WB is just poorly managed then.

RODSERLING said:

WB lost commercial viability in no releasing it last year (not even talking about 2014, it would be like firing on an ambulance).

They did lots of promotion for 4EVER, there were even tv ads...and it flopped, for obvious reasons (only one unreleased track, numerous best of released before, always the same tracks, etc.)

.

So they think it's useless to put money on PR deluxe, knowing that in less than 4 years they will lose the rights to another Player in the game.

.

Of course we all know this is unfair, and if there is a release that could sell well, it's this one. They could sell more than one million this year in the US alone with a minimum of promotion (tv adds, a tv special, a single on the radio, etc.).

.

If the guys in the music industry were so smart, physical albums won't be the niche it is now.

.

I'm so pissed off I'm not even sure to buy it.

[Edited 6/8/17 7:59am]

.

You do raise an important point!

.

After Prince passed the music charts were saturated with people buying all of the previous hits collections and some albums.

.

So with that in mind, WB then go and release.... another hits compilation, BUT anyone who wanted one bought one when Prince passed, DOH!

.

bonatoc said:

WB is just poorly managed then.

Yes, there was an article in Billboard right after Prince died that basically said Prince' s death was the best thing that could have happend for WB. ( Fucked up but unfortunatly true) Cameron Stang the CEO was close to losing his job as the losses have been really bad since he arrived.

RODSERLING said:

WB lost commercial viability in no releasing it last year (not even talking about 2014, it would be like firing on an ambulance).

They did lots of promotion for 4EVER, there were even tv ads...and it flopped, for obvious reasons (only one unreleased track, numerous best of released before, always the same tracks, etc.)

.

So they think it's useless to put money on PR deluxe, knowing that in less than 4 years they will lose the rights to another Player in the game.

.

Of course we all know this is unfair, and if there is a release that could sell well, it's this one. They could sell more than one million this year in the US alone with a minimum of promotion (tv adds, a tv special, a single on the radio, etc.).

.

If the guys in the music industry were so smart, physical albums won't be the niche it is now.

.

I'm so pissed off I'm not even sure to buy it.

[Edited 6/8/17 7:59am]

This is exactly what I meant about misguided expectations - 4EVER has spent 26 weeks on the Billboard 200 so far and sold over 100K to date. That's not a flop for a catalog item.

And frankly - if you don't buy it, you're part of the problem.

TwiliteKid said:

laurarichardson said:

TwiliteKid said: Private Equity groups buy companies to make quick profits which does always mean spending a lot of excess money. In fact WB was sold the first time to a private equity group a few years ago and then sold again after continuing to lose money. I see records sales at a all time low I do not see a private equity trying to make a quick buck spending big cash on promotion when they know they have a built in fan base.

The equity group wouldn't control day-to-day operations though. You're right that Warner isn't going to go all out on a legacy release, but that's standard industry practice, not a function of ultimate ownership.

I think the equity group purchased WB because of the back catalogue. I really do not think there is much interest in actually running a lable with new artist. Think we to exploit catalogue sales because l like you said industry practice is little or know money spent for promotion.

Anyway according to Londell's court documents. He believes that Prince only resigned with them to get the masters and resolve other legal issues that did not get resolved back in 96. He states that their were problems with the deal right after it was signed.

Could be bull on his part to try and save his commission or it could be true.

laurarichardson said:

TwiliteKid said:

The equity group wouldn't control day-to-day operations though. You're right that Warner isn't going to go all out on a legacy release, but that's standard industry practice, not a function of ultimate ownership.

I think the equity group purchased WB because of the back catalogue. I really do not think there is much interest in actually running a lable with new artist. Think we to exploit catalogue sales because l like you said industry practice is little or know money spent for promotion.

Anyway according to Londell's court documents. He believes that Prince only resigned with them to get the masters and resolve other legal issues that did not get resolved back in 96. He states that their were problems with the deal right after it was signed.

Could be bull on his part to try and save his commission or it could be true.

