David
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 16,804
|
Post by David on May 23, 2011 23:31:58 GMT -5
All I'm thinking now is that week 2 will see a HUGE drop for GaGa. I dont care. I don't worry about 2nd week drop as much as what happens in drops afterwards. It's just not a valid way of seeing how an album holds up. Since debuts are so irratic sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by Love Plastic Love on May 24, 2011 0:04:03 GMT -5
The long-term will matter more than the second week even if the second week is wince-worthy. So, if EOG becomes a massive hit and promo is fairly steady and they somehow get another hit out of the album she will be fine even if she does drop a lot in the 2nd and 3rd weeks.
|
|
discoloser
Platinum Member
Joined: April 2007
Posts: 1,180
|
Post by discoloser on May 24, 2011 0:10:40 GMT -5
I don't know if someone posted this but people are now having issues with Amazon's mp3 service delaying. So, it's a positive for itunes now.
Now my two thoughts on sale. 1)I'm still skeptical of anything above 500K, so if it does do close to 1million, then WOW! 2)I expect a huge drop aswell, no matter what, there are a few songs like TEOG that can substain some of the sales. But i think it's partially in the hardcore monsters to help keep it going. IMHO
|
|
fridayteenage
4x Platinum Member
Shake it Off
Joined: April 2008
Posts: 4,950
|
Post by fridayteenage on May 24, 2011 0:13:47 GMT -5
Amazon sold 40k copies of Speak Now in its first week, so Speak Now would have hit a million even if you subtracted all of the Amazon sales. I wonder how many copies Amazon will sell of BTW.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 0:40:04 GMT -5
I'm gonna predict 500k first day sales, and 700k first week sales, and a plumet to 100k next week.
|
|
Chelsea Press 2
Diamond Member
#LiteralLegender
The way I feel is sexual, when you're next to me
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 69,056
|
Post by Chelsea Press 2 on May 24, 2011 0:52:19 GMT -5
All I'm thinking now is that week 2 will see a HUGE drop for GaGa. I dont care. I don't worry about 2nd week drop as much as what happens in drops afterwards. It's just not a valid way of seeing how an album holds up. Since debuts are so irratic sometimes. The second week usually has a pretty big drop. That is to be expected. There have been some that held up pretty well and the drop wasn't that big, but that doesn't indicate how an album will perform week-to-week.
|
|
gagagigigugu
New Member
Make me a super-blogger!
Joined: November 2009
Posts: 234
|
Post by gagagigigugu on May 24, 2011 2:00:21 GMT -5
just listened to the album....boy, do i wish she released "Scheiße" instead of "Judas"
|
|
spooky21
Diamond Member
Secretly I'm so amused that nobody understands me.
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 11,669
|
Post by spooky21 on May 24, 2011 2:40:51 GMT -5
You know nothing about business if you think selling an album for .99 cents has nothing to do with Gaga or Universal. All companies that have distributors sell their products have contractual terms for the price floor in which their product can be sold at or terms that require negotiation for major promotional activities.
This prevents the original companies from losing brand value (i.e. You can't see my Chanel bag for less that 1K) and prevents companies like Amazon from doing whatever they want with products they receive. It simply does not happen. Any major promo of this magnitude has had a list of contractual terms signed defining what each side can do or gain for this activity.
In a normal sales transaction, both Amazon and the record profit on a sale to a customer and in order for both sides to forego that profit, there has to be an agreement on either side. This is especially true for a company like Amazon who doesn't carry much inventory since their don't have actual bricks and mortars stores.
This means that Universal/Gaga is making a cut on the backside of the Cloud Service and a payment for lose of revenue/price differential. Universal had to sign off on the promo plan and it likely included another check, on top of their normal cut, given the magnitude of the event. Amazon is using Gaga to promote their new Cloud Service. That would not have come cheap or free of charge.
Gaga will get a big boost, unit wide, the first week, but her second week drop will be MASSIVE and higher than the normal drop off for second weeks.
|
|
KingB
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2009
Posts: 1,355
|
Post by KingB on May 24, 2011 3:24:05 GMT -5
.99 is ridiculous enough,but they are giving away 20G storage with that. f**king crazy...how many of these people actually made this tribal purchase for Gagas music? interesting how the defense squad left this part out.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on May 24, 2011 3:35:45 GMT -5
Didn't someone mention that the 20GB is being given away with any purchase?
|
|
Enigma.
