Week 17

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
From what I have seen, that is definitely not the case. The vast majority of people at the show tend to be people who not only own the new album, but a wide portion of the rest of the bands catalog as well.

Do you make up these "facts" as you go along, or did you really conduct a scientific survey to make this determination? Because I agree with the other guy, only a small fraction of concertgoers knows every song in the catalog, and the rest are there to hear the classics. Hey, I don't have proof either, and this automatically makes my statement an opinion. But you seem bent on showing everyone here that you have the facts, when you're merely speculating like the rest of us.
 
Here's how I define a real success. Take Taylor Swift's current album. It was released last year and still hasn't let go of a Top 20 spot. 8 weeks at #1. Still selling 30k+ every week in the US, and has sold close to 4 million around the world since its November 2008 release. Since it was released last year, the overall figures are conveniently left out of Maoil's charts, like Lady Gaga's total numbers. The bad economy hasn't prevented people from buying Taylor Swift's album at a steady clip, while NLOTH is languishing outside the top 50 in the US and UK for some time now without a hit single only 4 months after its release. And it's not like 'Fearless' is a trashy album. It's about as well-reviewed as NLOTH (73 on metacritic).

So NLOTH isn't a total failure. U2 is still going to make their money touring. But the album sure isn't this gleaming commercial success some people make it out to be.
 
The bad economy hasn't prevented people from buying Taylor Swift's album at a steady clip, while NLOTH is languishing outside the top 50 in the US and UK for some time now without a hit single only 4 months after its release.

So NLOTH isn't a total failure. U2 is still going to make their money touring. But the album sure isn't this gleaming commercial success some people make it out to be.

IMO the rate of Taylor Swift's sales vs. U2's are not really comparable. Taylor Swift is an artist that is just finding success and that people are discovering all the time, hence the steady pace of album sales. U2 has been around for nearly 30 years, and they've built up a fanbase. That's why U2 sells a lot of albums right off the bat and then declines. So Taylor Swift's strong, constant sales just indicate that she is a fresh act who is expanding her fanbase. That doesn't indicate that somehow she's more popular than U2, or that they are a failure while she's a success because the rate of album sales are different.

As for NLOTH, I disagree with you that it hasn't had a hit song. True it hasn't had a hit at the massive level of Vertigo or Beautiful Day, but Get On Your Boots was a successful hit single that just about any musical act around would be jealous of. It was #1 in Ireland and Spain, #3 in Canada, #4 in Italy, #5 in Norway, #6 in France, and #8 in Sweden. So it was a top ten hit in 7 countries and performed strongly in other places, too. No, it wasn't an epic global smash like Viva La Vida but to say that GOYB wasn't a hit song is just not true.

NLOTH is the #1 selling album released this year and we are into July. With more promotion of the singles it could have sold even more copies, I agree. But only ONE musical artist in the world can claim to be #1 of 2009 -- and so far that's U2.
 
Here's how I define a real success. Take Taylor Swift's current album. It was released last year and still hasn't let go of a Top 20 spot. 8 weeks at #1. Still selling 30k+ every week in the US, and has sold close to 4 million around the world since its November 2008 release. Since it was released last year, the overall figures are conveniently left out of Maoil's charts, like Lady Gaga's total numbers. The bad economy hasn't prevented people from buying Taylor Swift's album at a steady clip, while NLOTH is languishing outside the top 50 in the US and UK for some time now without a hit single only 4 months after its release. And it's not like 'Fearless' is a trashy album. It's about as well-reviewed as NLOTH (73 on metacritic).

So NLOTH isn't a total failure. U2 is still going to make their money touring. But the album sure isn't this gleaming commercial success some people make it out to be.

The album is doing poorly in the US, UK, Canada & Australia. It is NO success in those areas but in fairness it is not a flop(it will be plat in the US & UK by the end of the year). However, in Spain, Italy, France and Poland it is doing VERY well. Now, I know these are much smaller markets but it is doing well in those area's nevertheless. Overall, in America it is very disapointing but world wide it is a success...at the moment (its #1 right now). This could change based on the year-end sales list. We dont know what the climate will show us. Perhaps the 3 mill that U2 has sold thus far will be top 3, then it would be a success. However, if the 3 mill ends up not in the top 10, then it is very disappointing. And who knows what their final number will be........
 