Well that's not true. Warner continues to sign new acts and do their best to break them. I know this because the agency I work for works with Warner reguarly.

TwiliteKid said:

laurarichardson said:

I think the equity group purchased WB because of the back catalogue. I really do not think there is much interest in actually running a lable with new artist. Think we to exploit catalogue sales because l like you said industry practice is little or know money spent for promotion.

Anyway according to Londell's court documents. He believes that Prince only resigned with them to get the masters and resolve other legal issues that did not get resolved back in 96. He states that their were problems with the deal right after it was signed.

Could be bull on his part to try and save his commission or it could be true.

Well that's not true. Warner continues to sign new acts and do their best to break them. I know this because the agency I work for works with Warner reguarly.

Signing acts and actully selling music are two different things. See the article below from last year. WB is not doing well financially and while the private equity group is not involved with the day to day running of the company. No one pays 3.3 billion dollar investment to lose money.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7445935/cameron-strang-warner-bros-records-profile

As one executive puts it, Strang was handed "a total bag of sh-t” when he took over Warner Bros. in 2012. It’s been an uphill battle ever since.

In April 22, Warner Bros. Records' storied Burbank headquarters -- friendly, low-slung redwood buildings whose interiors are lined with gold and platinum plaques from the likes of Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, Fleetwood Mac and Madonna -- were temporarily transformed into a temple to just one star: Prince, whose tragic and unexpected death from an opioid overdose the previous day had prompted a global outpouring of grief. As speakers blasted "Purple Rain," teary fans laid offerings at an impromptu shrine next to the entrance. Inside, the visage of the Purple One stared down from wall after hallway wall. It was a reminder of how the heritage of Warner Bros. Records proves almost inescapable.

No one knows this better than Cameron Strang, the ­company's current chairman and CEO. "This building, historically and today, is populated with music fans," says Strang, 49, who recently had brought Prince back into the WBR stable after years of acrimony. "So yesterday afternoon we all just came together, cranked up his music, and [former WBR president] Lenny Waronker came in and told stories about ­working with Prince. It was a deeper and darker thing than any of us could've predicted."

With a background in the niche Americana genre and boutique music publishing, Strang, who has held the role of CEO since 2012, makes for an unlikely major-label boss, let alone the steward of the once crown jewel of Warner Music Group (which also includes East Coast-based Atlantic Records, country label Warner Music Nashville, publishing company Warner/Chappell Music and catalog packager Rhino Entertainment). Laid-back and soft-spoken, he cuts a completely ­different profile to his hard-charging, alpha-dog peers.

Billboard Power 100 Profi...ron Strang

"I just like the way Cameron talks about music," says Jimmy Iovine, co-founder of Interscope Records and an executive at Apple Music, who first met Strang when they collaborated on an Apple campaign for the Grammy-nominated R&B singer Andra Day. "He cares about it, is completely engrossed in it and focuses on it more than the other things. I like it when I see an ­executive that has those qualities."

Amanda Friedman

Seated at a staff meeting on April 25 at Warner Bros. Records headquarters, from left: Snodgrass, executive vp/head of promotion Peter Gray, Strang and president Dan McCarroll.

More so than any contemporary record label that has seen better days, though, Warner Bros. remains haunted by its sunkissed heyday. Despite some recent gains, the label's reputation has suffered under the ­stewardship of Strang and his immediate predecessors. "Our ­history is a double-edged sword," he admits. "It's our biggest strength and our ­biggest weakness. I sometimes say it casts a big shadow -- which is great if you're looking for shade."

From its late-'60s golden age, propelled by visionary chairman Steve Ross and the groovy savoir-faire of legendary ­executives Mo Ostin and Waronker, through Time Warner's 1989 ­takeover and Ostin's bittersweet resignation in 1994, WBR was famed as ­simultaneously the most artist-friendly and commercially ­successful of the big labels. An endless fount of cool and ­revenue, WBR singularly created the romantic ideal of the record company as hothouse for hip young creatives. "Warner Brothers was a great home for artists, and one of the first labels with a real culture," says Iovine.

