dbhmr
Diamond Member
>
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 23,333
|
Post by dbhmr on Aug 17, 2011 10:45:46 GMT -5
...what does that have to do with my post? I don't know how "LFN" is illegitimate in any way. Much like "S&M", it hit #1 on both sales and airplay. It seems like a fair #1 to me. I acknowledged that the song was and is a huge hit, but the fact is it wasn't hitting #1 without all of the stunts they pulled--something her other singles didn't need.
|
|
llires
Gold Member
Joined: December 2009
Posts: 689
|
Post by llires on Aug 17, 2011 10:52:43 GMT -5
I don't know how "LFN" is illegitimate in any way. Much like "S&M", it hit #1 on both sales and airplay. It seems like a fair #1 to me. I acknowledged that the song was and is a huge hit, but the fact is it wasn't hitting #1 without all of the stunts they pulled--something her other singles didn't need. We don't know for sure if ET would have gone to number one if Kanye wasn't featured in it. I'm guessing they would have had to release a remix eventually to boost sales. But that is just guessing on my part.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 10:53:10 GMT -5
If Katy gets a 6th #1 off of this album, then she would be re-writing history, but being the first female to do it is making history, not re-writing it.
Anyway congrats Katy and Capitol.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 10:55:08 GMT -5
I acknowledged that the song was and is a huge hit, but the fact is it wasn't hitting #1 without all of the stunts they pulled--something her other singles didn't need. We don't know for sure if ET would have gone to number one if Kanye wasn't featured in it. I'm guessing they would have had to release a remix eventually to boost sales. But that is just guessing on my part. The difference is that the remix with Kanye was released right at the start, not strategically released when it looked like the song might only peak at #2. Billboard really has got to say something about this issue now.
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 17, 2011 10:57:13 GMT -5
Billboard really has got to say something about this issue now. Why do they have to say something? It still reach #1. It was still the most played song and most downloaded song in the country. Billboard doesn't need to say or differentiate anything.
|
|
llires
Gold Member
Joined: December 2009
Posts: 689
|
Post by llires on Aug 17, 2011 10:57:56 GMT -5
We don't know for sure if ET would have gone to number one if Kanye wasn't featured in it. I'm guessing they would have had to release a remix eventually to boost sales. But that is just guessing on my part. The difference is that the remix with Kanye was released right at the start, not strategically released when it looked like the song might only peak at #2. Billboard really has got to say something about this issue now. Yes, you are right about that. They released it at the very beginning, but wasn't it one of the most downloaded songs that wasn't a single until then? My thinking is that if they hadn't released it with Kanye it probably wouldn't have sold as much. But that does not matter now, I'm happy for her.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,743
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Aug 17, 2011 11:00:54 GMT -5
But when the E.T. remix was removed from iTunes, the original shot up to #3. It probably wouldve been higher, cuz then they put the remix back, and it peaked from there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:02:42 GMT -5
Billboard really has got to say something about this issue now. Why do they have to say something? It still reach #1. It was still the most played song and most downloaded song in the country. Billboard doesn't need to say or differentiate anything. But was it the most downloaded and most played song in the country at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 17, 2011 11:04:37 GMT -5
Why do they have to say something? It still reach #1. It was still the most played song and most downloaded song in the country. Billboard doesn't need to say or differentiate anything. But was it the most downloaded and most played song in the country at the same time? There are many BB #1s that weren't#1 on both charts at the same time. Don't see how that's relevant.
|
|
|
Post by livelikedying111 on Aug 17, 2011 11:04:54 GMT -5
The instant I saw the headline, I went to heaven. YESSSSSS Lucky for her lazy label though. Next time play it safeee!
|
|
Oprah
9x Platinum Member
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 9,064
|
Post by Oprah on Aug 17, 2011 11:05:52 GMT -5
Congrats are in order; stunt or not the label has handled this album flawlessly. I still don't really think anything of Katy Perry, though.
|
|
colson
Diamond Member
Joined: February 2006
Posts: 17,583
|
Post by colson on Aug 17, 2011 11:08:47 GMT -5
^I almost spit the water out of my mouth.lol
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:08:55 GMT -5
Billboard should say something because what's going to happen now? Will ALL artists now release remixes if they don't like where their single looks like it's going to peak? If someone wants a top 10 record, but it looks like they are just going to miss getting one, will they release a remix to try to boast their song into the top 10?