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 13,590
|
Post by Enigma. on May 24, 2011 3:50:40 GMT -5
LOL at this thread
I'm going to march to the shop and buy the album there. I bet millions of people will do the same.
Each copy counts, whether it's a bit cheaper download or a deluxe version as a vinyl.
But about this policy, it's clearly Amazon's own campaign to promote their cloud service.
|
|
Chelsea Press 2
Diamond Member
#LiteralLegender
The way I feel is sexual, when you're next to me
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 69,056
|
Post by Chelsea Press 2 on May 24, 2011 4:08:04 GMT -5
But about this policy, it's clearly Amazon's own campaign to promote their cloud service. Absolutely. Amazon also knew exactly what they were doing when they chose to align Gaga's album with this promotion. Look at how many fans she has on Twitter (10 million), if even a small percentage of them went to buy from Amazon, that is still pretty significant. And that gets them into Amazon's door for the cloud thing. Even if it's a small amount, every little bit helps.
|
|
spooky21
Diamond Member
Secretly I'm so amused that nobody understands me.
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 11,669
|
Post by spooky21 on May 24, 2011 4:48:34 GMT -5
But about this policy, it's clearly Amazon's own campaign to promote their cloud service. Absolutely. Amazon also knew exactly what they were doing when they chose to align Gaga's album with this promotion. Look at how many fans she has on Twitter (10 million), if even a small percentage of them went to buy from Amazon, that is still pretty significant. And that gets them into Amazon's door for the cloud thing. Even if it's a small amount, every little bit helps. Of course this is true and is a good by Amazon/Universal. Regardless of who is promoting what, the fact remains that Gaga album sold for .99, Loverboy single sold for .99, Bootylicious and other singles sold for .99, multiple artists sold for 3.99 and so on and so on. It is all valid promotional activities meant to promote an artist and a product. The problem comes when posters here try to discount the chart success of various albums/singles because such promotional activities. If you are going to defend it for one artist or your fave, you have to defend it for all artists. It gets annoying to see some posters try to say that this single got to number 1 or 2 because of this or that but ignore the use of this practice elsewhere.
|
|
Sir LOVE IX
2x Platinum Member
Down on your knees
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 2,019
|
Post by Sir LOVE IX on May 24, 2011 4:54:59 GMT -5
iTunes should now sale FF for 0.99$ :) that would be funny if britney sell more than gaga
|
|
leoapp
4x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2008
Posts: 4,986
|
Post by leoapp on May 24, 2011 7:13:12 GMT -5
I wonder, can she beat Oops!...I Did IT Again firts week sales? Hard but not impossible!
|
|
sbk
Gold Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 593
|
Post by sbk on May 24, 2011 7:28:42 GMT -5
.99 is ridiculous enough,but they are giving away 20G storage with that. f**king crazy...how many of these people actually made this tribal purchase for Gagas music? interesting how the defense squad left this part out. You get 20GB storage with ANY album, not just Gaga´s I can´t at people clinging on even false information to discredit her
|
|
slw84
7x Platinum Member
I only tolerate legends
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 7,896
|
Post by slw84 on May 24, 2011 7:46:04 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. A #1 is a #1 at this point...it's not as if her first two album debut at #1 and she needs to keep a streak going. Plus, I think it will be #1 for at least a month. Look at the bright side.
|
|
slw84
7x Platinum Member
I only tolerate legends
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 7,896
|
Post by slw84 on May 24, 2011 7:50:52 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. So the label or artist has no say in that? Doesn't an artist get a percentage (points) per album. If the album is being sold for .99 vs. 15.99 what is the breakdown of profits. Thinking about that old Behind the music TLC this is how you sell 10M records and become broke. LOL.