As for NLOTH, I disagree with you that it hasn't had a hit song. True it hasn't had a hit at the massive level of Vertigo or Beautiful Day, but Get On Your Boots was a successful hit single that just about any musical act around would be jealous of. It was #1 in Ireland and Spain, #3 in Canada, #4 in Italy, #5 in Norway, #6 in France, and #8 in Sweden. So it was a top ten hit in 7 countries and performed strongly in other places, too. No, it wasn't an epic global smash like Viva La Vida but to say that GOYB wasn't a hit song is just not true.

As much as I understand where you're coming from, I cant agree that GOYB was a hit. It just wasn't. I dont think it was a failure but it was very far from a hit. It had high entry points in most countries because it was the 1st single by U2, so people bought it and played it on the radio just because.
 
Doesn't matter. Your choosing to use a non-mediatraffic sales figure which is NOT exact, and very debatable, while at the same time excluding non-mediatraffic sales for U2.




Initially shipments typically outnumber actual sales figure, especially when were dealing with the 4th quarter of the year and Christmas sales. Its more likely that the album did not pass the 70,000 mark in Australia until some time in 2009. Retailers stock up big time on product and if actual sales were 100,000 at the time as you allege, shipments would have been over 140,000 and and the album would be certified double platinum.




People concerned with determining ACCURATELY what the most popular album of 1987 was, are not going to be concerned with sales from 1985 or 1995, they will be concerned with how the album sold in 1987 period.

So again, would you use sales from 1985 or 1986 to determine the biggest selling album of 1987?



Actually you wouldn't as any look at total soundscan results would show.



Thats absurd, especially in this environment where albums sales have been declining each year since 2000. The vast majority of people make their purchases, vacation plans, etc. on the Calander year. Taxes are paid in the Spring, a possible vacation in the summer, Christmas in December.

Given the decline of the music industry year after year, its simply inaccurate to be comparing albums from 2006, 2007, and yes even 2008, to what an album is selling in 2009.

Albums released in 2008 had a much stronger market to sell in. Most of the year had taken place before the financial crises of late 2008.

It is grossly inaccurate to be comparing albums from the sales environment of 2006, 2007, or even 2008 to 2009.

Be consistent, given the rapidly declining market, and simply compare 2009 sales TO 2009 sales.

NLOTH and virtually any other album released in 2009, would have higher sales at the moment if it had been released in 2008!



January-March sales are relevant to 2009's total sales, July to December 2008 is NOT. Its a different year, and a enormously different economic environment. ANY artist who was lucky enough to release an album in 2008 has a built in sales advantage because of the better economic climate in 2008 as well as a music market that had not declined to levels currently seen in 2009.

The year starts out generally with low sales in the 1st quarter, fluctuates during the 2nd and 3rd quarters, before ending on a very high note in the 4th quarter. Top 100 albums of the year, and other year end list are based on the calander year, or something very close to it because that is the general economic cycle.

If the market continues to decline year after year in 2010, 2011, it won't be accurate to be comparing the sales of NLOTH in 2009 to the sales of an album released in 2011.



There has been a widely reported annual decrease in album sales each and every year since 2000. The music industry has been in decline since 2000. Every week Billboard magazine compares sales to the same week in the year before and there is a substantial decrease shown. It also compares sales to the recent past week, and sales are sometimes up, sometimes down. A few weeks or a few months in the same calander year can of course be compared because the albums are selling in the same general economic environment.

The Chirstmas sales season of the year before is definitely a factor, but its also because its a different economic cycle from 2009 in which on average sales were higher, regardless of the season.



There is no evidence of that at all. In fact, if we just went with hard sales figures, no estimates, NLOTH is out in front.

