when i look back thinking of prince i wonder why diamonds and pearls sold more copies than parade or sign o the times? maybe because behind diamonds and pearls was frank di leo? Can someone tell me what where the recomendation frank di leo gave prince during the diamonds and pearls era?

[Edited 11/16/14 13:09pm]

[Edited 11/16/14 13:15pm]

If I recall, Frank Dileo was actually Prince's manager for a little while?

Hard to say exactly what his contribution was (unless he or any bandmembers have talked more about it). He was an "adviser" on some level. What seems reasonable to assume however -

- The cheap looking videos stopped and in came huge production videos like Cream, D&P, Gett Off.

- Prince worked to promote the album

Personally I think given the way he promoted Jackson, it's fair to assume this was his input. IIRC it was around this time some of the more insane tabloid stories appeared - Pure speculation on my part but seems fair to assume he may have had something to do with this.

[Edited 11/16/14 13:37pm]

Yea Diamonds was a huge success especially for the time when rap and grunge like Nirvanna started to appear on the scene, it's ashame Prince couldn't capitalize on the success of the album the next year, but that's typical Prince never being able to capitalize after one successfull commercial album.

Diamonds sold over 6.4m copies within a 2 year span and to date almost sold 7m world wide.

Tittypants said:

If I recall, Frank Dileo was actually Prince's manager for a little while?

No.Prince just brought him on-board to help out with the promotion of the D&P album.Prince noticed that Michael Jackson's albums always had at least 5 hit singles and remained on the charts for long periods of time.So,he asked Frank Dileo to work that same magic with D&P.It worked.

Prince was the person chiefly responsible for D&P's success. Nobody else -- he gave it the extra push he was usually unwilling to provide, very likely due to his contract coming up.

Not sure why people can't figure out it's always due to Prince.

Aerogram said:

Prince was the person chiefly responsible for D&P's success. Nobody else -- he gave it the extra push he was usually unwilling to provide, very likely due to his contract coming up.

Not sure why people can't figure out it's always due to Prince.

True but to a certain extent...

Why did an album like Diamonds and Pearls sell 2x more than Sign O' The Times?

Promoting had a lot to do with it.

Just like his "comeback" with Musicology with all the promotion and tour sold over 3m world wide his last "major" hit album.

[Edited 11/16/14 14:23pm]

the diamonds and pearls singles (get off; cream and d&p) where on heavy rotation both on mtv and on the radio, so i think it was thanks to frank di leo that the videos were in heavy rotation.

[Edited 11/16/14 17:14pm]

[Edited 11/16/14 17:17pm]

feeluupp said:

Aerogram said:

Prince was the person chiefly responsible for D&P's success. Nobody else -- he gave it the extra push he was usually unwilling to provide, very likely due to his contract coming up.

Not sure why people can't figure out it's always due to Prince.

True but to a certain extent...

Why did an album like Diamonds and Pearls sell 2x more than Sign O' The Times?

Promoting had a lot to do with it.

Just like his "comeback" with Musicology with all the promotion and tour sold over 3m world wide his last "major" hit album.

[Edited 11/16/14 14:23pm]

.

I agree. He promoted the hell out of it and all the singles. He picked the singles right, gave them the push, filmed classic videos for all of them, and made sure they succeeded. His image from Batman - Love Symbol (1989-1992) were some of his most accessible-looking years visually. The whole D&P era (videos, hits, the twins, the band, the look) is classic.

.

Michael Jackson's manager's magic worked great

Cream and the title song were responsible.

These are 2 of the most accessible singles he ever released.

Compare those to Mountains or IIWYG (2 of my favourite songs btw, but i can see they wouldn't be hits.).

Gett Off was huge in Holland too btw.

Aerogram said:

nextedition said:

Cream and the title song were responsible.

These are 2 of the most accessible singles he ever released.

Compare those to Mountains or IIWYG (2 of my favourite songs btw, but i can see they wouldn't be hits.).

This was one of the rare times when all the right singles were chosen.

Gett Off was even featured in two movies as background club music. I think they were "The Last Boyscout" and " Innocent Blood".

He also did the awesome live show on Arsenio Hall. And it was quite incredible.

Prince's singles were popular. That's where it starts, on whether the music catches on.

With all the promotion, 7 millions of DP sold is a pretty weak number.

The singles were released too fast, like every 2 months.

INSATIABLE was a very bad choice.

