I've said multiple times that 21 is bigger commercially than ...Baby One More Time. It will surpass COO by the end of this decade and maybe TBS next decade if it can keep-up with IWALY's amazing legs.
What exactly is your meltdown supposed to be about?
I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about this thread: http://atrl.net/forums/showthread.php?t=905836
Where 33% of this site actually thought Britney had a bigger peak than Adele...
There are so many pitfalls to "adjusted album sales," but 21 was still super obviously bigger than ...Baby One More Time.
I mean obviously the forumla isn't perfect and exact to the tea. There will never ever be a way to know 100% certainly how much an album would have sold in a different time period. But it's definitely a very reasonable and logical estimate
I mean obviously the forumla isn't perfect and exact to the tea. There will never ever be a way to know 100% certainly how much an album would have sold in a different time period. But it's definitely a very reasonable and logical estimate
Maybe if Adele released in 1999 she wouldn't have even scanned platinum?
The Bttm boi's with nothing better to do can continue adjusting album sales till the Mooriahs come home but that doesn't change the fact that it is an artificial concept. The actual album sales are the only ones that count.
I mean obviously the forumla isn't perfect and exact to the tea. There will never ever be a way to know 100% certainly how much an album would have sold in a different time period. But it's definitely a very reasonable and logical estimate
As madonnas said, 21 (and, by extension, Adele) was a total sales anomaly. I just don't think you can reasonably apply the same sales projection heuristics to that album as other albums from that time period.