Mo and Lenny, as they're warmly known, turned WBR and sister label Reprise into a cutting-edge rock powerhouse, ­releasing ­classics by Hendrix, The Grateful Dead, Neil Young, Randy Newman and James Taylor that helped birth the 1960s ­counterculture and midwife the '70s singer-songwriter boom. Later, in addition to transforming Prince and Madonna into mono-named megastars, WBR turned college-rock underdogs like R.E.M., Green Day, Depeche Mode and Red Hot Chili Peppers into arena-fillers while stoking long, lucrative relationships with Hall of Famers Clapton, Fleetwood Mac, Van Halen and Tom Petty. (Under Strang, Petty had his first No. 1 entry on the Billboard 200 with 2014's Hypnotic Eye.) The industry's most talented ­executives would work for decades at WBR, rebuffing offer after offer from rival labels for the privilege of rubbing shoulders with the best ­artists and brightest decision-makers. "It became a kind of ­religion," explains a former staffer. But years of turmoil have tested even the faithful. As one longtime label head says, "What does Warner Brothers really stand for today?"

Former Warner Bros. CEO M...ss Artist'

By all accounts, Strang's tenure at WBR was an uphill battle from the outset. As one executive puts it, Strang was handed "a total bag of shit" when he took over in 2012. A shell of its former ­industry-leading self, the label had been hobbled by ­dramatic changes in ownership, a revolving door of ­executives and ­internecine corporate politics -- along with a once-robust, now dated, rock-oriented roster of acts that seems to be in search of a ­viable commercial-radio ­format. As WBR declined, the music ­business mutated in a series of ­disruptions. The ascent of ­smartphones and global jukeboxes like Spotify, Apple Music and Tidal gave rise to an even more singles-­dominated ­industry as streams supplanted ­downloads (which themselves had ­superceded albums and CDs); hip-hop mavericks like Drake and Future and viral pop avatars such as Miley Cyrus became the digital era's rock stars. Therefore it's no wonder today's WBR -- still with approximately 250 U.S. ­employees -- proves last on a top manager's list when shopping new acts and songs ­looking for top 40 ­domination. "The best songs in the world are going to go to Taylor Swift, Rihanna, Beyoncé, Katy Perry," says the manager. "They're not going to [WBR pop hopeful] Bebe Rexha."

"Listen, I'd been at Epic for something like three and a half years before finally having some success with Meghan Trainor, allowing me to get where I am now," says Antonio "L.A." Reid, Epic Records chairman/CEO and a hitmaker with decades of hits under his belt as well as recent smashes with Future and Fifth Harmony. "To rebuild a broken record company takes five to seven years," explains Lyor Cohen, currently the head and co-founder of 300 Entertainment, and formerly ­chairman/CEO of Warner Music Group who installed the WBR ­administration before Strang. "WBR was especially broken [when Strang took over]. It was heavily reliant on legacy artists and was not breaking many new ones."

"When I got here, no question, market share was very low -- in the fours," says Strang. "In 2015 it was up to 5.9 percent; by end of 2016 we'll be in the sevens." According to Nielsen Music, WBR ranked seventh among major labels in market share for 2015, at 5.8 ­percent. Through midyear 2016, Strang has increased that share to 8.1 ­percent, good for third place and even outpacing its sister label Atlantic, although the bump is due in part to the posthumous sales of David Bowie, whose catalog is controlled by WBR, and especially Prince, whose greatest-hits album rocketed to the top of the Billboard 200 following his death. (All totals include sales from Warner Music Nashville, run autonomously by its chairman/CEO, John Esposito.) "Perversely, Prince and Bowie dying is the best thing that could've happened to the current Warner Brothers regime," says a source close to the situation.

