|
|
Post by popindustrialist on Jan 18, 2010 14:58:51 GMT -5
Why are you so cocky in your statement and yet you do not know that it is shipments that make the certification. Selling 819k of an album would make anyone believe that at least 191k albums are in store across the U.S.  Nah, you're totally wrong on that. If an album is selling 3,000 units a week, which AIEW is, you're not going to have more, logically, than around 24,000 copies in stores. You have a misperception that labels/distributors "manage" retail stock levels. Retail buys these discs wholesale from labels/distributors. It's to retail's advantage to buy as a many discs in one shot, one order, as it can possibly justify. The more discs you order, the lower the per-disc price goes. For established acts like Kelly, this means relatively big first week delivery numbers, as retail is ordering big at a low per-unit cost and banking that even if the disc is a flop, eventually those 100's of thousands of discs that they bought will be sold. If it dosent flop, the 2nd delivery is usually big too (because retail sees traction for the title and banks on being able to sell what it's ordering within a few years), then there's no significant re-order (some outpost in Alaska might run out, they love big Kelly types up there) for years. I am saying that it is not unusual for an album selling a really low number to have 100's of thousands of copies gathering dust at retail. |
|
cartman2002
6x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 6,088
|
Post by cartman2002 on Jan 18, 2010 16:15:19 GMT -5
THis week the top 48 current albums would have sold more than 10,000 this week and it takes more than 2,800 this week to make the BB200 under the current rules
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2010 17:08:40 GMT -5
Soundscan to BB200 differences
Paul McCartney - Good Evening New York City is #93 instead of 51
The Playing For Change album did not chart
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,918
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jan 18, 2010 17:19:50 GMT -5
Why exactly would a title appear on SS and not the Billboard 200? (unless it was just a SS error) We've seen other instances of an album appearing on SoundScan's chart and not the Billboard 200.
And that's quite a rank discrepancy for Paul McCartney's album.
|
|
matelot
Charting
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 112
|
Post by matelot on Jan 18, 2010 19:29:49 GMT -5
And that's quite a rank discrepancy for Paul McCartney's album. Yeah, he's the first one to achieve the feat of a second week drop in his first week  |
|
|
|
Post by onefrayedrepublic on Jan 18, 2010 21:21:54 GMT -5
Nah, you're totally wrong on that. If an album is selling 3,000 units a week, which AIEW is, you're not going to have more, logically, than around 24,000 copies in stores. You have a misperception that labels/distributors "manage" retail stock levels. Retail buys these discs wholesale from labels/distributors. It's to retail's advantage to buy as a many discs in one shot, one order, as it can possibly justify. The more discs you order, the lower the per-disc price goes. For established acts like Kelly, this means relatively big first week delivery numbers, as retail is ordering big at a low per-unit cost and banking that even if the disc is a flop, eventually those 100's of thousands of discs that they bought will be sold. If it dosent flop, the 2nd delivery is usually big too (because retail sees traction for the title and banks on being able to sell what it's ordering within a few years), then there's no significant re-order (some outpost in Alaska might run out, they love big Kelly types up there) for years. I am saying that it is not unusual for an album selling a really low number to have 100's of thousands of copies gathering dust at retail. I love the music industry -- they haven't even, according to you -- adopted standard retail practices such as only manufacturing as much product as people want. No wonder the labels are in such deep trouble. It'd never occur to me they'd print up 100,000s of thousands of unwanted albums. What morons! |
|
libri
Charting
Joined: December 2009
Posts: 134 
|
Post by libri on Jan 19, 2010 0:23:48 GMT -5
Nah, you're totally wrong on that. If an album is selling 3,000 units a week, which AIEW is, you're not going to have more, logically, than around 24,000 copies in stores. You have a misperception that labels/distributors "manage" retail stock levels. Retail buys these discs wholesale from labels/distributors. It's to retail's advantage to buy as a many discs in one shot, one order, as it can possibly justify. The more discs you order, the lower the per-disc price goes. For established acts like Kelly, this means relatively big first week delivery numbers, as retail is ordering big at a low per-unit cost and banking that even if the disc is a flop, eventually those 100's of thousands of discs that they bought will be sold. If it dosent flop, the 2nd delivery is usually big too (because retail sees traction for the title and banks on being able to sell what it's ordering within a few years), then there's no significant re-order (some outpost in Alaska might run out, they love big Kelly types up there) for years. I am saying that it is not unusual for an album selling a really low number to have 100's of thousands of copies gathering dust at retail. Well, both of you could be right. 'My December' was certified around the time of its release, wasn't it? Since it was a follow up to a very successful album, MD probably shipped platinum right out of the gate. But then it underperformed, and either the stores have a stack of CDs gathering dust in the warehouse or the CDs were returned (are they returnable in the big-order/lower-price scheme, btw?). In the case of AIEW, following an under-performing album, it probably didn't ship platinum, and its performance since then hasn't justified a significant retail re-ordering. |
|
|
|
Post by ListenToItTwice on Jan 19, 2010 6:24:29 GMT -5
wolfj, what you talkin' about? :) "Never Again" hit #8 on the strength of digital sales; "Sober" was the second single, so of course there was a digital chart. Oh jeez my memory is failing me... Why did I think Sober was the second single from "Thankful?" I feel foolish. |
|
jink
2x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2007
Posts: 2,587 
|
Post by jink on Jan 19, 2010 7:06:43 GMT -5
Aren't albums certified based on the number of non-returnable copies shipped to stores?
|
|
|
|
Post by popindustrialist on Jan 19, 2010 12:01:21 GMT -5
^ Yes. The old rule of thumb is probably out the window because of digital LP's, but it used to be safe to assume that 10 % of the first week shipment was going to excluded from the first certification round that would come at the 6-8 week mark. So if 600 k were shipped, 540 k could be certified immediately because retail was stuck with them no matter what happened. The RIAA certifies label sales to retail, not retail sales to the general public.
|
|
