The Best Selling Albums released after January 1, 2000 WORLDWIDE!

[fedeu2]

Good to see that according to your numbers JT has sold over 12 million copies in the US.
Now, what about the rest of the world? We, in this forum, believe that worlwide sales of JT stand at 25-27 million.

Oh yes I do a confusion, 12 millions are JT sales taking on account his certification.
Joshua Tree sold 2.8 millions in 14 years of soundscan, so 200k on average. 10xP certification was 10 years ago : 200k x 10 = 2M + 10xPlatinum = 12 millions. Without Music Club where JT are HUGE.

 

[MJDangerous]

Good to see that according to your numbers JT has sold over 12 million copies in the US.
Now, what about the rest of the world? We, in this forum, believe that worlwide sales of JT stand at 25-27 million.

I estimate this album 1 year ago at 26 millions.

USA : 12.500.000 (ALL include)
UK :
1.450.000 in 1987
250.000 in 1988
144.000 in 2001
Other years ?
Total sales estimate : 2.500.000 (at least)
Canada : 1.600.000 (est.)
Japan : 56.000 (ridiculous sales figure, the album probably sold much more since his charted time)
Germany: 1.000.000 (since 11 years)
Austria : 80.000
Finland : 27.965
Netherland : 500.000 (est.)
Spain : 650.000 (est.)
Italia : 500.000 (est.)
France : 2.000.000 (Certification at 600k but it sold much more, 20 weeks at #1)
Astralia : ??? (Rattle & Hum sold 490k)

So, North America : 14M
Europe : 8.5M
Asia : 1M (poor..)
ROW : ?? here is the difficulty !

I think about 26M WW, this album have "lose" many sales in Asia where other best sellers can sold an album in 5-6 millions copies.

 

[sleepaholic23]

Green Day

I think you can "officialy" add American idiot by Green Day now.
According to Mediatrffic the record reached at least 10 Million copies.

 

[STING2]

1. Beatles: 1 : 30,000,000+
2. Norah Jones : Come Away With Me : 19,000,000
3. Eminem: The Marshall Mathers LP : 17,000,000
4. Linkin Park: Hybrid Theory : 16,000,000
5. Britney Spears: Oops!....I Did It Again : 15,000,000
6. Eminem : The Eminem Show : 15,000,000
7. Usher : Confessions : 14,000,000
8. Avril Lavigne: Let Go : 13,500,000
9. Evanescence: Fallen : 13,500,000
10. N'Sync: No Strings Attached : 13,000,000
11. Madonna : Music : 12,500,000
12. U2 : ALL THAT YOU CAN'T LEAVE BEHIND: 12,000,000
13. Backstreet Boys : Black And Blue : 12,000,000
14. Shakira: Laundry Service : 11,000,000
15. Dido: No Angel : 11,000,000
16. Limp Bizkit: Chocolate Starfish : 11,000,000
17. Pink: M!SSUNDAZTOOD : 11,000,000
18. Enya: A Day Without Rain : 10,500,000
19. Shaggy: Hotshot : 10,500,000
20. Norah Jones : Feels Like Home : 10,000,000
21. Moby : Play : 10,000,000
22. Coldplay : A Rush Of Blood To The Head : 10,000,000
23. Green Day : American Idiot : 10,000,000

 

[U2Man]

Yep, of course.

1. Beatles

35 years after they split, they are still capable of selling more than 2.5x the amount of U2's best selling album the last 5 years. Amazing.

 

[roy]

Yep, of course.

1. Beatles

35 years after they split, they are still capable of selling more than 2.5x the amount of U2's best selling album the last 5 years. Amazing.

If only U2 could write songs as brilliant as Hello Goodbye. Bad, Streets, WOWY, One, UTEOTW came close but not close enough eh?....

 

[U2Man]

If only U2 could write songs as brilliant as Hello Goodbye. Bad, Streets, WOWY, One, UTEOTW came close but not close enough eh?....

Well, ask the people who still buy Beatles' music, including Hello Goodbye (and Lady Madonna) that are on Beatles 1 album which 30+ million have bought so far. U2 have actually given out a best of album in the last 5 years that included One and UTEOTW, it's not even on the list!!!