Among the living, Lukas Graham, a Danish band led by its ­namesake frontman, Lukas Graham Forchhammer, broke through with "Seven Years," a Spotify streaming sensation and No. 2 Billboard Hot 100 smash. Strang also had help making his numbers with a string of commercially successful singles from pop artist Jason Derulo, a Grammy sales uptick for Day and a No. 2 album from Red Hot Chili Peppers.

Roc Nation Partners With ...e Division

Despite the improved performance, Strang, who in 2015 earned $2.25 million in total compensation, according to public records, cautions against the pursuit of market share over profitability. "I'm a strong ­businessman and very good with numbers. You can distribute Taylor Swift records for a 3 to 5 percent margin," he says, ­referring to industry leader Universal Music Group's best-selling artist, "but what does that really say? I'm not so sure what Andra Day is ­contributing to our market share, but she's going to contribute to our profitability."

Strang's critics fire back, citing a glaring lack of WBR hits in the nearly four years since he took the reins.

"That guy took a vintage Ferrari and turned it into a broken-down Saturn," says one high-ranking industry insider. A major music manager notes, "It's funny -- I was just thinking, 'You never hear about Warners anymore.' " One insider with ­dealings at WBR charges that Strang "has no ­relationships. He's not in the mix. Where are the Gee Roberson-managed acts at Warner Brothers?" -- citing the high-profile manager of Nicki Minaj -- "Where's your Katy Perry? Your Lady Gaga? Where are the artists who can sell out arenas and have fashion lines?"

"He's miscast," concludes a rival label head. "His ­contemporaries come out of big, successful operations and were front-line label people. This is a person who has never dealt with scale and who has hired bad people. Bottom line: He's not talented enough to turn it around. And it was totally f--ed when he got there. How would he know what's the right thing to do?"

"In our business," Strang says calmly, in the face of such ­criticism, "people talk for different reasons -- some, frankly, strategic."

In person, it's hard to reconcile Strang -- a gentle giant at 6 feet 6 inches tall, dressed in an emo-­business-casual black T-shirt and matching minimalist Tom Ford high-tops -- with the fervor ­surrounding his tenure. Strang's ascetic vibe is a sharp contrast from his ­predecessor, Todd Moscowitz, who, as WBR's co-president and CEO from 2010 to 2013, hired street-art superstar Mr. Brainwash to ­redecorate his offices and create an installation for the lobby. (Moscowitz currently serves with Cohen as co-founder of 300 Entertainment.) Strang's holistic, team-centric management style evokes Silicon Valley's ­corporate experiments more than the take-no-prisoners ­micromanagement of most label heads. "I was struck by how Cameron treats people in the company," says longtime WBR CFO Hildi Snodgrass. "He always ends the meeting by saying, 'Be safe and take care of one another.' That's such a ­different sentiment than most chairmen would express."

"Often what people learn in a corporate culture is about persona and ego," says Strang. "They wonder, 'How do I make it about me, so I'm the one chosen?' But I'm not the type of guy to shout from the rooftops about myself. That doesn't strengthen the company."

Warner/Chappell CEO Jon P... Directors

Industry opinion is dramatically split on Strang's ­current performance and future potential. Some consider him uniquely well suited -- philosophically, temperamentally -- to reimagine the role of the record label in the digital age and create a corporate culture in line with contemporary trends, all while honoring WBR's fabled past.

"It has taken time and patience to revitalize WBR, but Cameron's skill set has made him an important ­catalyst for change," says Warner Music Group CEO Stephen Cooper, 69, the ­company's No. 2 under Russian-born owner Len Blavatnik, 59, who acquired WMG for $3.3 billion in 2011. "He has filled the label with real music fans, and the entire company is now committed to real, long-term artist development."

TwiliteKid said:

RODSERLING said:

WB lost commercial viability in no releasing it last year (not even talking about 2014, it would be like firing on an ambulance).

They did lots of promotion for 4EVER, there were even tv ads...and it flopped, for obvious reasons (only one unreleased track, numerous best of released before, always the same tracks, etc.)

.