Again, your creating a figure that highly debatable. Your then being inconsistent by adding this created figure to mediatraffic numbers without considering non-mediatraffic sales figures for NLOTH. Its totally inaccurate and inconsistent and you will never see mediatraffic, Billboard, soundscan, or any other sales tracking organization use such logic in comparing sales.



There is no evidence that whatever she sold in 2008, something you don't really know, will have put her sales ahead of NLOTH this week. Its simply inaccurate and inconsistent to be making a comparison using created 2008 sales figures which are highly debatable while at the same time restricting what sales figures for NLOTH to only 2009 figures mediatraffic sales figures.

If one is concerned about relevant and accurate figures, you use what is known from the same sources, in the same economic cycle, to make the comparison.

I find a bit difficult to understand the point that is being argued here. As far as 2009 goes, NLOTH is the biggest selling album. So naturally it has sold more copies than The Fame. As for 2008 sales of The Fame, doesn´t mediatraffic keep track of them too? If so, adding those figures to the 2009 figures would yield the total sales of The Fame. Compare that to the 3 M of NLOTH and you will know which is the album that has sold the most up to now.
 
As for 2008 sales of The Fame, doesn´t mediatraffic keep track of them too? If so, adding those figures to the 2009 figures would yield the total sales of The Fame. Compare that to the 3 M of NLOTH and you will know which is the album that has sold the most up to now.

In order for mediatraffic to count your album sales, you have to sell enough to make their top 40 chart. The Fame never sold enough to make the top 40 of the mediatraffic chart in 2008. There for, there are NO sales at all that mediatraffic has from 2008 for The Fame that could be added to the the 2009 figures.
 
Do you make up these "facts" as you go along, or did you really conduct a scientific survey to make this determination?

Well, if you actually read what I said, you should know that I did not state as a FACT, and no, I did not conduct a scientific survey. All I said was that based on what I had seen, that was definitely not the case.

Because I agree with the other guy, only a small fraction of concertgoers knows every song in the catalog, and the rest are there to hear the classics.

WOW, I've never said that every concertgoer knows every song in the U2 catalog. I simply said most people who go to a U2 concert know more than FIVE U2 songs. There a lots of people who have never been to a U2 concert, never owned anything by U2, and THEY know more than FIVE U2 songs.

Hey, I don't have proof either, and this automatically makes my statement an opinion. But you seem bent on showing everyone here that you have the facts, when you're merely speculating like the rest of us.

LOL, I never used the word fact, when I said, based on what I had seen, most people at U2 concerts knew more than five songs.
 
Here's how I define a real success. Take Taylor Swift's current album. It was released last year and still hasn't let go of a Top 20 spot. 8 weeks at #1. Still selling 30k+ every week in the US, and has sold close to 4 million around the world since its November 2008 release.

Look, Gibson Explorer has given his definition of what "real success" actually is, and its 3,872,000 copies sold worldwide. So here is the ultimate question for Gibson Explorer, we'll he admit that NLOTH is a "real success" when it passes the 3,872,000 sales mark?:wink:

Since it was released last year, the overall figures are conveniently left out of Maoil's charts, like Lady Gaga's total numbers.

Mediatraffic does not have any numbers for Lady Gaga in 2008 because she did not sell enough in any single week to make the chart. Even if the album did make the chart, the sales would not count towards determining the most popular album of 2009. Taylor Swift had the benefit of having an album out in the 4th quarter of 2008 which gives it a nice sales kick that no album released in the 1st quarter of 2009 would get. In any event, most organizations that compile sales figures to determine the most popular album of 2009 will not be using 2008 sales figures.

The bad economy hasn't prevented people from buying Taylor Swift's album at a steady clip
The bad economy impacts ALL albums in the market currently. But Taylor benefits from the fact that she had her album out in 2008 just before the Christmas buying season.


while NLOTH is languishing outside the top 50 in the US and UK for some time now without a hit single only 4 months after its release.