I'm not trying to say that U2 cannot write good rock songs, my point has been all along that when it comes down to what the great majority of people know, love and remember, yes, then - like it or not - both Hello Goodbye and Lady Madonna are still way ahead of even the U2 songs you mentioned above.

The two of us have already been through this elsewhere. It didn't turn out nicely, but I'm glad you gave me the opportunity of explaining this here.

 

[roy]

Well, ask the people who still buy Beatles' music, including Hello Goodbye (and Lady Madonna) that are on Beatles 1 album which 30+ million have bought so far. U2 have actually given out a best of album in the last 5 years that included One and UTEOTW, it's not even on the list!!!

I'm not trying to say that U2 cannot write good rock songs, my point has been all along that when it comes down to what the great majority of people know, love and remember, yes, then - like it or not - both Hello Goodbye and Lady Madonna are still way ahead of even the U2 songs you mentioned above.

The two of us have already been through this elsewhere. It didn't turn out nicely, but I'm glad you gave me the opportunity of explaining this here.

To be honest I find your assertion that Hello Goodbye is better than One, Streets etc...to be, quite frankly, bizarre. What I also find bizarre is that you spend so much time on a U2 site given that you think nothing they've done in 25 years has come close to even the laziest Macca song.

Do you spend as much time on Beatles sites or perhaps you just get your kicks from knocking other bands?

 

[fedeu2]

Honestly, I don´t think that either Hello goodbye or Lady Madonna are more popular than say One or With our without you.

You picked the wrong examples pal.

Well, ask the people who still buy Beatles' music, including Hello Goodbye (and Lady Madonna) that are on Beatles 1 album which 30+ million have bought so far. U2 have actually given out a best of album in the last 5 years that included One and UTEOTW, it's not even on the list!!!

I'm not trying to say that U2 cannot write good rock songs, my point has been all along that when it comes down to what the great majority of people know, love and remember, yes, then - like it or not - both Hello Goodbye and Lady Madonna are still way ahead of even the U2 songs you mentioned above.

The two of us have already been through this elsewhere. It didn't turn out nicely, but I'm glad you gave me the opportunity of explaining this here.

 

[U2Man]

Honestly, I don´t think that either Hello goodbye or Lady Madonna are more popular than say One or With our without you.

You picked the wrong examples pal.

Haha, there was a reason for picking these songs.

 

[U2Man]

To be honest I find your assertion that Hello Goodbye is better than One, Streets etc...to be, quite frankly, bizarre.

Fair enough. The truth is though, that I never said this. I never wrote "haha, Hello, Goodbye is way, way better than any U2 song". Personally, on the right day and in the right mood, I can enjoy Hello, Goodbye and Lady Madonna as much as any U2 song. Both contain beautiful little melody pieces which is why they have not been forgotten. I don't agree with you that these songs are "lazy" or "stop gap crap", but that is subjective, and we cannot discuss this.

What I did write in that other thread was that both of these songs could top any U2 song. But that was written in a very specific context, which you totally ignored when you started ridiculing me in that thread. What we were talking about was which U2/Beatles songs that people in general know and remember. What I meant by 'top' was simply that there are actually at least as many people in this world that know, love and remember Hello, Goodbye and Lady Madonna than there are people that know any of the U2 songs that you mentioned above. As I pointed out previously, this is quite well supported by the facts and figures above.

What I also find bizarre is that you spend so much time on a U2 site given that you think nothing they've done in 25 years has come close to even the laziest Macca song.

Do you spend as much time on Beatles sites or perhaps you just get your kicks from knocking other bands?