So they think it's useless to put money on PR deluxe, knowing that in less than 4 years they will lose the rights to another Player in the game.

.

Of course we all know this is unfair, and if there is a release that could sell well, it's this one. They could sell more than one million this year in the US alone with a minimum of promotion (tv adds, a tv special, a single on the radio, etc.).

.

If the guys in the music industry were so smart, physical albums won't be the niche it is now.

.

I'm so pissed off I'm not even sure to buy it.

[Edited 6/8/17 7:59am]

This is exactly what I meant about misguided expectations - 4EVER has spent 26 weeks on the Billboard 200 so far and sold over 100K to date. That's not a flop for a catalog item.

And frankly - if you don't buy it, you're part of the problem.

Well, that's a flop commercially and artistically.

Artistically because there are no songs after 1993, and don't tell me that WB doesn't own them, please...Every artist with more than one major company (Janet Jackson, MJ, George Michael, David Bowie, etc.) release best of merging different record companies.

.

Artistically because there is only one unreleased track, so most of the fans here didn't buy it.

.

Commercially because it cannibalize the other greatest hits.

.

Commercially because the PR deluxe would have been a better release instead.

.

Commercially because it makes no sense to release a best of with the same old tracks without new hits. I don't recall a major artist releasing a new greatest hits without major surprises or changes in the tracklist.

.

What is part of the problem is people here thinking that because 4EVER sold a little 130.000 copies in the US, makes it decent sales. US is not the center of the world. It had been released with the greatest campaign in France since Diamonds and Pearls, but barely sold 7500 copies. That's what is called a huge flop.

.

WB can't sell Prince stuff outside of anglo-saxon countries. So they gave up promoting it. But if they stopped selling crap, maybe it would be a success. That's what they didn't understand.

Oh, come on. The "no promotion" thing is surely meant to be a tribute to Prince.

rogifan said:

Genesia said:

Oh, come on. The "no promotion" thing is surely meant to be a tribute to Prince.

laurarichardson said:

TwiliteKid said:

Well that's not true. Warner continues to sign new acts and do their best to break them. I know this because the agency I work for works with Warner reguarly.

Signing acts and actully selling music are two different things. See the article below from last year. WB is not doing well financially and while the private equity group is not involved with the day to day running of the company. No one pays 3.3 billion dollar investment to lose money.

I didn't say they were doing well, but that doesn't mean they aren't trying, and it's not like they haven't had some recent success stories - people like Bruno Mars, Blake Shelton, Ed Sheeran, Paramore, etc.

RODSERLING said:

TwiliteKid said:

This is exactly what I meant about misguided expectations - 4EVER has spent 26 weeks on the Billboard 200 so far and sold over 100K to date. That's not a flop for a catalog item.

And frankly - if you don't buy it, you're part of the problem.

Well, that's a flop commercially and artistically.

Artistically because there are no songs after 1993, and don't tell me that WB doesn't own them, please...Every artist with more than one major company (Janet Jackson, MJ, George Michael, David Bowie, etc.) release best of merging different record companies.

.

Artistically because there is only one unreleased track, so most of the fans here didn't buy it.

.

Commercially because it cannibalize the other greatest hits.

.

Commercially because the PR deluxe would have been a better release instead.

.

Commercially because it makes no sense to release a best of with the same old tracks without new hits. I don't recall a major artist releasing a new greatest hits without major surprises or changes in the tracklist.

.

What is part of the problem is people here thinking that because 4EVER sold a little 130.000 copies in the US, makes it decent sales. US is not the center of the world. It had been released with the greatest campaign in France since Diamonds and Pearls, but barely sold 7500 copies. That's what is called a huge flop.

.

WB can't sell Prince stuff outside of anglo-saxon countries. So they gave up promoting it. But if they stopped selling crap, maybe it would be a success. That's what they didn't understand.

4EVER is still on the charts, after a year... It's selling slow but selling none the less... As a matter of fact 4EVER is selling better and sold more than all his albums in the last 7 years besides Lotusflow3r which went GOLD in the USA alone.