WEEK 25 UNITED KINGDOM ALBUMS SALES "YEAR TO DATE"

Rank - Sales - TITLE - Artist
01 - 685,706 - ONLY BY THE NIGHT - Kings Of Leon
02 - 543,971 - THE FAME - Lady GaGa
03 - 482,312 - IT'S NOT ME IT'S YOU - Lily Allen
04 - 390,366 - INVADERS MUST DIE - Prodigy
05 - 370,334 - I AM…SASHA FIERCE - Beyonce
06 - 341,033 - THE CIRCUS - Take That
07 - 312,604 - NO LINE ON THE HORIZON - U2
08 - 311,490 - SONGS FOR YOU TRUTHS FOR ME - James Morrison
09 - 289,340 - RELAPSE - Eminem
10 - 287,568 - ROCKFERRY - Duffy
11 - 277,763 - THE SELDOM SEEN KID - Elbow
12 - 274,387 - FUNHOUSE - Pink
13 - 273,825 - DAY AND AGE - Killers
14 - 246,135 - FLEET FOXES - Fleet Foxes
15 - 239,627 - THE SCRIPT - The Script
16 - 234,246 - THE COLLECTION - Annie Lennox
17 - 233,048 - FREEDOM - Akon
18 - 212,289 - 21ST CENTURY BREAKDOWN - Green Day
19 - 200,771 - SONGS FOR MY MOTHER - Ronan Keating
20 - 187,785 - THE ALESHA SHOW - Alesha Dixon


One question Gibson, where is your definition of success, Taylor Swift?

So NLOTH isn't a total failure. U2 is still going to make their money touring. But the album sure isn't this gleaming commercial success some people make it out to be.

LOL, yep, its only the best selling album of the year worldwide!:wink:
 
The album is doing poorly in the US, UK, Canada & Australia. It is NO success in those areas........

Week 25 YEAR TO DATE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES

Rank - Sales - TITLE - Artist
01 - 1,282,142 - FEARLESS - Taylor Swift
02 - 1,142,209 - HANNAH MONTANA: THE MOVIE - Soundtrack
03 - 1,121,546 - RELAPSE - Eminem
04 - 953,854 - TWILIGHT - Soundtrack
05 - 938,322 - THE FAME - Lady GaGa
06 - 934,471 - NO LINE ON THE HORIZON - U2
07 - 890,268 - DARK HORSE - Nickelback
08 - 806,389 - UNSTOPPABLE - Rascal Flatts
09 - 794,530 - I AM…SASHA FIERCE - Beyonce
10 - 641,578 - BIG WHISKEY AND THE GROOGRUX KING - Dave Matthews
11 - 621,371 - ALL I EVER WANTED - Kelly Clarkson
12 - 607,886 - INTUITION - Jamie Foxx
13 - 596,161 - NOW 30 - Various
14 - 589,403 - 21ST CENTURY BREAKDOWN - Green Day
15 - 586,271 - THE FRAY - The Fray
16 - 546,554 - WORKING ON A DREAM - Bruce Springsteen
17 - 536,065 - 808S AND HEARTBREAK - Kanye West
18 - 526,432 - ONLY BY THE NIGHT - Kings Of Leon
19 - 462,586 - CIRCUS - Britney Spears
20 - 457,909 - FUNHOUSE - Pink





WEEK 25 UK ALBUMS SALES YTD

Rank - Sales - TITLE - Artist
01 - 685,706 - ONLY BY THE NIGHT - Kings Of Leon
02 - 543,971 - THE FAME - Lady GaGa
03 - 482,312 - IT'S NOT ME IT'S YOU - Lily Allen
04 - 390,366 - INVADERS MUST DIE - Prodigy
05 - 370,334 - I AM…SASHA FIERCE - Beyonce
06 - 341,033 - THE CIRCUS - Take That
07 - 312,604 - NO LINE ON THE HORIZON - U2
08 - 311,490 - SONGS FOR YOU TRUTHS FOR ME - James Morrison
09 - 289,340 - RELAPSE - Eminem
10 - 287,568 - ROCKFERRY - Duffy
11 - 277,763 - THE SELDOM SEEN KID - Elbow
12 - 274,387 - FUNHOUSE - Pink
13 - 273,825 - DAY AND AGE - Killers
14 - 246,135 - FLEET FOXES - Fleet Foxes
15 - 239,627 - THE SCRIPT - The Script
16 - 234,246 - THE COLLECTION - Annie Lennox
17 - 233,048 - FREEDOM - Akon
18 - 212,289 - 21ST CENTURY BREAKDOWN - Green Day
19 - 200,771 - SONGS FOR MY MOTHER - Ronan Keating
20 - 187,785 - THE ALESHA SHOW - Alesha Dixon

