[Slayonce]

What kind of question. There's no competition really. Taylor wins in every department.

[OnlyManInTheWorld]

Originally posted by NX127

Actually, it's one of the things that matter more than the sales theirselves.

Only for those who lose.

[NX127]

Originally posted by OnlyManInTheWorld

Only for those who lose.

only for those who are not local *

Originally posted by eddytws

It really doesn't matter tbh

Globalness being a factor in an artist's success is a fact, not an opinion to agree with or not

[OnlyManInTheWorld]

Originally posted by NX127

only for those who are not local

Taylor isn't local, 1989 is a massive global phenomenon.

[NX127]

Originally posted by OnlyManInTheWorld

Taylor isn't local, 1989 is a massive global phenomenon

with only 2.4 million albums sold internationally

I did not say Taylor Swift local, I said this way of thinking is usually for stans whose faves are local.

As for Taylor Swift beig local or not, the fact that her stans think that "globalness doesn't matter" ( ) pretty much answers the question. You figure it out

[GiftFromGod]

Originally posted by NX127

with only 2.4 million albums sold internationally

More people still own 1989.

A CD owned by an American is no different than a CD owned by a Lithuanian.

[Ash12345]

Originally posted by NX127

only for those who are not local *



Globalness being a factor in an artist's success is a fact, not an opinion to agree with or not

I'd rather be relevant in one country than none at all like rih

[NX127]

Originally posted by GiftFromGod

More people still own 1989.

A CD owned by an American is no different than a CD owned by a Lithuanian.

Again, global success being important is not something to agree about or not.

Originally posted by Ash12345

I'd rather be relevant in one country than none at all like rih

You'd rather be local than global? Okay

[OnlyManInTheWorld]

But our fave is global so what's your problem? 1989 was a global success.

[Ash12345]

Originally posted by NX127

Again, global success being important is not something to agree about or not.



You'd rather be local than global? Okay

global success=of or relating to the whole world; worldwide.
The US is in the world, #stayinschool

And what I clearly meant was that I'd rather be local than irrelevant

[Ash12345]

At the end of the day loud was a major success as well though and it's one of my fave albums as well, so im glad both taylor and rih are slaying so hard tbh

[GiftFromGod]

Originally posted by NX127

Again, global success being important is not something to agree about or not.



You'd rather be local than global? Okay

So having majority of your sales come from Europe = global
But having majority of your sales come from North America = local?

[myself1981]

None is even here for Ri anymore let alone remember her Loud era. 1989 era = Teenage Dream era < 21 era

[lonnie]

In the U.S, 1989.
Everywhere else LOUD.
And everywhere else >>>>> The U.S so no.

[NX127]

Originally posted by Ash12345

global success=of or relating to the whole world; worldwide.
The US is in the world, #stayinschool

A global superstar actually means someone successful in most parts of the world ..

And what I clearly meant was that I'd rather be local than irrelevant

LOUD succeeded to balance between a large worldwide sales total and a huge percentage of it's sales being international, 1989 did not

You can't call an album with 2x platinum in the US and 5 million outside of it "irrelevant" by any standards, but you can call an album with 5x platinum in the US and 2.4 million internationally "local" compared to it.

Originally posted by GiftFromGod

So having majority of your sales come from Europe = global
But having majority of your sales come from North America = local?

If where your career is based is North America, then yes