| |
Discussion: Why do Hollywood Records albums get so few singles?
Member Since: 11/6/2010
Posts: 6,945
|
Why do Hollywood Records albums get so few singles?
Meet Miley Cyrus
Breakout
The Time of our Lives
Can't Be Tamed
Don't Forget
Here We Go Again
Unbroken
Kiss & Tell
A Year Without Rain
Stars Dance
Metamorphosis
Hilary Duff
Dignity
All of these albums, and more, released under Hollywood Records received only two or less singles in the US. It can't be because they wouldn't have been profitable. Meet Miley Cyrus has sold 3.3m in the US yet received two singles, while albums like DEMI have sold less than 500k yet received four singles. When The Sun Goes Down is the only other album I can think of released under HWR that received more than two singles (it had three), and it was outsold by many albums on the above list that got less singles than it. Why is it that HWR cut these eras so short?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 10,237
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 27,490
|
Quote:
Originally posted by TheSoneNavy
Cause they're a flop
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/6/2010
Posts: 6,945
|
Quote:
Originally posted by TheSoneNavy
Cause they're a flop
|
Half of the names in your sig will never be famous enough to even be thrown on a boat to America, so not sure why you're calling other artists flops.
-
I can't be the only one wondering this! Answer ppl. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/7/2011
Posts: 41,996
|
Because they're a ****** label (or used to be? I'm not sure), they also never sent half of these singles to Top 40 radio.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/6/2010
Posts: 6,945
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Starstruck.
Because they're a ****** label (or used to be? I'm not sure), they also never sent half of these singles to Top 40 radio.
|
WTF. Imagine how much more smash albums like MMC, Breakout, TTOOL or Metamorphosis would've sold given more singles. Also imagine how much albums like DEMI would've sold given one/two singles. Kind of frightening, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/18/2011
Posts: 5,330
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 27,745
|
Not only that but they usually wait too long between singles. 7 Things was released in June 2008 and Fly On The Wall in February 2009.  Truly the worst label along with RCA and Epic.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/26/2011
Posts: 14,707
|
Because what would be the point? To use MMC again, it sold 3.3m. It would be safer to end the era as it is and bank on the profits than sending another song to radio, filming a music video, booking performances for said single, etc. when it could end up not doing well.
If the era is a dud, why release more singles when they could just end up losing money (Can't Be Tamed, Dignity, half of Demi Lovato's albums, Stars Dance)? DEMI is a weird situation that I can't explain though. 4 singles for an album that can't even scratch 500k. It's odd.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/6/2010
Posts: 6,945
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pika
Because what would be the point? To use MMC again, it sold 3.3m. It would be safer to end the era as it is and bank on the profits than sending another song to radio, filming a music video, booking performances for said single, etc. when it could end up not doing well.
If the era is a dud, why release more singles when they could just end up losing money (Can't Be Tamed, Dignity, half of Demi Lovato's albums, Stars Dance)? DEMI is a weird situation that I can't explain though. 4 singles for an album that can't even scratch 500k. It's odd.
|
Even albums that bombed or underperformed (True Romance, SUCKER, Electra Heart, ARTPOP, Blackout, Warrior to name a handful) received three or more singles. I def get what you're saying, you handsome, handsome man, but it just feels weird that an album like MMC/Metamorphosis would receive two singles when whatever was released in those eras would've been a surefire seller, while DEMI/WTSGD received multiple singles for no reason.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 10,237
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Aaron
Half of the names in your sig will never be famous enough to even be thrown on a boat to America, so not sure why you're calling other artists flops.
-
I can't be the only one wondering this! Answer ppl. |
I was talking about the Label, not the artists, which the title of this thread said "Hollywood Records", not "Hollywood Records artists".