Releasing Sexy MF 7 months after the release of the album killed the sales.

Prince played the game at first, but after some months he got bored.

RODSERLING said:

With all the promotion, 7 millions of DP sold is a pretty weak number.

The singles were released too fast, like every 2 months.

INSATIABLE was a very bad choice.

Releasing Sexy MF 7 months after the release of the album killed the sales.

Prince played the game at first, but after some months he got bored.

Absolutely...selling 7 million copies of an album is an absolute piece of piss! Jeez, some people...

hw3004 said:

RODSERLING said:

With all the promotion, 7 millions of DP sold is a pretty weak number.

The singles were released too fast, like every 2 months.

INSATIABLE was a very bad choice.

Releasing Sexy MF 7 months after the release of the album killed the sales.

Prince played the game at first, but after some months he got bored.

Absolutely...selling 7 million copies of an album is an absolute piece of piss! Jeez, some people...

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

RODSERLING said:

hw3004 said:

Absolutely...selling 7 million copies of an album is an absolute piece of piss! Jeez, some people...

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

For Prince selling almost 7 million was indeed a big deal, and that is what sparked the $100m contract renewel with WB. They thought after the sucess of D&P, with right promotion Prince would sell over 5m consitantly from there on... Obviously we all knew what happened with that...

feeluupp said:

RODSERLING said:

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

For Prince selling almost 7 million was indeed a big deal, and that is what sparked the $100m contract renewel with WB. They thought after the sucess of D&P, with right promotion Prince would sell over 5m consitantly from there on... Obviously we all knew what happened with that...

He could have sold that 5 million amount with LOVESYMBOL, if he didn't released SEXY MF between DP and LOVESYMBOL, in the middle of nowhere in term of promotion, and continuing the promotion after 7 with CONTINENTAL, more catchy than MORNING PAPERS.

RODSERLING said:

feeluupp said:

For Prince selling almost 7 million was indeed a big deal, and that is what sparked the $100m contract renewel with WB. They thought after the sucess of D&P, with right promotion Prince would sell over 5m consitantly from there on... Obviously we all knew what happened with that...

He could have sold that 5 million amount with LOVESYMBOL, if he didn't released SEXY MF between DP and LOVESYMBOL, in the middle of nowhere in term of promotion, and continuing the promotion after 7 with CONTINENTAL, more catchy than MORNING PAPERS.

I agree with you. Even though I believe Love Symbol was a superior album than D&P, he didn't chose the right singles or promote smartly.

Unfortuneatly that album didn't live up to expectations, selling 3m world wide none the less, but far short from expectations.

RODSERLING said:

hw3004 said:

Absolutely...selling 7 million copies of an album is an absolute piece of piss! Jeez, some people...

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

ok, you go and sell 7 million copies of your album, and I'll take it all back!

Weither it was the music, promotion, or all of the above... None the less Diamonds and Pearls was a huge success and become Prince's 3rd best selling album behind

Purple Rain -21m

Batman -11m

Diamonds and Pearls selling almost 7m is still a huge commercial success.

feeluupp said:

Weither it was the music, promotion, or all of the above... None the less Diamonds and Pearls was a huge success and become Prince's 3rd best selling album behind

Purple Rain -21m

Batman -11m

Diamonds and Pearls selling almost 7m is still a huge commercial success.

I remember the batman album has sold 6 million copies, not 11 million.

funkyblues said:

feeluupp said:

Weither it was the music, promotion, or all of the above... None the less Diamonds and Pearls was a huge success and become Prince's 3rd best selling album behind

Purple Rain -21m

Batman -11m

Diamonds and Pearls selling almost 7m is still a huge commercial success.

I remember the batman album has sold 6 million copies, not 11 million.

There was a back and forth discussion about the sale of Batman with another member last month..

The first was the RIAA numbers back in 1989 saying Batman sold 4m in the U.S.

Then there were reports of it selling 11 million world wide, according to Wikipedia as well as several documentaries on YouTube stating Batman TO THIS DATE sold 11 million worldwide.

RODSERLING said:

hw3004 said:

Absolutely...selling 7 million copies of an album is an absolute piece of piss! Jeez, some people...

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

That was pretty common back then. A single being released before the album to build anticipation. It also helped to provide a degree of familiarity with the LP when it was released "oh I've heard that song"... I don't think thats a promotional flaw.

RODSERLING said:

.