|
|
slw84
7x Platinum Member
I only tolerate legends
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 7,896
|
Post by slw84 on May 24, 2011 7:52:49 GMT -5
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. IDK. I was honestly thinking that they would follow the route of the single like BTW except get full week single and album sales and radio to maximize a #1 debut but it didn't work that way. They might just go the traditional route and make sure her album has legs...like her 3 previous efforts Today at 12:40am, Codex wrote: I'm gonna predict 500k first day sales, and 700k first week sales, and a plumet to 100k next week.I'll stay with my original 750k-800k 1st week 200k 2nd week 100k and competing with Adele for #1 for the remaining weeks until Beyonce comes in leoapp I wonder, can she beat Oops!...I Did IT Again firts week sales? Hard but not impossible!DON'T SCARE ME, GURL.
|
|
slw84
7x Platinum Member
I only tolerate legends
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 7,896
|
Post by slw84 on May 24, 2011 7:56:21 GMT -5
You know nothing about business if you think selling an album for .99 cents has nothing to do with Gaga or Universal. All companies that have distributors sell their products have contractual terms for the price floor in which their product can be sold at or terms that require negotiation for major promotional activities. This prevents the original companies from losing brand value (i.e. You can't see my Chanel bag for less that 1K) and prevents companies like Amazon from doing whatever they want with products they receive. It simply does not happen. Any major promo of this magnitude has had a list of contractual terms signed defining what each side can do or gain for this activity. In a normal sales transaction, both Amazon and the record profit on a sale to a customer and in order for both sides to forego that profit, there has to be an agreement on either side. This is especially true for a company like Amazon who doesn't carry much inventory since their don't have actual bricks and mortars stores. This means that Universal/Gaga is making a cut on the backside of the Cloud Service and a payment for lose of revenue/price differential. Universal had to sign off on the promo plan and it likely included another check, on top of their normal cut, given the magnitude of the event. Amazon is using Gaga to promote their new Cloud Service. That would not have come cheap or free of charge. Gaga will get a big boost, unit wide, the first week, but her second week drop will be MASSIVE and higher than the normal drop off for second weeks. WERQUE.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 8:07:00 GMT -5
Absolutely. Amazon also knew exactly what they were doing when they chose to align Gaga's album with this promotion. Look at how many fans she has on Twitter (10 million), if even a small percentage of them went to buy from Amazon, that is still pretty significant. And that gets them into Amazon's door for the cloud thing. Even if it's a small amount, every little bit helps. Of course this is true and is a good by Amazon/Universal. Regardless of who is promoting what, the fact remains that Gaga album sold for .99, Loverboy single sold for .99, Bootylicious and other singles sold for .99, multiple artists sold for 3.99 and so on and so on. It is all valid promotional activities meant to promote an artist and a product. The problem comes when posters here try to discount the chart success of various albums/singles because such promotional activities. If you are going to defend it for one artist or your fave, you have to defend it for all artists. It gets annoying to see some posters try to say that this single got to number 1 or 2 because of this or that but ignore the use of this practice elsewhere. Theres a difference between selling a 1.29 single for 0.99, and a 15 dollar album for 0.99....
|
|
Oprah
9x Platinum Member
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 9,064
|
Post by Oprah on May 24, 2011 8:11:52 GMT -5
I'm gonna predict 500k first day sales, and 700k first week sales, and a plumet to 100k next week. Seems like wishful thinking on your part tbqh. I never get what the big deal is when companies pull marketing strategies like this. There's nothing illegal about it, and they SHOULD be doing their utmost to maximize profit. It's especially pointless in this situation since the album would've opened to huge numbers regardless.
|
|
musicrocks
Gold Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 874
|
Post by musicrocks on May 24, 2011 8:15:34 GMT -5
LOL at this thread I'm going to march to the shop and buy the album there. I bet millions of people will do the same. Each copy counts, whether it's a bit cheaper download or a deluxe version as a vinyl. But about this policy, it's clearly Amazon's own campaign to promote their cloud service. Said it the best. Stop the drama and lets just enjoy the ride. As for the $0.99 cent deal, I am NEVER doing it again. I bought the album and only half downloaded. Not the first time Amazon's messed up. #itunesforthewin
|
|
musicrocks
Gold Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 874
|
Post by musicrocks on May 24, 2011 8:17:05 GMT -5
Oh. And just to bring another album into the mix. I wonder where Brad Paisley's numbers will end up? I'm hoping for around 125-150k. That's probably a little too high though. I wonder if he'll beat Adele.
