Quote:
Originally posted by ethan
 Just because they aren't huge music sellers doesn't mean they should just give up and do whatever. They are still a business and are trying to save themselves from future releases like this.
Will they lose money from not selling BEYONCE? Yes. But the potential benefits outweigh the loss, especially since they wouldn't have sold THAT much. They don't sell much music anyway, and considering the fact that this album has already sold a ton, taking away from their potential sales, they're not looking at that much of a loss. |
You keep repeating they don't sell much music, but really they do.
I mean, some of the girls don't run to Target for exclusive deals for NOTHING. There's no "potential benefit" from this decision. They'll be playing catchup all Q1 2014 due to lack of new releases and them not pushing BEYONCE' (the biggest seller for the next few months, for sure). I'd like to see them outweigh that loss.
Quote:
Originally posted by tittieslap
I'm not coming for anything. I'm just making a point,if you don't mind thank you. What if the sales are coming from the basic fact that she's the first person to put out a surprise album with no promotion or singles?
|
I meant come better with an argument than "illegal downloading" like we're in 2005. Calm your tittie.
Anyway, that's ridiculous to assume. Garth Brooks, the person she's blocking this week, dropped his Walmart set and is moving units. Susan Boyle blew up and people instantly started purchasing her music with no relevant promotion or songs at radio. You're making the music consumer seem completely idiotic. If they want something, they'll get it. Regardless of how it's put out to them.
The sales are coming from a) being an established artist, b) positive word of mouth and c) premium packaging. Simple as that.