Again, I didn't say that none of U2's songs come close to "even the laziest Macca" song. I can personally enjoy U2's best songs as much as I enjoy "the laziest Macca song". I do believe that Beatles song catalogue in general is way, way, way more impressive than U2's, though and that John, Paul and George were more talented song writers than Bono and The Edge. - And that the list of U2 songs you presented could not at all live up to the list of Beatles songs that typhoon presented. But I don't regard admitting this as "knocking U2". Not being comparable to these guys is not a shame. Imagine a band where you have two unbelievable song writing geniuses, a third one who can write genius songs that become classics on his own, and even a fourth member who is capable of adding a little to the band, too, if nothing else, then at least humour. These guys, so far, haven't really had any real competition to their status as the greatest band ever. I cannot see why acknowledging this is "knocking U2".

 

[fedeu2]

You know, I consider The Beatles the only band in the history of rock that have written as many great tunes as U2. That´s why they are my SECOND favourite band.
I don´t agree that Beatles catalogue is way, way more impressive than U2, but it does come very close.
Some time ago, I have made a couple of mp3 cds, each one containing the 100+ best songs of U2 and The Beatles, and in my eyes, there´s no comparison, U2 is the clear winner.

To each his own I guess.

Again, I didn't say that none of U2's songs come close to "even the laziest Macca" song. I can personally enjoy U2's best songs as much as I enjoy "the laziest Macca song". I do believe that Beatles song catalogue in general is way, way, way more impressive than U2's, though and that John, Paul and George were more talented song writers than Bono and The Edge. - And that the list of U2 songs you presented could not at all live up to the list of Beatles songs that typhoon presented. But I don't regard admitting this as "knocking U2". Not being comparable to these guys is not a shame. Imagine a band where you have two unbelievable song writing geniuses, a third one who can write genius songs that become classics on his own, and even a fourth member who is capable of adding a little to the band, too, if nothing else, then at least humour. These guys, so far, haven't really had any real competition to their status as the greatest band ever. I cannot see why acknowledging this is "knocking U2".

 

[roy]

What I meant by 'top' was simply that there are actually at least as many people in this world that know, love and remember Hello, Goodbye and Lady Madonna than there are people that know any of the U2 songs that you mentioned above.

Do you seriously consider popularity to be a judge of greatness? Amarillo has been a huge hit twice, even my in-laws love it, its a crap song though....

 

[STING2]

Yep, of course.

1. Beatles

35 years after they split, they are still capable of selling more than 2.5x the amount of U2's best selling album the last 5 years. Amazing.

Not to amazing when you consider how much more exposure the Beatles have received in both their career and after their career. Lets remember that this is a chart and sales forum and that massive exposure or sales does not necessarily mean superior quality. Please take the discussion of who you think is better to another forum.

 

[U2Man]

Not to amazing when you consider how much more exposure the Beatles have received in both their career and after their career. Lets remember that this is a chart and sales forum and that massive exposure or sales does not necessarily mean superior quality. Please take the discussion of who you think is better to another forum.

Oh, and the other artists haven't had any exposure at all? U2 is not touring the planet at the moment?

I don't know if you noticed, but I actually didn't say who I thought was better in this first post. I actually commented on the sales chart. In Beatles' case massive sales and superior quality are indeed correlated, if you ask me, btw.

 

[STING2]

Oh, and the other artists haven't had any exposure at all? U2 is not touring the planet at the moment?

I don't know if you noticed, but I actually didn't say who I thought was better in this first post. I actually commented on the sales chart. In Beatles' case massive sales and superior quality are indeed correlated, if you ask me, btw.

The Beatles received far more exposure than any other artist from 1964 to 1970. In fact, no other artist in history has received the level of exposure that the Beatles did during that time. The impact of that is still being felt today.

When U2 came up in 1980, there thousands of artist and new artist attempting to get signed. A far more competitive field than it was in the early 1960s. U2 had to work extremely hard to get any sort of a following and they started to get one little by little, NOT because their songs were getting Blanket airplay like every new Beatles record since the begining of 1964, but because of the power of the their live performances. U2 did not receive any top 40 radio airplay in the United States until the Spring of 1987! Yet, they manage to have 3 platinum albums by then and were one of the biggest concert drawing artist in the world already, despite this lack of exposure.

Since 1987 of course, U2 have received an incredible amount of exposure over various years for a single artist in this much larger and complex music climate. But even in U2's most heavily exposed years, 1987-1988 and 1992-1993, they never received the level of exposure the Beatles did in the 1960s. No artist has ever received the same level of exposure that the Beatles did back then, vs. other artist of the time.