How is having the 6th biggest selling album of the year in the United States and the 7th biggest selling album of the year in the United Kingdom considered "doing poorly" or "no success"?
 
These are the most up to date figures for the UK, excluding the current week

1 Kings of Leon 700,356
2 Lady GaGa 559,784
3 Lily Allen 492,463
4 Prodigy 402,722
5 Beyonce 378,278
6 Take That 360,096
7 James Morrison 316,392
8 U2 314,108
9 Eminem 299,111
10 Duffy 293,541
11 Elbow 281,980
12 Pink 280,442
13 Killers 289,993
14 Fleet Foxes 251,448
15 Script 247,557
16 Akon 236,243
17 Annie Lennox 235,671
18 Green Day 219,266
19 Ronan Keating 201,845
20 Alesha Dixon 190,200


Add 7000 for Eminem, 6000 to Duffy, 3800 to Elbow and 5600 to Pink for the current ones
 
These are the most up to date figures for the UK, excluding the current week

1 Kings of Leon 700,356
2 Lady GaGa 559,784
3 Lily Allen 492,463
4 Prodigy 402,722
5 Beyonce 378,278
6 Take That 360,096
7 James Morrison 316,392
8 U2 314,108
9 Eminem 299,111
10 Duffy 293,541
11 Elbow 281,980
12 Pink 280,442
13 Killers 289,993
14 Fleet Foxes 251,448
15 Script 247,557
16 Akon 236,243
17 Annie Lennox 235,671
18 Green Day 219,266
19 Ronan Keating 201,845
20 Alesha Dixon 190,200


Add 7000 for Eminem, 6000 to Duffy, 3800 to Elbow and 5600 to Pink for the current ones

Gibsons definition of success, Taylor Swift, still not showing up in the UK top 20.
 
Taylor Swift's sugary country music is only for the american cowboys and cowgirls.

Please do not compare U2 with this shit.
 
Seeing that the UK Top 20 lacks American country artists, I'd say that's no surprise.

Hey, you said Taylor Swift is the definition of success, not me. By the way, that US top 20 is not filled with American country artist either. In fact, Rascal Flatts are the only other one besides Taylor Swift.
 
Hey, you said Taylor Swift is the definition of success, not me. By the way, that US top 20 is not filled with American country artist either. In fact, Rascal Flatts are the only other one besides Taylor Swift.

Doesn't matter. The US top 20 is far more likely to have country artists. You should know this already.

I can't understand how you are obviously trying to ridicule the fact that I call 'Fearless' a success. If 'Fearless' is not a commercial success, then how can you consider NLOTH to be one when it has sold less in the US and worldwide and is already on its way out of the Billboard Top 100?
 
I understand full well how music was selling back then and outside of a few exceptions you could see the Internet starting to affect music sales as far back as when the MP3 was first conceived. The music industry was just too stupid to see it or do anything about it back then and when they started to do something about it it was far too late.

U2 has a distinct advantage when it comes to initial CD sales compared to other bands because as I said they have a much larger hardcore fan base then most bands that have stayed with them through thick and thin and will by anything just because it is U2 and not because of the actual music on the album itself.

