New topic
PrintableRaze said: lastdecember said: Sorry but soundscan is a purchase of what stores order and then what is shipped and re-ordered it is NOT over the counter sales, its what arrives in the stores and what they key into their computers at their headquarters, trust me i know i did this bullshit for 17 years. True soundscan is more accurate than Riaa certifications but not by a big difference. Why do you think albums fall so damn quick? Because the stores dont reorder what was shipped right away if they need too. Proof of this point, if a store gets 250 copies of Kanye West shipped to their store from their warehouse, and then when it arrives at the stores all 250 get stolen, those are not lost, those may be lost to the stores $$$ but the label still sold 250. If you dont believe me check with Sonya Askew she used to write for Vibe and she was the Urban buyer for Sam Goody, and i worked for her as an assistant and this was always the discussion. Nope, you're wrong. What arrives at the stores is the number that is shipped, and that is the number that the RIAA uses in determining gold, platinum, etc. status. Soundscan numbers are reported by scanning the item at checkout. Sorry, but you're just wrong about this. Well keep avoiding the truth but Soundscan despite more accurate of sales is NOT tracking every single sale over the counter, it doesnt work that way. There is a difference in what a company buys and what arrives in stores, at least at chains and thats what the difference, The Eagles gave 3 million copies to Walmart, but 800,000 were sent to stores initially which is what is tracked. When companies warhouses ship to the stores there are your numbers, the difference with the RIAA is they track what is sitting at the warehouse, Soundscan doesnt track that it tracks what goes into the stores, and then what is replenished by stores, when they run out and have to restock from their warheouses. All Soundscan has done is removed one step but it is not 100% accurate its about 75-80% depending on the volume shipped of an artist. This is why you will see what we called "Dumping" labels will call up a companys buyer and get them to over order for the stores to get bigger chart positions, and from that they would cut the stores discounts, alot of times drop the cd wholesale price or give a discount for purchasing a larger quantity. Is Soundscan more accurate? Yes of course because now its going into the actual stores and what they are getting and re-ordering, but its not tracking counter sales to that extreme, its still going off of orders and re orders. Like i said once its in that store physically its sold, there is a difference between store allocating and warehouse allocating, huge difference, thats why stores scan them into their inventory when they get them from the labels/warehouses. I mean what if every cashier in America at a music store hated Kanye West and when a customer was buying them they scanned a Kenny Chesney Cd instead or dummy skued the sale (generic numbers for stores) do you think Kanye would have zero sales week one, come on, do you think something this important is being put into a cashiers hands at a store who hates their job and is underpaid, not the way it goes. "We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
VikFoxx said: lastdecember said: Elton was always an albums artist like Stevie Wonder was like Prince was like Billy Joel, these are artists that had tons of "singles" (real singles, not airplay singles) but they also sell tons of albums for the most part.As for repacking hits, thats what labels do to make their money, mainly because they dont have to worry about paying for promotion or working out a financial deal with the artists, its 100% profit for the label NOT the artist at all. I do think the single elimination was the dumbest thing the industry ever did, and it was a joint conspiracy with Soundscan and labels and radio, the fact is that singles sell fine in the UK people still buy them, mainly for bonus tracks or mixes, its just a smarter way to market, but the 99 cent idea is dumb, and it is "dumping", and they shouldnt even be counted as sales, there should be a commercial single release and that should be the song you are able to buy for 99 cents, not every song on an album. i think that whole business about the "decline" of the single in the mid 90's was all BULLSHIT.. single sales were at all time high and the ONLY reason they declined was when company's stopped releasing them..then they were saying "see?? single sales are way down this year!" yes of course! that's because you guys stopped releasing them!...i think Rock music was hurt most by all this.. because the hip hop artist continued to pump out singles and the rock artists wouldnt release a physical single only a single to radio..so what happens? the billboard chart was filled with Hip Hop and radio saw that and geared their playlist to what was popular in billboard and in my opinion Rock has NEVER recovered from that Exactly when you take away something of course the sales DECLINE, but how come single sales for AMERICAN artists arent declining in the UK, and those singles arent cheap either. Yeah i agree, this is where ROCK put the bullet in its head, along with the Grunge faze and things like No Doubt not releasing "dont Speak" as a single or Alanis not releasing "You Outta Know" or Jewel not releasing and the list went on and on. The labels can say they wanted to PUSH these acts as album artists, but thats bull, because they were just coming from the 80's when SINGLES and ALBUMS were big, i mean we can run down the list of albums in the 80's that had between 3-7 "physical singles" that sold and the albums sold millions, and it had nothing to really do with talent, it had more to do with the diversity of the music, and the playlists being opened WIDE to all music and video stations not being bought out, that all happend once Soundscan took over in late 1991 early 92. I know people swear by Soundscan but its nothing more than a TOOL of a label to prove its wealth and now its so called decline. "We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TonyVanDam said: lastdecember said: Im not buying into that, i hear that complaint all the time and it doesnt hold water at all, mainly because i can look through tons of crappy records i bought in the 80s where i had to save my allowance for weeks to buy, i wasnt crying about it. Sorry but this era of consumer wants everything for nothing, dont work like that, if you dont want it dont buy it, if you are suspect that the Soulja album is going to suck dont buy it. .....and who's fault was it for wasting all of the money on albums that were only good for 3 songs at best?!? 