Also let me add, for one year now PURPLE RAIN has been on the TOP 20 selling vinyl charts in the USA as well.

RODSERLING said:

feeluupp said:

RODSERLING said:

Well, that's a flop commercially and artistically.

Artistically because there are no songs after 1993, and don't tell me that WB doesn't own them, please...Every artist with more than one major company (Janet Jackson, MJ, George Michael, David Bowie, etc.) release best of merging different record companies.

.

Artistically because there is only one unreleased track, so most of the fans here didn't buy it.

.

Commercially because it cannibalize the other greatest hits.

.

Commercially because the PR deluxe would have been a better release instead.

.

Commercially because it makes no sense to release a best of with the same old tracks without new hits. I don't recall a major artist releasing a new greatest hits without major surprises or changes in the tracklist.

.

What is part of the problem is people here thinking that because 4EVER sold a little 130.000 copies in the US, makes it decent sales. US is not the center of the world. It had been released with the greatest campaign in France since Diamonds and Pearls, but barely sold 7500 copies. That's what is called a huge flop.

.

WB can't sell Prince stuff outside of anglo-saxon countries. So they gave up promoting it. But if they stopped selling crap, maybe it would be a success. That's what they didn't understand.

4EVER is still on the charts, after a year... It's selling slow but selling none the less... As a matter of fact 4EVER is selling better and sold more than all his albums in the last 7 years besides Lotusflow3r which went GOLD in the USA alone.

No, it was release six months ago, you have a strange definition of "a year".

.

And once again, its sales could have been much higher if the content was what is expected to from a greatest hits. I'm not even talking about 1 unreleased track by disc, which would have been a minimum.

.

But Where are Party Man, TMBGITW, Musicology, Call My Name, Gold, Let It Go, Black Sweat; the HolyRIver, etc that were definitively better hits than Soft And Wet, Why You WaNNA tREAT mE sO bAD, Paisley Park, Glam Slam, Peach...what a joke.

.

In the US and UK, 4EVER sales may be correct, but nos as much as expected for a compilation that is supposed to "cover the entire Prince carreer", which is a lie.

feeluupp said:

Also let me add, for one year now PURPLE RAIN has been on the TOP 20 selling vinyl charts in the USA as well.

Which means 30.000 ex

.

My point was to say that PR DELUXE was a potential huge seller, and I'm talking about millions of copies, but that WB completely screwed it. Like they screw with 4EVER, which was a flop in every markets except 3.

TwiliteKid said:

RODSERLING said:

Well, that's a flop commercially and artistically.

Artistically because there are no songs after 1993, and don't tell me that WB doesn't own them, please...Every artist with more than one major company (Janet Jackson, MJ, George Michael, David Bowie, etc.) release best of merging different record companies.

.

Artistically because there is only one unreleased track, so most of the fans here didn't buy it.

.

Commercially because it cannibalize the other greatest hits.

.

Commercially because the PR deluxe would have been a better release instead.

.

Commercially because it makes no sense to release a best of with the same old tracks without new hits. I don't recall a major artist releasing a new greatest hits without major surprises or changes in the tracklist.

.

What is part of the problem is people here thinking that because 4EVER sold a little 130.000 copies in the US, makes it decent sales. US is not the center of the world. It had been released with the greatest campaign in France since Diamonds and Pearls, but barely sold 7500 copies. That's what is called a huge flop.

.

WB can't sell Prince stuff outside of anglo-saxon countries. So they gave up promoting it. But if they stopped selling crap, maybe it would be a success. That's what they didn't understand.

As usual, this post is a mix of personal opinion, supposition and misinterpreted facts, which makes it hard to debate you. I will say this again - your idea of what constitutes a successful for release for legacy/catalogue product is way off base. Warner is not unhappy with these results.

This is not personnal opinion to say the tracklist of 4EVER is a piece of crap, compared to what was Prince's commercial carreer.