U2 are not stupid though they were smart to start the tour in Europe because I truly believe when this tour hits the US the media is going to have a field day in dismantling it saying its megalomania all over again. Do I agree with the media, no but I can pretty much state for a fact that this is going to happen. The media works in cycles they put you up on a pedestal for a few years but after those few years they enjoy shooting you down off that pedestal even more. Also U2 have inflated their sales figure on recent albums by releasing the CD in multiple different formats that all count the same on the statistical sheet. One thing about stats is they can always be swayed in your favor by creatively making it happen that way. U2 know their fan base and they know that a portion of that fan base possibly up to 30 percent will buy multiple copies of the same album because they have to have everything. In my opinion these secondary sales have added 20-30 percent on the last 3 albums including this one. I am sure somebody will say that this number is much smaller then that but I have my doubts that it is. The older U2 gets the more of a nostalgia group they will become whether they like it or not.

You can pat U2 on the back if you like if you deem this album a success sales wise in my opinion it is not.

U2 are the last of the rock stars but basically are living off past catalog hits and reputation at this point, they will be the last super group ever to be assembled.

I will also say this the concept of an "Album" will be dead within 10 years. There will be no physical CD shops, it will be all digital and some people will choose to pay for this service and the majority will not. Therefore music is going to fall and erode even further then it already has.

I think this is one of U2s best albums its a top 3 album for me, but times have changed. U2 has been behind the times in promoting this album. Maybe it could have done better. Id have been happy if it sold as much as POP but it has not and wont.
 
Doesn't matter. The US top 20 is far more likely to have country artists. You should know this already.

Doesn't matter. You said Taylor Swift is the definition of success.

I can't understand how you are obviously trying to ridicule the fact that I call 'Fearless' a success. If 'Fearless' is not a commercial success, then how can you consider NLOTH to be one when it has sold less in the US and worldwide and is already on its way out of the Billboard Top 100?

Taylor Swift is not the issue here. Its your overwhelming unwillingness to see that NLOTH is in fact an extremely successful album.

Your on record here as calling NLOTH a failure after its first week of sales LOL. That first week of sales is the biggest single week of sales for any album worldwide in 2009, and the 2nd biggest week in the USA in 2009.

The fact is, NLOTH will finish out 2009 as the biggest selling album of the year or at least on of the top 5 biggest sellers of the year worldwide. So its either success on the level of Joshua Tree in 1987 or success on the level Achtung Baby in 1992 or HTDAAB in 2005.
 
Are there any more albums coming out this year that will trouble NLOTH?

Amy Winehouse (if it's released this year) I guess

Shakira, Mika, Christina Aguilera, and Mariah Carey might be releasing this year, with the right singles they could possibly reach NLOTH's success

Any other albums out there that people can think of. Right now it seems like only Lady GaGa and Eminem have a shot, save for another album having some massive single
 
I understand full well how music was selling back then and outside of a few exceptions you could see the Internet starting to affect music sales as far back as when the MP3 was first conceived. and wont.

If you really understood the differences in the music industry between 2000 and 2008 or 1997 and 2009, you would not be comparing the sales of POP to the sales of NLOTH. You can compare how those albums finished in their respective years, but you can't compare the actual units sold. POP sold nearly 6 million copies in 1997 and that was enough to make it the 20th biggest selling album of the year worldwide in 1997.

In 2009, NOBODY can sell 6 million copies in just 12 months. Sales of just 4 million or 4.5 million copies are so large today that an album that achieves that sales level within the year will likely be the biggest seller of the year by a good margin!

U2 has a distinct advantage when it comes to initial CD sales compared to other bands because as I said they have a much larger hardcore fan base then most bands that have stayed with them through thick and thin and will by anything just because it is U2 and not because of the actual music on the album itself.

Its only an advantage in the first week of release and U2 are far from being the only veteran artist in the industry with such a built in advantage. Plus, although you consider it an advantage, its not one that U2 are insured to always keep. Just ask R.E.M., Def Leppard, ZZ Top, Pearl Jam, Aerosmith etc. The so called built in advantage can easily erode, and working to keep the fanbase along with attracting new fans can be equally difficult.

U2 are not stupid though they were smart to start the tour in Europe because I truly believe when this tour hits the US the media is going to have a field day in dismantling it saying its megalomania all over again. Do I agree with the media, no but I can pretty much state for a fact that this is going to happen. The media works in cycles they put you up on a pedestal for a few years but after those few years they enjoy shooting you down off that pedestal even more.

