I just read the thread about Musicology's slip on the charts (which I'm sure will change after the 2nd single/video comes out). I was reading somewhere that if "they" counted the number of CD's that were given at the shows, that Prince would have the #1 spot on lock. I think they should count them b/c a) we did technically pay for it and b) I'm sure everybody who went to the concert certainly would have bought the CD if they didn't receive it at the concert. What do ya'll think?

Love Ya'll

You must not be following very closely because they DO count them... That's how the album managed to stick at #3 for 3 weeks straight.

I never said I was a journalist, I was just askind for opinion, the question is still the same. You know I like he/say she/say.

tuffycat said:

This has been talked to death, though.... look for about a dozen existing threads.

tuffycat - yes I do believe the concert sales should count. Just because this has not been done before doesn't mean it shouldn't. It's like when the charts were "redesigned" to include radio airplay as well as physical sales.

Prince is trailblazing again only this time instead of being branded eccentric he's actually causing a buzz that will without doubt see others follow suit in the years to come.

No.

Cloudbuster said:

Why not? A sale's a sale.

jtfolden said:

Looks like it was intresting enough for you to click and post, huh? Kind if like if you don't like what a radio station is playing, change the station, don't try to put it off the air.

First off- yes this topic has been discussed alot. But aparently people are still interested in it. If you are not then don't click on the thread!!

Personally I think this little wrinkle in the Prince story is very interesting and I think its GREAT that he is leading the way in a major industry shift. The charts have been BOGUS CRAP for years and maybe they always were. All P did was find a way to get his music actually, physically out there and draw attention to it. That's all the charts are utlimately- a marketing tool. I say bravo to Prince for this coup.

It is too bad however that the big buzz around his new album is not about the *music* on it, but rather its unique marketing approach but whatever. I'll take what I can get and so will Prince!!

Secondly should it be counted? HELL YES. Its a sale so why the hell not? All this technique does is level the playing field for established artists w/ a substantial live draw. These artists DO sell records and concert tickets and are very viable in the industry. Now the charts will reflect that and not just whatever teenybopper thing a million 12 year olds bought that week with their parents' money.

WHAT ON EARTH CAN BE WRONG WITH THAT?!

.. the concert cd's should count has a record sale. Why shouldn't they?? PEOPLE payed to see a concert and the cd is part of the ticket price.. Plus, if you buy and addtional cd from the store. I just believe it's fair and it all should count has a record sale.

OdysseyMiles said:

Forced purchasing.

krebsne said:

Excellent point.

Cloudbuster said:

You still know what you're getting ahead of time.
Everyone that bought a ticket for this tour knew that a cd was included in the price. Even the CEO of Soundscan said that he couldn't find any good reason not to count them. Counting the cds sold at concerts in the given sales week is fair to me, chartwise. And even still, P's ticket prices are waaay cheaper than say, Fleetwood Mack, or The Eagles or Rolling Stones. Folks are getting an incredible live show and a cd for a reasonable price. After attending the theater simulcast on 3/29, and the Columbus show, I felt like I owed Prince!

They shouldn't count as sales, cuz people have no choice in the matter. I'll use myself as an example. I'll be going to the show in July, but I don't want that piece of shit album. So why should my attendence at the show support the album itself? If I had a choice in the matter, I'd skip on the CD and just see the show.

OdysseyMiles said:

Sure. And it was never going to make a great difference to ticket sales but I still think it amounts to unfair distribution/purchase.

My 2 cents..

You pay $$ to see Prince in concert. In exchange for that money you are entitled to 2 things.

1. A seat at the concert.
2. The musicology CD.

The CD is bundled as part of the concert package that you are entitled to in exchange for your $$, whether or not you even know you're entitled to it. You paid for the show and the cd, you got the show and the cd. Even if all you really wanted was the show.

To the extent that Billboard tracks cds sold, these are cds that are sold as part of a package. Just because something is sold as part of a package doesn't mean it wasn't really sold. That's the dillema faced by Billboard. People who paid money got a cd. That's what Billboard tracks.

As far as choice goes, retailers don't always offer consumers choices. If a cd is released with a dvd performace attached to it, you can't break open the package and only pay for the cd if you have no use for the dvd. If that's the only way the retailer sells it then your choice is simple. Buy it or don't. If you buy it then it's still a sale.


.
[This message was edited Thu May 27 9:00:40 2004 by Universaluv]

Universaluv said:

All Prince is doing is taking full advantage of Billboard's own methodology. There's nothing wrong with that. The mag's editors made the decision to start counting sales from "nontraditional" outlets, Prince just found a way to make it work to his benefit.

Now, he's probably forced Billboard's hand a bit and they'll have to find a way to conclusively deal with this issue in the future, but that's their issue. It should have no bearing on what's happening with "Musicology."

Case in point: Michael Jackson became the first artist in history to debut at number one on the singles chart in 1995 with "You Are Not Alone." How did he accomplish this? The same way Prince is "boosting" his Soundscan numbers, by working the system:

Under Billboard's previous ranking methodology, singles could not chart unless they were available for sale. Traditionally, released singles would build sales and airplay points simultaneously and move up the charts. Sony figured out a way to make Billboard's rule work to their own advantage. They held back the commercial release of "You Are Not Alone" until the song was number one on the airplay chart, then they issued the single which naturally was the top seller of the week. The result was an instant Hot 100 chart-topper.

Did Sony do anything wrong? Of course not. They fully complied with Billboard's guidelines...just in a creative and advantageous way.

In the aftermath, once a few other superstars seized upon this tactic and debuted at number one, Billboard decided to let airplay-only singles chart as soon as they had enough points to appear.

To reiterate, I'm sure we'll see Billboard respond to "Musicology" with some type of rule change, but that's, as they say, another story.

Peace, David

please lay off the crack.

a) in the begining - the tickets were announced and the musicology cd was offered as a freebie to everyone that went to the gig. it wasn't 'included in the price as part of a package' at all.

how much did you pay for the ticket..? what does the FACE VALUE say on the ticket...? is it $10 less due to the price of the CD....no..? didn't think so.

b) NO-ONE bought the tickets to get the album. they wanted to see the gig. a gig that was advertised as SEEING THE HITS LIVE FOR THE LAST TIME. if this was a direct sale and not, as mentioned, a freebie, then why wasn't it offered as an opt in (or out) deal.

end of.

NME said:

So you actually believe that Prince just gave those cd's away for free out of the goodness of his purple little heart?

ok...


[This message was edited Thu May 27 18:05:02 2004 by Universaluv]

yes, they should definately count them....no doubt about it...