I don't understand why you point out what you said in your first post when you know full well what you said in your next few posts. Lets keep the discussion on sales and chart related issues. Music quality is for another forum.

 

[U2Man]

^ I was asked a specific question. Therefore the next posts.

Beatles actually had a lot of competition in the sixties. Lots of groups and artists around back then, remember? But anyway, I think you're turning things around here. Beatles is not selling well and remembered today because of their exposure today or back then. If exposure is all it takes, then I suppose you want me to believe that Britney or Eminem will stand the test of time like The Beatles and still be remembered in 35 years? Beatles got the vast part of the exposure they have had and are still selling the amounts of albums, we see above, because their music is that good. It is as simple as that.

 

[edge3]

^ I was asked a specific question. Therefore the next posts.

Beatles actually had a lot of competition in the sixties. Lots of groups and artists around back then, remember?

err...no. There was no way the same competition for artists in the 60's as there is today & the pop music / record industry climate was totally different. I mean could a rock band today have 17 # 1 singles in the US (a la Beatles) ? & be credible ? A : No way

 

[STING2]

^ I was asked a specific question. Therefore the next posts.

Beatles actually had a lot of competition in the sixties. Lots of groups and artists around back then, remember? But anyway, I think you're turning things around here. Beatles is not selling well and remembered today because of their exposure today or back then. If exposure is all it takes, then I suppose you want me to believe that Britney or Eminem will stand the test of time like The Beatles and still be remembered in 35 years? Beatles got the vast part of the exposure they have had and are still selling the amounts of albums, we see above, because their music is that good. It is as simple as that.

The level of exposure that Britney, Eminem or any artist for that matter has received since the Beatles is tiny by comparison to what the Beatles received in the music climate of the 1960s. I would say Michael Jackson in 1982-1984 with the Thriller album and tour is the only thing that would be even remotely similar to what the Beatles had in the 1960s.

This level of exposure in the 1960s has a ripple effect that continues to impact sales today. At least in the United States, most of the Baby Boom generation was around for the Beatles 1963-1970 run and still impacts this generation to this day as well as their childern. It creeps into what they read, what they write about, what they decide to play on classic rock radio, as well as what they purchase when new music formats that did not exist in the 1960s become available. It would be interesting to know how many times some Beatles fans from the 1960s have purchased the same album, because it has become available on a new format, whether it be audio cassette, 8-track, Compact Disk, or any new format.

Not to go down the road of quality here, but obviously when something is excellant quality, its repeated exposure after the initial promotion period of a couple of years is more likely. But there is excellent music out there that has received little if any exposure and because of that will not be played at all on classic rock radio, even if it is as good as or better than many classic rock favorites.

 

[andyuk]

hey it was easier to be a big band in the 60's! look at all the different types of music avaialble today which was not about then! if the beatles where about now would they be as massive? i don't think so! thats why U2 is so impressive they have continued to be the biggest band on the planet when there so much more diverse music about!

 

[Axver]

Oh, and the other artists haven't had any exposure at all? U2 is not touring the planet at the moment?

Last time I checked, there's a world outside of Western Europe and North America ...

If you ask me, there's tonnes of bands that were/are better than the Beatles, but the Beatles were in the right place at the right time in the right climate to soar straight up the charts and create a legend that continues to bolster sales today. So many people now just buy Beatles albums because they're The Biggest Of The Big Things.

 

[U2Man]

^ Nope, it is because they love their music.

 

[Axver]

^ Nope, it is because they love their music.

I know of people who've bought Beatles albums simply because it's the Beatles and you're 'meant' to have albums by them in your collection. I'm sure this occurrence isn't strictly limited to a few people in Queensland either.

 

[phanan]

^I honestly don't know anyone who does this, and if they did, I'd be like, what's the point? If you like the music, you buy the CD. Plain and simple really.

