Quote:
Originally posted by iHype.
You're completely off from what we're talking about. We're talking about US digital sales, and you're posting WW digital sales. A mess.
"Hollaback Girl" sold 1.2M in US during 2005. 353 million digital tracks were sold 2005, and 1.336B were sold 2012 creating a multiplier of 3.784. 1,200,000 * 3.784 = 4,540,800 which is what slobro was talking about honey. That's perfectly reasonable, that it, a #1 hit, sold 4.5M in 2012 adjusting. 
"BOMT supposedly sold 7.5M WW in 1999"
So it didn't? 'supposedly' 
And as slobro pointed out, it can't be done with physical singles accurately because lots of singles weren't released, they were out for a limited time (versus digital singles being available forever), limited amounts were made and they stopped shipping once a criteria was met unlike albums, etc. It's really a completely different situation. Labels didn't choose not to release albums, labels didn't make limited amounts to last a few months, etc like with physical singles.
I notice you completely left out a reply on how VEVO was gonna be included in SEA. 
|
So now we have to limit it to U.S. sales only for this method to work?
It did. It sold almost 3M in the U.S. and U.K. alone. And if we follow your method, that means it would have sold 15,704,100 in just two countries alone in one year
It would've been the biggest-selling digital single ever...with just two countries counted
Do you honestly believe "...Baby One More Time" would have sold over 39M copies in a year had it been released in 2012?
I don't think the sales disparity is a problem. Album sales were $15.99 during 2000 for a standard edition, which is now more than a deluxe album's price tag. We don't rank single sales based on whether they were 99 cents or $1.29 or discounted to $.69. Why would streams be held to a higher standard and their $.0001 disparity make them ineligible to be counted when albums aren't adjusted for price despite a gap thousands of times greater?
shes so embarassing
Poor Fad 
!