Hudson said:

MotownSubdivision said:

Hudson said:

I never said MJ and Madonna couldn't sell shitload of concert tickets at very high prices, only that there wasn't much public appeal out of their fanbase. The same applies to every artist nowadays with the exception of Adele and Carrie Underwood who are liked even by people who don't listen to their music.


The last time a Madonna tour was broadcast on tv was the Confessions Tour on NBC on Wednesday, 11/22/06. This was considered a losing performance by ratings analysts because everything on TV was much, much higher ten years ago. Due to the affluence of people who can afford Madonna tickets and their likelihood to have Showtime, I'm expecting 0.80 million for the Rebel Heart tour on Showtime.






_____________
-Wednesday’s Winners:
Jericho (CBS), Criminal Minds (CBS), CSI: NY (CBS)

-Wednesday’s Losers:
Madonna: The Confessions Tour Live From London (NBC), Day Break (ABC), One Tree Hill (CW), The Nine (ABC)

----------

CBS
8:00 p.m. Jericho
Viewers: 9.75 million (#1), Adults 18-49: 2.5/ 8 (#1)

9:00 p.m. Criminal Minds
Viewers: 16.56 million (#1), A18-49: 4.3/12 (#1)

10:00 p.m. CSI: NY
Viewers: 15.17 million (#1), A18-49: 4.2/12 (#1)

---

ABC
8:00 p.m. Show Me the Money (time period premiere)
Viewers: 7.78 million (#2), A18-49: 2.1/ 6 (#2t)

9:00 p.m. Day Break
Viewers: 5.12 million (#3), A18-49: 1.9/ 5 (#3)

10:00 p.m. The Nine
Viewers: 4.10 million (#3), A18-49: 1.5/ 4 (#3)

---

NBC
8:00 p.m. Madonna: The Confessions Tour Live From London (two-hours)
Viewers: 4.78 million (#4), A18-49: 1.8/ 5 (#4)

10:00 p.m. Medium
Viewers: 7.41 million (#2), a18-49: 2.5/ 8 (#2)

---

Fox:
8:00 p.m. Movie – “Cheaper By the Dozen”
Viewers: 6.42 million (#2), A18-49: 2.2/ 7 (#2)

---

The CW
8:00 p.m. America’s Next Top Model
Viewers: 6.18 (#3), A18-49: 1.9/ 6 (#4t)

9:00 p.m. One Tree Hill
Viewers: 2.53 million (#5), A18-49: 1.0/ 3 (#5)

source

Yea 4.78 million viewers is a ALOT compared 700,000 who tuned in for Beyonce

Beyonce is just overrated and the receipts you post prove that. How did a 40 something year old Madonna pull in more viewers than a 35 year old Beyonce who is allegedly the biggest pop star in the world???

There is nothing you can do or say to change that, the RECEIPTS tell a different story and Rebel Hearts air next year, Madonn will pull in more ratings than Beyonce, AGAIN.

[Edited 12/11/16 11:26am]

Hudson said:

BTW, here is Rihanna's response. Gotta love this woman because she is incapable of being phony.

I have just concluded that you are a Beyonce stan that can not be objective. Beyonce has done far more cruel things toward her peers versus RiRi thanking a tweet from a fan. She did not read the entire caption just the first part. Rihanna has class and her response was mature and respecful

im rooting for Anderson to win something.

[Edited 12/12/16 7:25am]

The Grammy show bowed down to the ratings god years ago. For those with short term memories, the Grammy shows were losers in ratings for awhile and also labeled the "GRANNIES" when the likes of no talents like Bob Dylan was getting nominations for album of the year. SO the producers bowed and the "committee" bowed and said lets change it up. It started doing these longer shows, more performances, HYPE duets that were pretty much disasters but it got them ratings. But the grammy show found itself having to keep it up, go for ratings so the nominations are a reflection of that year in year out. Lets also remember they give out about 15 awards on the show if even that many, some categories arent even seen. They have become nothhing more than a slightly upscale AMA show.

But wasn't it always about the show with the grammy's?

I mean they definitely kicked it up over the past say 15 or so years by making it a ratings thing. But their reputation was killing them by giving non-musical, no talent hacks like Steely Dan and Herbie Hancock AOTY awards over more deserving acts like Eminem, Amy Whinehouse and Kanye West.