Oh and its fine tho. The artists in my sig that can't throw a boat to America sold a lot more records than the people at HR and had sold out arena tours here in the states.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 10,569
|
a big problem is that they don't send the singles to radio...they expected Disney Channel airing the music videos and Radio Disney playing the singles to be enough to sell albums
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/26/2012
Posts: 3,294
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Aaron
Even albums that bombed or underperformed (True Romance, SUCKER, Electra Heart, ARTPOP, Blackout, Warrior to name a handful) received three or more singles. I def get what you're saying, you handsome, handsome man, but it just feels weird that an album like MMC/Metamorphosis would receive two singles when whatever was released in those eras would've been a surefire seller, while DEMI/WTSGD received multiple singles for no reason.
|
Because they were very profitable WW ! They saw potential in Demi which is why DEMI sold more copies outside the US around 700k, for instance it went Diamond in Brazil , and Platinum and Gold in several countries other than the U.S. So they weren't aiming for a local but a global success !
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 15,836
|
And some of those singles barely even got a Pop Radio release. A truly laughable record label 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/12/2011
Posts: 3,834
|
They slept on Demi and Selena during the beginning of their careers tbh. They could have had bigger singles. now Demi is the only artist to bring in the $ .
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/12/2011
Posts: 3,834
|
HWR is a terrible label over all tho.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/27/2008
Posts: 78,826
|
Because I think back then, they couldn't handle so many artists at once. Wasn't Raven on the same label as Hilary? As was Aly & AJ? And The Cheetah Girls?
Miley, Demi and Selena all released at the same time as well. It really seemed like HWR doesn't like dealing with so many artists at once.
Demi got more singles with her last album because that was after Miley left the label, the Jonas Brothers disbanded, Hilary was long gone, as was Raven and Aly & AJ, and Selena cut her era short because of personal issues. They needed someone to bring in the dough, because R5, Zendaya and Bridgit Mendler came after the Miley/Selena/Demi generation stopped watching Disney Channel. Which brings me to another point. The current Disney generation gets less viewers on their shows than the Hannah Montana/Wizards of Waverly Place era. Part of the reason Miley, Demi and Selena have all good big enough fanbases to do well now that they are adults is because their shows brought viewers into Disney Channel. Once WOWP went off the air, that generation of kids stopped watching the channel. 10 million viewers RARELY happens on that channel, so for the WOWP finale to get that many meant that a lot of people were saying goodbye to the channel that night. The loss of viewership as a result affected the careers of the people that came after them. R5, Zendaya and Bridgit are either one hit wonders or flops at the moment. Bella Thorne didn't really try either.
So yeah. That's my reasoning. Demi was the only one that still had a shot at making HWR money last year, which is why she got more singles.
I really have a feeling that HWR is gonna really go under now that all the big names that brought them money are now leaving. Even Epic has more profitable artists right now.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 3,198
|
Miley = She was ******** #1 / platinum albums effortlessly at the time. ALL of her records could've been multi-platinum with the right promo spots and more radio singles but I guess Hollywood Records was satisfied with the idea of getting huge numbers while doing minimal effort  .
Selena = She had lots of potential, so idgi. If Selena was the star of Camp Rock (like it was originally planned), she would've had a legit chance at being a massive teen phenomenon. But then again, her albums sold decently up until the embarrasing Stars Dance bomb, so I see why Disney didn't feel like pushing any more singles.
Demi = Her best selling U.S album sold only 540k copies ...you know, after the major exposure of Camp Rock 1 & 2, Sonny With A Chance, several tours with the Jonas Brothers and the Princess Protection Program movie. So I don't blame them, tbh!.
Hilary = She was their first major "pop star" and they didn't know how to manage her career. Simple as that. Plus, her music wasn't really radio friendly and the market was already over-satured with Britney, Christina, Avril, Jessica, Ashlee, etc.
The rest = Extremely safe and no palpable charisma or star-power. Only Zac Efron had a future but he didn't want to be an international pop star (dumbass, lol).
However, I do think Disney focused a little too much on The Jonas Brothers fad and slept on Selena and Demi. Sad.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 28,415
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/27/2011
Posts: 36,557
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pika
Because what would be the point? To use MMC again, it sold 3.3m. It would be safer to end the era as it is and bank on the profits than sending another song to radio, filming a music video, booking performances for said single, etc. when it could end up not doing well.
If the era is a dud, why release more singles when they could just end up losing money (Can't Be Tamed, Dignity, half of Demi Lovato's albums, Stars Dance)? DEMI is a weird situation that I can't explain though. 4 singles for an album that can't even scratch 500k. It's odd.
|
It sold 1.1 million worldwide tho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