He could have sold that 5 million amount with LOVESYMBOL, if he didn't released SEXY MF between DP and LOVESYMBOL, in the middle of nowhere in term of promotion, and continuing the promotion after 7 with CONTINENTAL, more catchy than MORNING PAPERS.

Sexy MF was a monster hit in Holland and rightly so; but then we had to wait months for the album...

Although it might be a matter of taste, I think The Morning Papers is one of his catchiest singles, in spite of the 'I'm having sex with a young girl, so sue me' lyrics.

I doubt that The Continental would have been a big hit anywhere.

[Edited 11/17/14 10:03am]

hw3004 said:

RODSERLING said:

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

ok, you go and sell 7 million copies of your album, and I'll take it all back!

Ok, give me one million dollars for each music video.

Distribute my 6 singles in 8 months

Give me a mob like DI Leo, to pay the radio to play my tunes

Give me money to make a world tour

Give me millions of dollars to make adverts tv, radio, etc.

feeluupp said:

funkyblues said:

I remember the batman album has sold 6 million copies, not 11 million.

There was a back and forth discussion about the sale of Batman with another member last month..

The first was the RIAA numbers back in 1989 saying Batman sold 4m in the U.S.

Then there were reports of it selling 11 million world wide, according to Wikipedia as well as several documentaries on YouTube stating Batman TO THIS DATE sold 11 million worldwide.

No way. BATMAN, when prince signed his 100 millions contract, didn't reach the 5 million mark worldwide.

There never were reports of 11 millions worldwide.

Wiki is full of shits, concerning figure and sales, because fans are inflated these numbers. Way back in 2005, I tried to correct some false figures (such as 6 millions for musicology) but they reappeared hours later.

The discrepancy between 5 millions and 11 millions is too big to be true, get back to earth. When an album is a huge seller, you don't hide the numbers.

Noodled24 said:

RODSERLING said:

With all the money invested in the project, yes, absolutely.

The music video of GET OFF cost 1 million dollar. Who knows how much CREAM cost.

The album of Sinead O Connor released in 1990, who only got one hit in her life, sold 7 millions too. 1990.

And in her case there was no 4 top 40 hits, there was no big budget music video, no big world tour.

Released at the same time, the DANGEROUS album shipped 14 millions in 38 days.

There was no less than 6 singles, not even counting that WILLING AND ABLE was played during the superbowl, and that STROLLIN was the B FACE of SEXYMF.

GETT OFF and SEXY MF shares the same flaw promotionnaly speaking : they were released 3 months before the actual release of the album! During the peak of these singles on charts, the album can't chart as much as it could...since it's not released yet.

That was pretty common back then. A single being released before the album to build anticipation. It also helped to provide a degree of familiarity with the LP when it was released "oh I've heard that song"... I don't think thats a promotional flaw.

No, it wasn(t common to release a single 3 months before the album's release, and then again one months later release another single before the album release.

The common thing was to release a single one month and a half before the album release. It's idiot to have a single at its peak and to not capitalize on it to get the album on charts.

In the first place, the album should have been #1. Despite two big singles releases at that time (GETT OFF and CREAM) the album only sold 200.000 the first week.

RODSERLING said:

Noodled24 said:

That was pretty common back then. A single being released before the album to build anticipation. It also helped to provide a degree of familiarity with the LP when it was released "oh I've heard that song"... I don't think thats a promotional flaw.

No, it wasn(t common to release a single 3 months before the album's release, and then again one months later release another single before the album release.

The common thing was to release a single one month and a half before the album release. It's idiot to have a single at its peak and to not capitalize on it to get the album on charts.

In the first place, the album should have been #1. Despite two big singles releases at that time (GETT OFF and CREAM) the album only sold 200.000 the first week.

I am very impressed that d&p sold 900.000 copies in the uk (3 platinium)....wow!!

funkyblues said:

RODSERLING said:

No, it wasn(t common to release a single 3 months before the album's release, and then again one months later release another single before the album release.

The common thing was to release a single one month and a half before the album release. It's idiot to have a single at its peak and to not capitalize on it to get the album on charts.

In the first place, the album should have been #1. Despite two big singles releases at that time (GETT OFF and CREAM) the album only sold 200.000 the first week.

I am very impressed that d&p sold 900.000 copies in the uk (3 platinium)....wow!!

It was huge in Australia too. The album outsold PR almost in many countries, except that in the USA, PR sold 12 millions more.