Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on May 23, 2011 19:52:59 GMT -5
I'm interested to know if Amazon ends up making a profit off of this. I know in the long term it will give them more exposure/attention as a digital music seller but in the past I've read articles saying they've lost money in their $3.99 or less deals
|
|
Black Jesus
6x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2005
Posts: 6,075
|
Post by Black Jesus on May 23, 2011 19:53:02 GMT -5
I'm about to go f**k some bitches up at Wal-Mart. At least she'll get #1 next week. I'm interested to know if Amazon ends up making a profit off of this. I know in the long term it will give them more exposure/attention as a digital music seller but in the past I've read articles saying they've lost money in their $3.99 or less deals They knew how huge of an event this album release was going to be. I don't think they would have done it if they were expecting huge losses.
|
|
|
Post by passionformusic on May 23, 2011 19:54:57 GMT -5
i was thinking amazon wont count for that much at first...but now that perez is tweeting it and all,i am not sure anymore.
|
|
|
Post by ificanthaveyou on May 23, 2011 19:55:39 GMT -5
LMFAO Funny that everyone was complaining when Rihanna reduced the price of Only Girl...
|
|
|
Post by Push The Button on May 23, 2011 19:59:14 GMT -5
SoundScan does count street date violations, before someone asks. The SoundScan tracking week is Monday through Sunday. Not Tuesday through Monday. GaGa will not debut at #1 this week based on Monday's sales. Labels sometimes have those numbers held, though. That will most likely happen with Born This Way.
|
|
|
Post by areyoureadytojump on May 23, 2011 20:00:12 GMT -5
Wasn't it Taylor Swift's album that had a enough street date violations to debut a week early on the Billboard 200 and it didn't? SoundScan may ask the label if they want the album to debut early??
|
|
|
Post by areyoureadytojump on May 23, 2011 20:00:48 GMT -5
^^That's what I thought. Thanks.
|
|
Wave.
Moderator
Look...
Positive VibesππΎβ€
Joined: August 2006
Posts: 42,834
Pronouns: He/Him
Staff
|
Post by Wave. on May 23, 2011 20:01:14 GMT -5
3 pages already?
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,882
|
Post by HolidayGuy on May 23, 2011 20:17:36 GMT -5
That also happened with 50 Cent's album, where Billboard/SoundScan held the digital numbers until the week of the physical album's release.
This kind of pricing is further evidence (not that we need it) of how the charts are a game- and some labels play it a lot better than others.
|
|
|
Post by areyoureadytojump on May 23, 2011 20:19:39 GMT -5
^Maybe that was the album I was thinking about...
|
|
|
Post by ListenToItTwice on May 23, 2011 20:21:18 GMT -5
i believe that Tha Carter III debuted early on Hip/Hop Albums due to street date violations, but was witheld on the Billboard 200.
|
|
badrobot
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,350
|
Post by badrobot on May 23, 2011 20:43:40 GMT -5
Amazon is trying to promote their cloud storage service and get people used to buying from them. They are taking a loss. This is a common practice called a "loss leader" which means they lose money on this sale but hope that they are picking up customers who may buy other items that are profitable. What's unusual is just how steep the discount is. I'm sure Gaga's label is excited for it (they get the same amount of money no matter what Amazon prices it at), but there was no way for them to force a retailer to do this, so in that respect it is Amazon's decision.
(for the record, I've never cared when other artists have deep discounts on albums, I see no problem with this for anyone)
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,882
|
Post by HolidayGuy on May 23, 2011 20:46:43 GMT -5
This makes Taylor Swift's one-day (I think) $3.99 pricing look like a ripoff by comparison. :)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 20:48:25 GMT -5
People who want to say that this was Gaga's own desperate decision will continue to say such even when the facts are thrown in their face. It's not even worth arguing anymore.
|
|
Black Jesus
6x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2005
Posts: 6,075
|
Post by Black Jesus on May 23, 2011 20:50:15 GMT -5
People who want to say that this was Gaga's own desperate decision will continue to say such even when the facts are thrown in their face. It's not even worth arguing anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 20:50:26 GMT -5
LMFAO Funny that everyone was complaining when Rihanna reduced the price of Only Girl... Exactly. Or when Mariah did it. The principle is the same for all 3 of them (4 including Taylor Swift). It's just a good marketing strategy.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 20:54:00 GMT -5
LMFAO Funny that everyone was complaining when Rihanna reduced the price of Only Girl... Exactly. Or when Mariah did it. The principle is the same for all 3 of them (4 including Taylor Swift). It's just a good marketing strategy. Except it wasn't. I have no problem with labels deciding to discount albums/singles. However, in the case of "Loverboy," "Bootylicious," and other singles that were discounted to 49 cents, it was the labels making that decision. In the case of the Born this Way album, Amazon decided to price the album at 99 cents and take the loss in order to promote their Cloud service and other merchandise. In one case it was the labels taking the loss. In the other case it was the retailer taking the loss.
|
|
|
Post by passionformusic on May 23, 2011 20:58:58 GMT -5
This makes Taylor Swift's one-day (I think) $3.99 pricing look like a ripoff by comparison. :) i remember mr Adonis being especially bothered by this. Waiting his comments.
|
|
$uperb@tDuDe
2x Platinum Member
Drunk On Love!