And it's too bad all those artists from the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's never had the chance to have another go at getting a #1 hit when their songs peaked short of the top spot. If only they had known that all they had to do was release remixes. Who knew?
I miss the days when a single was released and peaked wherever it peaked based solely on its own merit, whether that was at #1 or #2 or whatever.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:10:22 GMT -5
But was it the most downloaded and most played song in the country at the same time? There are many BB #1s that weren't#1 on both charts at the same time. Don't see how that's relevant. And I don't see how being #1 in sales and airplay at different times makes this song more deserving of #1 either.
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 17, 2011 11:10:55 GMT -5
Billboard should say something because what's going to happen now? Will ALL artists now release remixes if they don't like where their single looks like it's going to peak? If someone wants a top 10 record, but it looks like they are just going to miss getting one, will they release a remix to try to boast their song into the top 10? Sure. There's nothing stopping them. OMG THE LABEL USED PROMOTION TO PROMOTE THEIR SONG, AND IT WORKED!?!?!? >:( >:( >:( :( >:(
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:13:22 GMT -5
There are many BB #1s that weren't#1 on both charts at the same time. Don't see how that's relevant. And I don't see how being #1 in sales and airplay at different times makes this song more deserving of #1 either. People liked it, so they bought it enough times to be #1 on Digital. Radio liked it, so they played it enough to be a monster #1 on H100 Airplay. It had both of the ingredients of a #1 song, then it got it... I don't see the problem.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:13:46 GMT -5
Billboard should say something because what's going to happen now? Will ALL artists now release remixes if they don't like where their single looks like it's going to peak? If someone wants a top 10 record, but it looks like they are just going to miss getting one, will they release a remix to try to boast their song into the top 10? Sure. There's nothing stopping them. OMG THE LABEL USED PROMOTION TO PROMOTE THEIR SONG, AND IT WORKED!?!?!? >:( >:( >:( :( >:( This isn't promotion, this is using tactics to try to improve on a lower chart position. Please. Let's at least call it what it is.
|
|
colson
Diamond Member
Joined: February 2006
Posts: 17,583
|
Post by colson on Aug 17, 2011 11:14:11 GMT -5
Billboard should say something because what's going to happen now? Will ALL artists now release remixes if they don't like where their single looks like it's going to peak? If someone wants a top 10 record, but it looks like they are just going to miss getting one, will they release a remix to try to boast their song into the top 10? And it's too bad all those artists from the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's never had the chance to have another go at getting a #1 hit when their songs peaked short of the top spot. If only they had known that all they had to do was release remixes. Who knew? I miss the days when a single was released and peaked wherever it peaked based solely on its own merit, whether that was at #1 or #2 or whatever. The only thing BB can do is change the rules and only count remixes if they are released at the same time as the original version. That's the only thing that will stop that. But then we'd have an iTunes chart already more messed up than it is now. Can you imagine the top 100? Like 20 different songs with remixes to them?lol Then again, I'd doubt that many artist would release remixes so early when they don't even know what subsequent singles are going to be released.
|
|
|
Post by Adonis the DemiGod! on Aug 17, 2011 11:15:31 GMT -5
Billboard should say something because what's going to happen now? Will ALL artists now release remixes if they don't like where their single looks like it's going to peak? If someone wants a top 10 record, but it looks like they are just going to miss getting one, will they release a remix to try to boast their song into the top 10? And it's too bad all those artists from the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's never had the chance to have another go at getting a #1 hit when their songs peaked short of the top spot. If only they had known that all they had to do was release remixes. Who knew? I miss the days when a single was released and peaked wherever it peaked based solely on its own merit, whether that was at #1 or #2 or whatever. Please. Everyones gets to #1on merit.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,743
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Aug 17, 2011 11:15:43 GMT -5
Just because a remix is made does not guarantee anything. No one is forcing anyone to buy anything, let alone 23 times like me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:16:36 GMT -5
And I don't see how being #1 in sales and airplay at different times makes this song more deserving of #1 either. People liked it, so they bought it enough times to be #1 on Digital. Radio liked it, so they played it enough to be a monster #1 on H100 Airplay. It had both of the ingredients of a #1 song, then it got it... I don't see the problem. LOL It only got it because of the remix. Otherwise it would have peaked at #2. A dangerous precedent is being established here. Hell, I think it already has been. I would be very surprised if Billboard does not come out with some kind of new rule governing these late release remixes sometime in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 17, 2011 11:17:42 GMT -5
Sure. There's nothing stopping them. OMG THE LABEL USED PROMOTION TO PROMOTE THEIR SONG, AND IT WORKED!?!?!? >:( >:( >:( :( >:( This isn't promotion, this is using tactics to try to improve on a lower chart position. Please. Let's at least call it what it is. No matter what the label did, people didn't need to download the new version of the song. The label didn't hold a gun to buyers heads and force them to pay for the download. They can do all the promo, and it is promo, that they want but if the public isn't having it then it won't happen. ...but it did and now you're irate.