|
|
Black Jesus
6x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2005
Posts: 6,075
|
Post by Black Jesus on May 24, 2011 8:17:25 GMT -5
LOL at this thread I'm going to march to the shop and buy the album there. I bet millions of people will do the same. Each copy counts, whether it's a bit cheaper download or a deluxe version as a vinyl. But about this policy, it's clearly Amazon's own campaign to promote their cloud service. Said it the best. Stop the drama and lets just enjoy the ride. As for the $0.99 cent deal, I am NEVER doing it again. I bought the album and only half downloaded. Not the first time Amazon's messed up. #itunesforthewin Amazon's overload better be saying something about how big the first day sales were. If they weren't that big then I'd be pissed too.
|
|
Rodze
2x Platinum Member
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 2,546
|
Post by Rodze on May 24, 2011 8:33:28 GMT -5
So the label or artist has no say in that? Doesn't an artist get a percentage (points) per album. If the album is being sold for .99 vs. 15.99 what is the breakdown of profits. How this sale is occurring on Amazon's balance: +$0.99 (from consumer) -$7.00 (to Universal) ----------------------------------------- -$6.01 (balance for Amazon) +$7.00 balance for Universal Amazon is losing money, but this is promotion money. Instead of spending those $6.01 to put up ads to increase awareness, they are increasing awareness by making people go to their store to buy this ridiculously cheap product. While I haven't seen Amazon's contract with music labels, their contract for selling digital products on the Android store had a explicit clause saying they can price your item for however much they want, but they'll still pay you a minimum amount, even if the item is sold for less than that. I imagine the contract for the mp3 store is in the same line. Considering this is not the first album that is priced well below the regular price of a digital album, I also am lead to believe this was no exception to the original contract with Universal. This is Amazon's idea and all they did was call Universal to let them know about it -- the way I see it.
|
|
slw84
7x Platinum Member
I only tolerate legends
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 7,896
|
Post by slw84 on May 24, 2011 8:35:11 GMT -5
So the label or artist has no say in that? Doesn't an artist get a percentage (points) per album. If the album is being sold for .99 vs. 15.99 what is the breakdown of profits. How this sale is occurring on Amazon's balance: +$0.99 from consumer -$7.00 to Universal ------------------------------ -$6.01 final balance for Amazon They are losing money, but this is promotion money. Instead of spending those $6.01 to put up ads to increase awareness, they are increasing awareness by making people go to their store to buy this ridiculously cheap product. While I haven't seen Amazon's contract with music labels, their contract for selling digital products on the Android store had a explicit clause saying they can price your item for however much they want, but they'll still pay you a minimum amount, even if the item is sold for less than that. I imagine the contract for the mp3 store is in the same line. Considering this is not the first album that is priced well below the regular price of a digital album, I also am lead to believe this was no exception to the original contract with Universal. This is Amazon's idea and all they did was call Universal to let them know about it -- the way I see it. Oh wow...okay.
|
|
|
Post by passionformusic on May 24, 2011 8:37:10 GMT -5
interesting how the defense squad left this part out. You get 20GB storage with ANY album, not just Gaga´s I can´t at people clinging on even false information to discredit her How many of these albums are on sale for .99? The free stuff coming with this is probably why HDD is not sure. Do not tell me there were no people, who thought, the hell with it...i`ll just get the cheapest album for my 20GB storage. =manipulation. End of. Just trying to look at this reasonably. Lots of music spread- great. More competition created (which could lead to cheaper album prices)-great. I am just trying to understand HDD uncertainty here...and i do feel there is a case for it.
|
|
|
Post by Adonis the DemiGod! on May 24, 2011 8:59:23 GMT -5
It's a new way to sell music. Now the distributors are going to pick up more of the cost for titles that they want to promote.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,882
|
Post by HolidayGuy on May 24, 2011 9:06:30 GMT -5
The 40 Amazon sold for Speak Now was for physical and mp3 combined, based on the reports.
When downloading Born This Way from Amazon, I had an issue downloading two tracks, that just kept on failing. I called Amazon and had it resolved.
I doubt second-week sales would drop as low as 100K. But, yeah, any album that opens huge is bound to have a huge percentage decline.
|
|