CynicKill said:

But wasn't it always about the show with the grammy's?

I mean they definitely kicked it up over the past say 15 or so years by making it a ratings thing. But their reputation was killing them by giving non-musical, no talent hacks like Steely Dan and Herbie Hancock AOTY awards over more deserving acts like Eminem, Amy Whinehouse and Kanye West.

purplethunder3121 said:

CynicKill said:

But wasn't it always about the show with the grammy's?

I mean they definitely kicked it up over the past say 15 or so years by making it a ratings thing. But their reputation was killing them by giving non-musical, no talent hacks like Steely Dan and Herbie Hancock AOTY awards over more deserving acts like Eminem, Amy Whinehouse and Kanye West.

>

It's called sarcasm.

Look it up.

CynicKill said:

purplethunder3121 said:

>

It's called sarcasm.

Look it up.

lastdecember said:

The Grammy show bowed down to the ratings god years ago. For those with short term memories, the Grammy shows were losers in ratings for awhile and also labeled the "GRANNIES" when the likes of no talents like Bob Dylan was getting nominations for album of the year. SO the producers bowed and the "committee" bowed and said lets change it up. It started doing these longer shows, more performances, HYPE duets that were pretty much disasters but it got them ratings. But the grammy show found itself having to keep it up, go for ratings so the nominations are a reflection of that year in year out. Lets also remember they give out about 15 awards on the show if even that many, some categories arent even seen. They have become nothhing more than a slightly upscale AMA show.

The grammy show ratings get lower and lower each year. Even with all the "so called biggest stars" on the show, the ratings are still low. I have looked at all the stats of these shows and I notice the highest ratings in recent years was when MJ passed away, there was an increase in ratings on all the award shows across the map and they have slowly declined since then. And your right, the Grammys are like an upscale AMA's, the Grammys are a joke now which is why nobody watches. Its not a prestigious honor like it once was.

[Edited 12/14/16 12:22pm]

mjscarousal said:

CynicKill said:

lastdecember said:

mjscarousal said:

The grammy show ratings get lower and lower each year. Even with all the "so called biggest stars" on the show, the ratings are still low. I have looked at all the stats of these shows and I notice the highest ratings in recent years was when MJ passed away, there was an increase in ratings on all the award shows across the map and they have slowly declined since then. And your right, the Grammys are like an upscale AMA's, the Grammys are a joke now which is why nobody watches. Its not a prestigious honor like it once was.

[Edited 12/14/16 12:22pm]

The marketing backfired just like the catering to the young backfired in the industry the truth is the older crowd watches these shows, they stopped watching when it became nothing but new acts and no interest in them. Then of course the show tried to safe face and do these horrific duets, The Time with Rihanna ? Good lord what shit that was. Tina and Beyoncé was supposed to be the duet of the century and it was average to awful. This year will be interesting with the death of Prince where do they go with it, cause they know if they jam a bunch of today's stars out there it's going to be blasted worse than anything yet, rumor is he might get a lifetime achievement award, but I pray neither Alicia or Beyoncé are in town for this. Kids don't buy albums nor watch these shows so why go for the audience.

I don't think they are necessesarily going for that audience per se. I think it all comes down to politics because if they were REALLY catering to the "young audience" Rihanna would have gotten a nomination. I am still confused with how JB got a nomination over her and I don't think Lemonade deserves a nomination at all. David Bowie should have been nominated in that category, even if he didn't win it still was album of the year material and a worthy nomination. There are politics, money being paid, payola etc going on behind the scenes and I think the public see's that which is why they have no interest. I don't know about last years show but the year before last, the Grammys was the lowest in YEARS and they had everybody on there Bey, Kanye, Jay, Justin etc and Bey even performed and it was still the lowest in years. I just personally feel the public ain't feeling none of these artists of today, music sells and these award show ratings are at an all time low. It MIGHT be different this year if Adele comes so we will see. A lot of people seem to like her and she seems to have sparked some interest in music.