Most reviews will probably be very positive and people will be talking about all the attendance records that U2 will be breaking. U2 have already set attendance records in Boston and the New York City area with their U2 360 shows. The Washington DC show may in fact be the largest attended concert(non-festival) on the East Coast of the United States in history.


Also U2 have inflated their sales figure on recent albums by releasing the CD in multiple different formats that all count the same on the statistical sheet. One thing about stats is they can always be swayed in your favor by creatively making it happen that way. U2 know their fan base and they know that a portion of that fan base possibly up to 30 percent will buy multiple copies of the same album because they have to have everything. In my opinion these secondary sales have added 20-30 percent on the last 3 albums including this one. I am sure somebody will say that this number is much smaller then that but I have my doubts that it is.

There was NO special edition for "All That You Can't Leave Behind". There was only one for HTDAAB Bomb and it only accounted for around 10% of sales the first week of release, and much less after that time.

In 2009, releasing the album in multiple configerations is common, but based on the number of people who bought the special edition for HTDAAB, the number of people who buy more than one edition of the album is small.

The older U2 gets the more of a nostalgia group they will become whether they like it or not.

That seems just to be wishful thinking on your part. Whats hot today in 2009, is what is selling the most, and right now, the biggest selling album of 2009, the one that citizens of Earth have bought the most of in 2009 is NO LINE ON THE HORIZON!

U2 are the last of the rock stars but basically are living off past catalog hits and reputation at this point, they will be the last super group ever to be assembled.

If that were true, they would not have a new album even in the top 10 worldwide, let alone an album that had outsold every other album in 2009! When was the last time the Rolling Stones had one of the 10 biggest selling albums around the world for a given year? 1981

I will also say this the concept of an "Album" will be dead within 10 years. There will be no physical CD shops, it will be all digital and some people will choose to pay for this service and the majority will not. Therefore music is going to fall and erode even further then it already has.

In case you did not know, digital album sales are counted in the sales totals listed above. When it comes to what people are actually willing to spend their money on, U2 are on top way ahead of the pack, even at their age and after all the time they have been in the industry.

I think this is one of U2s best albums its a top 3 album for me, but times have changed. U2 has been behind the times in promoting this album. Maybe it could have done better.

So who has been really successful in promoting their album this year? Who is really hot this year? Well, what album has sold the most copies this year? ANSWER: NO LINE ON THE HORIZON

Best Selling Albums in 2009 WORLDWIDE as of WEEK 27

1. U2 No Line On The Horizon 3,013,000

2. Lady Gaga The Fame 2,600,000
3. Eminem Relapse 2,098,000
4. Kings Of Leon Only By The Night 1,955,000
5. Beyoncé I Am... Sasha Fierce 1,907,000
6. Taylor Swift Fearless 1,914,000
7. Soundtrack Twilight 1,818,000
8. Soundtrack Hannah Montana: The Movie 1,730,000
9. Green Day 21st Century Breakdown 1,610,000
10. Pink Funhouse 1,536,000
 
The difference between POP and this album though is Zooropa was not a hit by a long shot and U2 had not had a hit record since Achtung Baby which was released almost 6 full years before POP and in the music industry that is an eternity. U2 are coming off 2 successful albums in ATYCLB and Bomb, so this album is basically riding the coat tails of those. I think that its a much better album myself but the fact is that it has only sold 1/3rd of what Bomb did and 1/4th of what ATYCLB did.

In the business world no matter what the circumnstances are behind those declines that would be considered a failure. Whether NLOTH is the biggest selling album of the year or not. If Coldplay sold only 3 million albums with Viva La Vida it would have been considered a failure. I hold U2 to the same standard.
 
Everyone is selling less. :shrug:

Even the hottest band of the 00s Coldplay - unless I'm missing something - sold less with Viva la vida than X and Y. And they had a hit both times.
 