 

[phanan]

1. Beatles: 1 : 30,000,000+
2. Norah Jones : Come Away With Me : 19,000,000
3. Eminem: The Marshall Mathers LP : 17,000,000
4. Linkin Park: Hybrid Theory : 16,000,000
5. Britney Spears: Oops!....I Did It Again : 15,000,000
6. Eminem : The Eminem Show : 15,000,000
7. Usher : Confessions : 14,000,000
8. Avril Lavigne: Let Go : 13,500,000
9. Evanescence: Fallen : 13,500,000
10. N'Sync: No Strings Attached : 13,000,000
11. Madonna : Music : 12,500,000
12. U2 : ALL THAT YOU CAN'T LEAVE BEHIND: 12,000,000
13. Backstreet Boys : Black And Blue : 12,000,000
14. Shakira: Laundry Service : 11,000,000
15. Dido: No Angel : 11,000,000
16. Limp Bizkit: Chocolate Starfish : 11,000,000
17. Pink: M!SSUNDAZTOOD : 11,000,000
18. Enya: A Day Without Rain : 10,500,000
19. Shaggy: Hotshot : 10,500,000
20. Norah Jones : Feels Like Home : 10,000,000
21. Moby : Play : 10,000,000
22. Coldplay : A Rush Of Blood To The Head : 10,000,000
23. Green Day : American Idiot : 10,000,000

It's interesting that there hasn't been an updated certification of Linkin Park's Meteora in the U.S. Mediatraffic has its current worldwide number at just over 8,000,000 copies, but with the last RIAA certification being in February of 2004, I'd say it's a sure bet the album has moved another 2,000,000 since then. Meteora stayed in the Billboard 200 chart throughout 2004 (it fell off in February 2005) and its sales were bolstered by the airplay success of "Lying From You" and "Breaking The Habit", all of which came after the last certification. So even though we don't have anything official, I'm guessing it's at 10,000,000 now.

 

[STING2]

It's interesting that there hasn't been an updated certification of Linkin Park's Meteora in the U.S. Mediatraffic has its current worldwide number at just over 8,000,000 copies, but with the last RIAA certification being in February of 2004, I'd say it's a sure bet the album has moved another 2,000,000 since then. Meteora stayed in the Billboard 200 chart throughout 2004 (it fell off in February 2005) and its sales were bolstered by the airplay success of "Lying From You" and "Breaking The Habit", all of which came after the last certification. So even though we don't have anything official, I'm guessing it's at 10,000,000 now.

The album has indeed moved another 1 million copies in the United States where the majority of its album sales come from. The Soundscan figure for the album just recently passed the 5 million mark in the summer. Remember, mediatraffics numbers prior to April 2004 are estimates and not exact numbers. Since April 2004, exact numbers from around the world have been used from Soundscan or Soundscan type companies in other countries.

So, one has to look at shipments for Meteora and what we have is:

United States 5 million
Europe 2 million (certified October 2004)
Canada 400,000
ROW (2 million copies maximum)

At best, the album is at 9.4 million, but is probably a little less than that. Catalog sales in the USA if they continue to be strong will probably eventually put the album over the top.

 

[phanan]

Well, if the last certification in Europe was a year ago, there's probably more to add to that tally as well, probably a few hundred thousand or so, even though they aren't as popular there.

 

[STING2]

Well, if the last certification in Europe was a year ago, there's probably more to add to that tally as well, probably a few hundred thousand or so, even though they aren't as popular there.

I kind of doubt it because the album had already left the charts by the time it hit 2 million in October 2004 in Europe.

 

[phanan]

I guess it would depend on catalog sales over the last year. If it did two million in its first year, I don't think it is that much of a stretch that it did a few hundred thousand in its second year.

 

[STING2]

I guess it would depend on catalog sales over the last year. If it did two million in its first year, I don't think it is that much of a stretch that it did a few hundred thousand in its second year.

Actually it took nearly two years for it to sell 2 million copies in Europe. Catalog sales of all studio albums in Europe beyond two years are much lower than they are here in the United States. In Europe, people buy more compilations and Greatest Hits packages rather than the old studio albums to a degree much greater than seen here in the USA.