All in all, while it has always been rare, it's definitely harder to do it, even with the right marketing and strategy.

[renfield75]

Nov 1, 2010 22:23:19 GMT -5 @2m said:

Thought I would bring this list back up since it is relevant to this week.

Soundscan all-time top 15 sales weeks

1 4/8/2000 No Strings Attached 'N Sync 2,415,859
2 8/11/2001 Celebrity 'N Sync 1,879,955
3 6/10/2000 The Marshall Mathers LP Eminem 1,760,049
4 12/9/2000 Black & Blue Backstreet Boys 1,591,191
5 6/15/2002 The Eminem Show Eminem 1,321,799
6 6/3/2000 Oops...I Did It Again Britney Spears 1,319,193
7 1/6/2001 1 The Beatles 1,258,667
8 3/19/2005 The Massacre 50 Cent 1,140,638
9 6/5/1999 Millennium Backstreet Boys 1,133,505
10 4/10/2004 Confessions Usher 1,096,213
11 12/5/1998 Double Live Garth Brooks 1,085,373
12 1/2/1993 The Bodyguard Soundtrack 1,061,000
13 11/4/2000 Chocolate Starfish Limp Bizkit 1,054,511
14 2/28/2004 Feels Like Home Norah Jones 1,022,149
15 6/28/2008 Tha Carter III Lil' Wayne 1,005,545

Just for the heck of it...you keep saying it happened 8 times up to 2000, and 8 times since, making it seem pretty even. Let's shift the timeline a bit, going by the above list: It happened eleven times in the five years between 2000-2005, and only twice in the following five years. Clearly it's harder to do now than in the first half of the last decade.

[slicknickshady]

6/10/2000 The Marshall Mathers LP Eminem 1,760,049

6/15/2002 The Eminem Show Eminem 1,321,799


Dude just kills it.

Also, there is no way to prove if Speak Now was released in 2000 it would have got the same audience. So some of you can act all you want and say T-Swift would have broke N'syncs record if Speak Now was released in 2000 but there is no way to know that. Taste change.

So this argument is futile. So you T-Swift people can try to move T-Swift up above all those that speak now doesnt get higher then but the numbers will be the same.

[Peaches. [Ch, r. is]]

Nov 2, 2010 0:37:33 GMT -5 slicknickshady said:

Dude just kills it.

[musicrocks]

Nov 2, 2010 0:41:23 GMT -5 Peaches. [Ch, r. is] said:

Nov 2, 2010 0:37:33 GMT -5 slicknickshady said:

Dude just kills it.

WIN.

[slicknickshady]

Take notice my above argument.

If you say Em or say N-Sync released MMLP or NSA now it wouldnt do what it did back in '2000?

I can say the oppisite for Swift. If Speak Now was released in '2000 it wouldnt come close to what it is doing know.

Theres just no way to prove it. So around in circles we will keep going.

[Deleted]

If one act that hit it big in one time period released the same album in another time period would it have had the same results?

Absolutely not.

That goes for Eminem,Britney or N Sync or even Taylor Swift or anyone else

It takes the right mix of music, marketing, star quality and timing to pull it off. Just as difficult to pull off today as any other time in Soundscan history(not harder, not easier).

N Syncs album was right for 2000 but would fail today. Taylor Swifts album is right for today but would likely fail if released 10 years ago.

[slicknickshady]

Exactly, 2m. You said my point way more eloquently then i did. Nice job.

"N Syncs album was right for 2000 but would fail today. Taylor Swifts album is right for today but would likely fail if released 10 years ago."

Game - Set - Match.

[Deleted]

Nov 2, 2010 0:37:33 GMT -5 slicknickshady said:

6/10/2000 The Marshall Mathers LP Eminem 1,760,049

6/15/2002 The Eminem Show Eminem 1,321,799


Dude just kills it.

.

LOL I'll try to remember to highlight Eminems name next time I post a list that has Eminem on it

Of course if I forget I know I can count on you to do it for me;)

[slicknickshady]

Yes, seriously, people act like im trying to take something away from swift. I'm not. I'm just not willing to give her something based on what someones definition of record industry inflation is. Whatever she does.... 1.1 -1.3 or etc. Great for her. I may not be the biggest Swift fan but I'd rather she do a million then a lot of other artists who would get gigantic ego's.

[Deleted]

Nov 2, 2010 0:51:20 GMT -5 slicknickshady said:

Exactly, 2m. You said my point way more eloquently then i did. Nice job.

"N Syncs album was right for 2000 but would fail today. Taylor Swifts album is right for today but would likely fail if released 10 years ago."

Game - Set - Match.

This would be the reason I am not buying into the whole, "if Taylor released in 2000, she would have sold 2 million(or whatever) instead of 1 million" craze that people here are getting into.

This album released 10 years ago could have just as easily failed.

[Deleted]

Taylor Swift Aiming For Biggest Sales Week Since 2005
November 01, 2010 - Retail | Country

By Keith Caulfield

A week ago, it seemed as if Taylor Swift's third studio album, "Speak Now," released Oct. 25, was on its way to selling at least 800,000 to 900,000 copies sold in its first week. But 1 million copies? Possible, but not a done deal.

Now, label sources say that that magic million first week for "Speak Now" is almost a certainty. And the set's a clear lock for a No. 1 debut on the Billboard 200 chart.

While Nielsen SoundScan's official first-week tally won't arrive until Wednesday (Nov. 3) morning, all signs point to a historic debut. (SoundScan's tracking week runs through the close of business on Sunday, and their numbers, which are reflected in Billboard's sales charts, are reported each Wednesday.)

If "Speak Now" starts with 1 million, it would instantly be the best sales week for a single album since Lil Wayne's "Tha Carter III" bowed with 1,006,000 June of 2008. And we're hearing that the album's launch might even be bigger than "Carter III." That could mean "Speak Now" would have the biggest week for an album in over five years, scrolling all the way back to March of 2005 when 50 Cent's "The Massacre" slayed the No. 1 spot with 1,141,000 sold, according to SoundScan.

[Deleted]

The last paragraph is somewhat amusing,

It is almost a lock for 1 million and could even be bigger than Tha Carter III

Well I think if it is a lock for 1 million, the chances look pretty good it will get at least 6000 more copies :o :o :o :o

[Eqbk]

Okay, so I've been reading through the posts and I don't think the people who believe that a 1mil+ in 1st sales is harder took into account the musical climate. I don't they meant that if you were to literally go back in time and release Taylor's album that she would be guaranteed more, since of course the musical climate would affect her. What they were referring to is the sales climate/conditions. Albums back then had advantages that Taylor does not.

First, there was no illegal downloading so if you wanted an album you had to buy it. Second, many record labels would not make certain singles available for separate purchase. So even if you just wanted a single, you had to buy the album. That isn't the case today. Taylor has to deal w/ illegal downloading and has her sales split between album and singles sales due to itunes. These factors both take away from her potential numbers. Had the advantages that albums in the early 2000's had been present today, Taylor would likely (not guaranteed of course) have higher numbers.

Now let's turn the scenario around. What if back in 2000 N'Sync, BSB, etc. had to deal w/ large amount of illegal downloading and weren't able to make singles album-exclusive. Their numbers would likely go down since those factors take away from album sales.

Perhaps you guys were arguing different things?