Joined: February 2010
Posts: 2,172
|
Post by $uperb@tDuDe on May 23, 2011 21:01:55 GMT -5
Why do people keep saying Rihanna sold Rated R for $0.99? She never did it was $3.99
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 21:03:58 GMT -5
Why do people keep saying Rihanna sold Rated R for $0.99? She never did it was $3.99 Because people are confused. Amazon sold the album for $3.99 while they were simultaneously having a deal to get $3 off digital albums. So a lot of people got it for 99 cents, but that is not what Amazon was selling it for, and Rihanna nor Island were the reason people were receiving the album for 99 cents.
|
|
$uperb@tDuDe
2x Platinum Member
Drunk On Love!
Joined: February 2010
Posts: 2,172
|
Post by $uperb@tDuDe on May 23, 2011 21:05:31 GMT -5
For all the people complaining about the $.99, the deluxe version is still outselling the regular version on Amazon so I doubt it's making a HUGE difference.
|
|
|
Post by passionformusic on May 23, 2011 21:07:10 GMT -5
.99 is ridiculous enough,but they are giving away 20G storage with that. Fucking crazy...how many of these people actually made this tribal purchase for Gagas music?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 21:20:09 GMT -5
Exactly. Or when Mariah did it. The principle is the same for all 3 of them (4 including Taylor Swift). It's just a good marketing strategy. Except it wasn't. I have no problem with labels deciding to discount albums/singles. However, in the case of "Loverboy," "Bootylicious," and other singles that were discounted to 49 cents, it was the labels making that decision. In the case of the Born this Way album, Amazon decided to price the album at 99 cents and take the loss in order to promote their Cloud service and other merchandise. In one case it was the labels taking the loss. In the other case it was the retailer taking the loss. Oh ok I gotcha but it all comes down to good marketing strategies at the end of the day still. There's losses made for each scenario but gains as well in sales.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on May 23, 2011 21:26:34 GMT -5
All I'm thinking now is that week 2 will see a HUGE drop for GaGa.
|
|
|
Post by Love Plastic Love on May 23, 2011 21:29:38 GMT -5
All I'm thinking now is that week 2 will see a HUGE drop for GaGa. Lol probably at LEAST 80%.
|
|
chartfreak
Diamond Member
Enter your message here...
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 10,300
|
Post by chartfreak on May 23, 2011 21:30:32 GMT -5
SoundScan does count street date violations, before someone asks. The SoundScan tracking week is Monday through Sunday. Not Tuesday through Monday. GaGa will not debut at #1 this week based on Monday's sales. You mean sales from yesterday and Saturday that Wal Mart sold? Why do you say Monday's sales?
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,624
|
Post by renfield75 on May 23, 2011 21:31:00 GMT -5
i believe that Tha Carter III debuted early on Hip/Hop Albums due to street date violations, but was witheld on the Billboard 200. Hip-hop albums often debut early from street date violations on the R&B chart. I don't know if they're withheld from the BB200 or if they just didn't register enough to debut. Consider how just a few thousand copies can get you at the bottom of the BB200, then think about how few copies can get you on the bottom of the Hip-Hop/R&B albums chart. I would imagine you could scrape by with 1,000 or fewer copies scanned.
|
|
d.t.m
6x Platinum Member
D.T.M.
Joined: March 2006
Posts: 6,437
|
Post by d.t.m on May 23, 2011 22:08:59 GMT -5
i believe that Tha Carter III debuted early on Hip/Hop Albums due to street date violations, but was witheld on the Billboard 200. Hip-hop albums often debut early from street date violations on the R&B chart. I don't know if they're withheld from the BB200 or if they just didn't register enough to debut. Consider how just a few thousand copies can get you at the bottom of the BB200, then think about how few copies can get you on the bottom of the Hip-Hop/R&B albums chart. I would imagine you could scrape by with 1,000 or fewer copies scanned. So true. You only have to sell peanuts to get onto the Hip-Hop/R&B chart. Now the big question is if Columbia/Beyonce will follow this route.
|
|
overboard
New Member
Joined: February 2010
Posts: 474
|
Post by overboard on May 23, 2011 22:51:36 GMT -5
Im gonna make a prediction of 680k.
There is obviously a lot of buzz about this release and it is going to be hugely successful, but I dont think it is going to go over a million or even get close. Not having a huge hit on the radio right now is going to hurt her.
|
|
David
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 16,804
|
Post by David on May 23, 2011 23:28:33 GMT -5
GAGA ADD: Sources report that Wal Mart has violated street date by selling the Lady Gaga album, Born This Way, over the weekend, with estimates of more than 10,000 moved, meaning the release could end up debuting on tomorrowβs HITS Top 50 sales chart. Poor debut, record breaking 2nd week? More like record breaking street violation sales.
|
|