[Edited 12/14/16 12:41pm]

lastdecember said:

The Grammy show bowed down to the ratings god years ago. For those with short term memories, the Grammy shows were losers in ratings for awhile and also labeled the "GRANNIES" when the likes of no talents like Bob Dylan was getting nominations for album of the year. SO the producers bowed and the "committee" bowed and said lets change it up. It started doing these longer shows, more performances, HYPE duets that were pretty much disasters but it got them ratings. But the grammy show found itself having to keep it up, go for ratings so the nominations are a reflection of that year in year out. Lets also remember they give out about 15 awards on the show if even that many, some categories arent even seen. They have become nothhing more than a slightly upscale AMA show.

Are you calling God Dylan a no talented artist?

214 said:

Even though it was at a six year low last year, it still garnered an 8.5 rating and 25.3 million viewers.

A lot of people, and young ones too according to that rating, are still watching The Grammy's.

Oh BTW LL Cool J is NOt hosting this year. The carpool karaoke guy is. I'm saddened.

CynicKill said:

Even though it was at a six year low last year, it still garnered an 8.5 rating and 25.3 million viewers.

A lot of people, and young ones too according to that rating, are still watching The Grammy's.

Oh BTW LL Cool J is NOt hosting this year. The carpool karaoke guy is. I'm saddened.

This further proves the show is a joke

lastdecember said:

214 said:

Are you calling God Dylan a no talented artist?

No it was a joke it's how the marketing looks at older artists now

One does not joke with that.

Sly Stone To Receive Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award

Link

Identity said:

Sly Stone To Receive Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award

Link

The Grammys aint shit but this is long over due... Sly is a underrated and underappreciated Legend and genius.

lastdecember said:

mjscarousal said:

The grammy show ratings get lower and lower each year. Even with all the "so called biggest stars" on the show, the ratings are still low. I have looked at all the stats of these shows and I notice the highest ratings in recent years was when MJ passed away, there was an increase in ratings on all the award shows across the map and they have slowly declined since then. And your right, the Grammys are like an upscale AMA's, the Grammys are a joke now which is why nobody watches. Its not a prestigious honor like it once was.

[Edited 12/14/16 12:22pm]

The marketing backfired just like the catering to the young backfired in the industry the truth is the older crowd watches these shows, they stopped watching when it became nothing but new acts and no interest in them. Then of course the show tried to safe face and do these horrific duets, The Time with Rihanna ? Good lord what shit that was. Tina and Beyoncé was supposed to be the duet of the century and it was average to awful. This year will be interesting with the death of Prince where do they go with it, cause they know if they jam a bunch of today's stars out there it's going to be blasted worse than anything yet, rumor is he might get a lifetime achievement award, but I pray neither Alicia or Beyoncé are in town for this. Kids don't buy albums nor watch these shows so why go for the audience.

The hard part for them now is that they have to contend with Prince's passing in April and George's passing yesterday. BOTH need to be honored and respected. Do you cancel acts or do you make them part of the tribute?

They cannot ignore them. It won't be easy.

I wouldn't put it past them but it'll be hard to muck up the show with tributes to Prince and George. Hell throw in a redo to Bowie while you're at it. Cut the new performances short because the only ones that'll be interesting will be Bruno Mars and Solange. Bruno HAS to be involved with the Prince tribute somehow and since he missed the deadline himself I see this happening.

If the Grammys had any ounce of decency and respect, they would honor all the icons and pioneers in music we lost this year (David Bowie, Prince, George Michael, Maurice White, etc, and make that the emphasis of the award show BUT todays industry doesn't give a fuq about honoring real icons and legends. Lets HONOR and pay RESPECT to the TRUE pioneers. I am SO SICK of the disrespect the industry is giving to real music legends over this crap out now and none of this crap out now is going to be remembered anyway BUT we will STILL be listening to Prince, George Michael, etc. Fuq Lemonade, Fuq Views, Fuq all this crap and lets pay HONOR and RESPECT TO REAL MUSIC LEGENDS AND PIONEERS THAT SHAPED MUSIC THAT WE LOST.

[Edited 12/27/16 8:16am]

mjscarousal said:

Identity said:

Sly Stone To Receive Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award

Link

The Grammys aint shit but this is long over due... Sly is a underrated and underappreciated Legend and genius.

He really is, specially after Riot.

Don't forget about Cohen