|
|
Arabella21
Platinum Member
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 1,381
|
Post by Arabella21 on Aug 17, 2011 11:18:26 GMT -5
Billboard should say something because what's going to happen now? Will ALL artists now release remixes if they don't like where their single looks like it's going to peak? If someone wants a top 10 record, but it looks like they are just going to miss getting one, will they release a remix to try to boast their song into the top 10? And it's too bad all those artists from the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's never had the chance to have another go at getting a #1 hit when their songs peaked short of the top spot. If only they had known that all they had to do was release remixes. Who knew? I miss the days when a single was released and peaked wherever it peaked based solely on its own merit, whether that was at #1 or #2 or whatever. Please. Everyones gets to #1on merit. No, the charts were never ever manipulated in the good old days before downloading and remixes.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,743
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Aug 17, 2011 11:19:09 GMT -5
It couldve gotten to #1 with just a discount, too, as seen this week.
|
|
Rodze
2x Platinum Member
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 2,546
|
Post by Rodze on Aug 17, 2011 11:19:55 GMT -5
Stay pressed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2011 11:20:06 GMT -5
This isn't promotion, this is using tactics to try to improve on a lower chart position. Please. Let's at least call it what it is. Did they use promotional stunts? Yes. But that's kind of what a label does; PROMOTES, and they do it in any way that they can for their artist. If tactics is what they resorted to, then so be it. LFN was the biggest song of the week, thus rightfully earning the #1. It worked in their favor, and both Katy and Capitol Records earned it. Congrats to Katy on the big milestone. :)
|
|
I Wish
5x Platinum Member
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 5,094
|
Post by I Wish on Aug 17, 2011 11:20:07 GMT -5
I don't see what the difference is in releasing remixes or doing TV promotion and radio interviews. It's essentially the same thing - a tactic to sell more singles/albums.
Katy's discounts on her remixes & single aren't as bad Gaga's album discount to 0.99. Everyone needs to take a breather and realize that Katy did not do any vast promotion for LFN. The remix was a cheap cut & paste of Missy Elliott's vocals that Katy really didn't have much to do with.
I do agree that this may become overwhelming in the future when labels aren't happy with the peak of a single so they'll release a remix, but I honestly just see it as another form of promotion.
IDK maybe that's just me.
|
|
colson
Diamond Member
Joined: February 2006
Posts: 17,583
|
Post by colson on Aug 17, 2011 11:20:51 GMT -5
People liked it, so they bought it enough times to be #1 on Digital. Radio liked it, so they played it enough to be a monster #1 on H100 Airplay. It had both of the ingredients of a #1 song, then it got it... I don't see the problem. LOL It only got it because of the remix. Otherwise it would have peaked at #2. A dangerous precedent is being established here. Hell, I think it already has been. I would be very surprised if Billboard does not come out with some kind of new rule governing these late release remixes sometime in the near future. Maybe you should write them a letter or send them an email since you are so upset about this. ;)
|
|
|
Post by Adonis the DemiGod! on Aug 17, 2011 11:21:17 GMT -5
Please. Everyones gets to #1on merit. No, the charts were never ever manipulated in the good old days before downloading and remixes. Yes they were. In many ways it was worse. Sales and AirPlay was a function of people saying it happened. Additionally the artists back then didn't have to deal with illegal downloading etc.... People could've easily gotten lfn for free nowadays.
|
|
Verisimilitude
8x Platinum Member
'90s Zealot
Joined: July 2010
Posts: 8,959
|
Post by Verisimilitude on Aug 17, 2011 11:22:12 GMT -5
OMG, it's the "We Belong Together" discussion all over again.
|
|