.

This is not personnal opinion to say the sales are very low for this kind of release - yes, very low.

There are PR Deluxe ads in german magazines...So they will do

some promotion of course....

TwiliteKid said:

feeluupp said:

Whats the deal?? Why no promotion at all for the upcoming PR Deluxe that will be relesed in a few weeks. I mean literally no promotion at all besides the new music site that was launched a month ago where you can buy all the WB stuff and the new remastered 7" and 12" singles...

Who is handling this, WB? Prince estate? Both?? What happens if it fails to sell, what is the future for other re releases and deluxe remasterings of his golden age 80's catalouge...

It's a reissue. How much promotion do you expect? Did you see any for the Sgt Pepper reissue a few weeks ago?

.

I've seen several TV ads, saw an hour long documentary on BBC Two past weekend, saw a truckload of articles (even in mainstream publications). And yes, such articles are the result of promo, with journalists being invited to listening sessions at Abbey Road and interviews with Giles Martin.

.

It does seem odd that there's so far little fanfare WRT PR Deluxe; perhaps the August issues of Mojo and/or Uncut will feature multi-page articles?

BartVanHemelen said:

TwiliteKid said:

feeluupp said: It's a reissue. How much promotion do you expect? Did you see any for the Sgt Pepper reissue a few weeks ago?

.

I've seen several TV ads, saw an hour long documentary on BBC Two past weekend, saw a truckload of articles (even in mainstream publications). And yes, such articles are the result of promo, with journalists being invited to listening sessions at Abbey Road and interviews with Giles Martin.

.

It does seem odd that there's so far little fanfare WRT PR Deluxe; perhaps the August issues of Mojo and/or Uncut will feature multi-page articles?

As labels define it, promo is paid advertising. The documentary and interviews are press. And it remains to be seen if there will be any similar efforts for Purple Rain - as you suggest, let's wait and see what hits once it's available.

TwiliteKid said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

I've seen several TV ads, saw an hour long documentary on BBC Two past weekend, saw a truckload of articles (even in mainstream publications). And yes, such articles are the result of promo, with journalists being invited to listening sessions at Abbey Road and interviews with Giles Martin.

.

It does seem odd that there's so far little fanfare WRT PR Deluxe; perhaps the August issues of Mojo and/or Uncut will feature multi-page articles?

As labels define it, promo is paid advertising. The documentary and interviews are press. And it remains to be seen if there will be any similar efforts for Purple Rain - as you suggest, let's wait and see what hits once it's available.

Documentary and first page on the press are considered as promotion too- it's not free at all.

It results from listening session, sending copies to the various medias, etc.

.

The fact there is not even a video of Electric Intercourse, is a really bad sign.

RODSERLING said:

TwiliteKid said:

RODSERLING said: As usual, this post is a mix of personal opinion, supposition and misinterpreted facts, which makes it hard to debate you. I will say this again - your idea of what constitutes a successful for release for legacy/catalogue product is way off base. Warner is not unhappy with these results.

This is not personnal opinion to say the tracklist of 4EVER is a piece of crap, compared to what was Prince's commercial carreer.

I know English isn't your first language, but this is pretty much the definition of an opinion.

RODSERLING said:

This is not personnal opinion to say the sales are very low for this kind of release - yes, very low.

You're wrong. We're in an age when the highest selling album of the year has yet to sell a million copies. No one is expecting similar for a Prince compilation. The day of the Eagle's Greatest Hits selling 20 million copies are long gone. Can you point me to a recent best of that's done better? Certainly not Bowie's Legacy.

RODSERLING said:

TwiliteKid said:

As labels define it, promo is paid advertising. The documentary and interviews are press. And it remains to be seen if there will be any similar efforts for Purple Rain - as you suggest, let's wait and see what hits once it's available.

Documentary and first page on the press are considered as promotion too- it's not free at all.

It results from listening session, sending copies to the various medias, etc.

.