The difference between POP and this album though is Zooropa was not a hit by a long shot and U2 had not had a hit record since Achtung Baby which was released almost 6 full years before POP and in the music industry that is an eternity..

While Zooropa did not sell as much as Achtung in its first year, it did sell 6.5 million copies compared to Achtung's 10 million for the first year of sales. Thats a hit in most people's books unless your minimum standard for having a hit record is always the sales of Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby.

U2 are coming off 2 successful albums in ATYCLB and Bomb, so this album is basically riding the coat tails of those.

There were 51.5 months in between the release of HTDAAB and the release of NLOTH, the longest time between new studio album releases in U2's career.

I think that its a much better album myself but the fact is that it has only sold 1/3rd of what Bomb did and 1/4th of what ATYCLB did.

YOU CAN'T COMPARE ALBUM SALES FROM 2000 or 2004 to ALBUM SALES IN 2009! Its a totally different market environment. Top selling albums in 2009 are only selling 50% of what top selling albums were selling in 2004. The decline since 2000 is nearly 75% !

For NLOTH to sell 4.5 million copies in 2009 would be EQUAL or MORE than HTDAAB sales of 9 million in 2004-2005, because of the changed market conditions.

There is no one out there that can sell 12 million copies or 9 million copies of an album in a single year. The top selling album this year is unlikely to sell more than 4.5 million copies.

In the business world no matter what the circumnstances are behind those declines that would be considered a failure.

If your competition in the business world cannot sell such numbers, then the fact that you can't either is NOT a failure!

If Coldplay sold only 3 million albums with Viva La Vida it would have been considered a failure.

NO it wouldn't have! It would still have been one of the 10 biggest selling albums of 2008. Coldplay's next album could be more popular than Viva La Vida, but it is NOT going to be able to sell the same number of albums as Viva La Vida did. Most people can and do obtain their music for FREE these days!


I hold U2 to the same standard.

What do you think is the most successful album of 2009?
 
Maoilbheannacht, your methodical, fact-based approach is commendable. Great points!
 
Yeah I love when people don't understand perspective, X&Y sold more copies than VLV by far, but it wasn't talked about as much or as 'popular' as VLV, things are changing.
 
Yeah I love when people don't understand perspective, X&Y sold more copies than VLV by far, but it wasn't talked about as much or as 'popular' as VLV, things are changing.

I think Coldplay are a great example of this, despite Viva la Vida selling less it was most definitely a much bigger album than X&Y. NLOTH needs to sell 4.5-5 million copies to match Bomb and about 6 million to match Viva la Vida.
 
I think Coldplay are a great example of this, despite Viva la Vida selling less it was most definitely a much bigger album than X&Y. NLOTH needs to sell 4.5-5 million copies to match Bomb and about 6 million to match Viva la Vida.

Yep. 4,5 M is feasible for NLOTH. 6 M, well, I would love to see that happening but it´s unlikely.
If I´m not mistaken X&Y sold about 1 M more than HTDAAB so asking NLOTH to match VLV sales (which all of us deem as a more successful album than X&Y) is not quite "fair" :wink:
 
Are there any more albums coming out this year that will trouble NLOTH?

Amy Winehouse (if it's released this year) I guess

Shakira, Mika, Christina Aguilera, and Mariah Carey might be releasing this year, with the right singles they could possibly reach NLOTH's success

Any other albums out there that people can think of. Right now it seems like only Lady GaGa and Eminem have a shot, save for another album having some massive single

It depends on the exact date those albums are going to be released. If its late october/november, I don´t see how any of them will be able to sell 4 millon copies which at this point seems to be a reasonable figure for NLOTH come next December. Ok, I´m extrapolating mediatraffic results here and consider that NLOTH has already sold nearly 3,3 M worldwide so it´s 0.7 M more to go. Still, don´t see how an album released in late october will be able to sell 3,8 M before the end of the year.
I wouldn´t discount Eminem yet but it looks like he´s having a weekly decline in sales steeper than what U2 had back in April.

So, yes, right now Lady Gaga is the other contender for biggest selling album of 2009.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom