RODSERLING said:

hw3004 said:

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.

You're the one who said it was easy so, you know, put your money where your mouth is!

I'm just saying I think your original statement (7 million sales is poor) and some of the other points (common thing is to release a single 6 weeks before an album) you've made are...flawed.

There's plenty of albums/movies/ whatever out there who had more spent on them (and spent on marketing them) that have been much less successful than D&P.

Also, sure a lot of successful albums follow the single-album route you describe but as many again don't. Go back far enough and a decent amount of the top selling albums ever didn't contain any singles (Led Zep IV) or else singles only released after the album was released (Dark Side of the Moon). That's not even to mention some (UK at least) big selling debut albums where the acts built momentum through a series of singles prior to the album getting released (Definitely Maybe).

All I'm saying is tt's not a science, there's no one size fits all approach in all of this....

RODSERLING said:

feeluupp said:

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.

Many places including the 95 Brit Awards as well as documentary on YouTube, Prince In The 80's, said it sold 11 million.

feeluupp said:

RODSERLING said:

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.

Many places including the 95 Brit Awards as well as documentary on YouTube, Prince In The 80's, said it sold 11 million.

Just because the brit award made a mistake, everyone repeated it. That's no proof. Only sales, chartrun and certifications are proofs. If BATMAN sold 11 millions in 1989, it would have left some marks.

According to the accountants of WB in 1992, BATMAN didnt even reach the 5 millions mark worldwide.

It's a bit strange the album never sell more than 5 millions because it was 6 weeks #1 in France and in the USA, but sales on summer are weak.

The album was also reported to have been the fast selling album of all time. Assuming it's true, it's only about shipments.

According to soundscan, between 1991 and 2005, BATMAN sold only 88.000 in the US. SS has its flaws, nevertheless there is absolutely no proof that BATMAn sold more than 5 millions worldwide.

If you have any other informations, please share.

hw3004 said:

RODSERLING said:

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.

You're the one who said it was easy so, you know, put your money where your mouth is!

I'm just saying I think your original statement (7 million sales is poor) and some of the other points (common thing is to release a single 6 weeks before an album) you've made are...flawed.

There's plenty of albums/movies/ whatever out there who had more spent on them (and spent on marketing them) that have been much less successful than D&P.

Also, sure a lot of successful albums follow the single-album route you describe but as many again don't. Go back far enough and a decent amount of the top selling albums ever didn't contain any singles (Led Zep IV) or else singles only released after the album was released (Dark Side of the Moon). That's not even to mention some (UK at least) big selling debut albums where the acts built momentum through a series of singles prior to the album getting released (Definitely Maybe).

All I'm saying is tt's not a science, there's no one size fits all approach in all of this....

i said it was easy with the promotion Prince had. And it doesn't take to account the fact that P was a super mega star wolrdwide. 7 millions seems low.

Of course promotion has no strict rules, but you're talking about rock band (led Zep, Oasis), that's not the same public as pop/rnb.

The only other album I know of that floppes with huge promotion was INVINCIBLE, at 7 millions too, and there was not as much music video, tour, etc. than for DP.

It was more profitable to sell SONGS IN A MINOR from Alicia keys, whose music video were far less expensive.

Imagine if for DANGEROUS BLACK OR WHITE was released on september, and then for the release of the album REMEMBER THE TIME in december. DANGEROUS couldn' t have benefited from the BOW success at its peak. That's what happened with GETT OFF and SEXY MF. Despite being success on charts, that success couldn' be translated by consumers buying the album.

How can you explain that SineAd o connors sold 7 million of the same album with only one hit single, with a very cheap music video ?

You don't take to account at all, all the costs involved.

[Edited 11/18/14 4:48am]

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.

The album then proceeded to spend fiftyseven weeks on the UK chart based on sales alone. So in the UK at least it worked.

You're right 3 months before the album is a long time, but I don't think it was unheard of. You are right a month and a half was more common. But it worked.

GetOfFunk 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.

Exactly. By the way I think that diamonds&pearls is a "pure" Prince album that deserves all the success it had

Exactly. Especially pure were Jughead and Push.

Given the fact this is Prince's 2nd most comercial album next to Purple Rain... Frank Di Leo without a doubt had a help promoting it properly... In terms of Prince's catalogue, the numbers don't lie.

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.

Bingo.

RODSERLING said:

hw3004 said:

You're the one who said it was easy so, you know, put your money where your mouth is!

I'm just saying I think your original statement (7 million sales is poor) and some of the other points (common thing is to release a single 6 weeks before an album) you've made are...flawed.

There's plenty of albums/movies/ whatever out there who had more spent on them (and spent on marketing them) that have been much less successful than D&P.

Also, sure a lot of successful albums follow the single-album route you describe but as many again don't. Go back far enough and a decent amount of the top selling albums ever didn't contain any singles (Led Zep IV) or else singles only released after the album was released (Dark Side of the Moon). That's not even to mention some (UK at least) big selling debut albums where the acts built momentum through a series of singles prior to the album getting released (Definitely Maybe).

All I'm saying is tt's not a science, there's no one size fits all approach in all of this....

i said it was easy with the promotion Prince had. And it doesn't take to account the fact that P was a super mega star wolrdwide. 7 millions seems low.

Of course promotion has no strict rules, but you're talking about rock band (led Zep, Oasis), that's not the same public as pop/rnb.

The only other album I know of that floppes with huge promotion was INVINCIBLE, at 7 millions too, and there was not as much music video, tour, etc. than for DP.

It was more profitable to sell SONGS IN A MINOR from Alicia keys, whose music video were far less expensive.

Imagine if for DANGEROUS BLACK OR WHITE was released on september, and then for the release of the album REMEMBER THE TIME in december. DANGEROUS couldn' t have benefited from the BOW success at its peak. That's what happened with GETT OFF and SEXY MF. Despite being success on charts, that success couldn' be translated by consumers buying the album.

How can you explain that SineAd o connors sold 7 million of the same album with only one hit single, with a very cheap music video ?

You don't take to account at all, all the costs involved.

[Edited 11/18/14 4:48am]

....What?

feeluupp said:

Given the fact this is Prince's 2nd most comercial album next to Purple Rain... Frank Di Leo without a doubt had a help promoting it properly... In terms of Prince's catalogue, the numbers don't lie.

Prince should have used Frank Dileo on his follow-up albums as well.

pureTsexy said:

Let's not forget, this was the follow to Graffiti Bridge... So 7 million is, indeed, a huge success.

I think that,after GB,Prince knew that he had to use the heavy artillery.He knew that he needed a massively successful album,to prove that he wasn't "over".That's why he called up Frank Dileo and released one of the most commercial albums of his career.The strategy worked.

RODSERLING said:

hw3004 said:

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.

My brother makes music for a living and his band is signed with a major label. It costs in today's market 1 million dollars to get a top ten hit. Through indirect pay outs. (There are always exceptions.)