The fact there is not even a video of Electric Intercourse, is a really bad sign.

That depends on who produced the documentary - if it was the BBC then it wasn't a label expense at all. And you're right that listening parties and the like would have costs attached, but those events would come out the press budget.

TwiliteKid said:

RODSERLING said:

I know English isn't your first language, but this is pretty much the definition of an opinion.

RODSERLING said:

This is not personnal opinion to say the sales are very low for this kind of release - yes, very low.

You're wrong. We're in an age when the highest selling album of the year has yet to sell a million copies. No one is expecting similar for a Prince compilation. The day of the Eagle's Greatest Hits selling 20 million copies are long gone. Can you point me to a recent best of that's done better? Certainly not Bowie's Legacy

Well actually believe it or not there have been pretty big sellers in the last 2 years... Adele over 19 million, Taylors swift latest album 1989 just been certified 10x platinum. Beyonce, Kendrick Lamar, Drake, Ed Sheeran sold over 3 million in the last year, etc...

feeluupp said:

TwiliteKid said:

This is not personnal opinion to say the sales are very low for this kind of release - yes, very low.

You're wrong. We're in an age when the highest selling album of the year has yet to sell a million copies. No one is expecting similar for a Prince compilation. The day of the Eagle's Greatest Hits selling 20 million copies are long gone. Can you point me to a recent best of that's done better? Certainly not Bowie's Legacy

Well actually believe it or not there have been pretty big sellers in the last 2 years... Adele over 19 million, Taylors swift latest album 1989 just been certified 10x platinum. Beyonce, Kendrick Lamar, Drake, Ed Sheeran sold over 3 million in the last year, etc...

I was referring to 2017 releases, but you're right, Kendrick, Drake and Ed have cleared a million (I was looking at an old table).

Regardless, the point stands - it used to be common for albums to debut with a million sales, or close to it. Given the new reality (this week's #1, Bryson Tiller, just barely broken 100K), calling 4EVER a flop or a disappointment just isn't accurate.

TwiliteKid said:

feeluupp said:

Well actually believe it or not there have been pretty big sellers in the last 2 years... Adele over 19 million, Taylors swift latest album 1989 just been certified 10x platinum. Beyonce, Kendrick Lamar, Drake, Ed Sheeran sold over 3 million in the last year, etc...

I was referring to 2017 releases, but you're right, Kendrick, Drake and Ed have cleared a million (I was looking at an old table).

Regardless, the point stands - it used to be common for albums to debut with a million sales, or close to it. Given the new reality (this week's #1, Bryson Tiller, just barely broken 100K), calling 4EVER a flop or a disappointment just isn't accurate.

4EVER is no flop... Like I stated in my previous post... 4EVER is still in the TOP 200 and selling slow but steadily... 4EVER has sold more than PLECTRUM ELECTRUM, AOA, PHASE 1 & PHASE 2...

Also 4EVER has been certified GOLD in the U.K. with over 100,000 copies sold in the U.K. alone...

feeluupp said:

TwiliteKid said:

I was referring to 2017 releases, but you're right, Kendrick, Drake and Ed have cleared a million (I was looking at an old table).

Regardless, the point stands - it used to be common for albums to debut with a million sales, or close to it. Given the new reality (this week's #1, Bryson Tiller, just barely broken 100K), calling 4EVER a flop or a disappointment just isn't accurate.

4EVER is no flop... Like I stated in my previous post... 4EVER is still in the TOP 200 and selling slow but steadily... 4EVER has sold more than PLECTRUM ELECTRUM, AOA, PHASE 1 & PHASE 2...

I know you know that - I was aiming that at Rod.

TwiliteKid said:

feeluupp said:

4EVER is no flop... Like I stated in my previous post... 4EVER is still in the TOP 200 and selling slow but steadily... 4EVER has sold more than PLECTRUM ELECTRUM, AOA, PHASE 1 & PHASE 2...

I know you know that - I was aiming that at Rod.

As was I