Of course it was mine but i wasnt sitting at home in 1985 crying that this Jack Wagner album sucks and thinking it was the end of life and saying dumb stuff like "Wow if music sucks like this i'll just steal it" i mean im tired of that argument or how it should be 99 cents cause thats all its worth. Look music is what it is, its a choice to buy it, its not a necessity of life, it may fill our lives with great moments of course, but its not a necessity. "We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lastdecember said: TonyVanDam said: .....and who's fault was it for wasting all of the money on albums that were only good for 3 songs at best?!?
Of course it was mine but i wasnt sitting at home in 1985 crying that this Jack Wagner album sucks and thinking it was the end of life and saying dumb stuff like "Wow if music sucks like this i'll just steal it" i mean im tired of that argument or how it should be 99 cents cause thats all its worth. Look music is what it is, its a choice to buy it, its not a necessity of life, it may fill our lives with great moments of course, but its not a necessity. That's why I don't follow the logic of that argument either. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lastdecember said: Raze said: Nope, you're wrong. What arrives at the stores is the number that is shipped, and that is the number that the RIAA uses in determining gold, platinum, etc. status. Soundscan numbers are reported by scanning the item at checkout. Sorry, but you're just wrong about this. Well keep avoiding the truth but Soundscan despite more accurate of sales is NOT tracking every single sale over the counter, it doesnt work that way. There is a difference in what a company buys and what arrives in stores, at least at chains and thats what the difference, The Eagles gave 3 million copies to Walmart, but 800,000 were sent to stores initially which is what is tracked. When companies warhouses ship to the stores there are your numbers, the difference with the RIAA is they track what is sitting at the warehouse, Soundscan doesnt track that it tracks what goes into the stores, and then what is replenished by stores, when they run out and have to restock from their warheouses. All Soundscan has done is removed one step but it is not 100% accurate its about 75-80% depending on the volume shipped of an artist. This is why you will see what we called "Dumping" labels will call up a companys buyer and get them to over order for the stores to get bigger chart positions, and from that they would cut the stores discounts, alot of times drop the cd wholesale price or give a discount for purchasing a larger quantity. Is Soundscan more accurate? Yes of course because now its going into the actual stores and what they are getting and re-ordering, but its not tracking counter sales to that extreme, its still going off of orders and re orders. Like i said once its in that store physically its sold, there is a difference between store allocating and warehouse allocating, huge difference, thats why stores scan them into their inventory when they get them from the labels/warehouses. I mean what if every cashier in America at a music store hated Kanye West and when a customer was buying them they scanned a Kenny Chesney Cd instead or dummy skued the sale (generic numbers for stores) do you think Kanye would have zero sales week one, come on, do you think something this important is being put into a cashiers hands at a store who hates their job and is underpaid, not the way it goes. Wow, you're totally clueless... Remember a smile is the quickest way to improve your apperance... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vanilli said: I tell you what..when artists start making albums worth buying THE WHOLE album for, I will gladly shell out more than 99 cents per track. Till then, I think Steve Jobs and everyone else are kings for not making us, the consumers, buy a shitty product for 2-3 standout tracks.
I believe it was Michael Jackson who once said, every song should have the strength to be a single. I agree. co-sign x_____ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |