[xLovatoEve]

WW.

[touchofmyhand]

What kind of stupid question?

[emmanuel_punk]

WORLDWIDE obviosuly but the US too!

[RobynYoBank]

US success is still far more important. Not only is US success much more likely to crossover into worldwide appeal, the careers of major artists today depend on a lot of business factors outside of music sales, and the US is light-years beyond the rest of the world (excluding Asia's own little sphere) in terms of raking that in. US record labels also dominate worldwide influence.

[Cap10Planet]

WW success is probably ideal to some people, but it has never broken anyone. You haven't truly made it until you crossed over to the U.S. There is a reason why labels continue to push international artists here.

[Mélina]

Originally posted by Cap10Planet

WW success is probably ideal to some people, but it has never broken anyone. You haven't truly made it until you crossed over to the U.S. There is a reason why labels continue to push international artists here.

.

[gettsleazy]

I would rather sell 1 Million in the US than 1 Million worldwide. If I sell 1 Million worldwide, I'm selling a smaller amount of albums, just in more places, which doesn't mean much in retrospect.

[LDYGG]

Originally posted by Scuba_Dive

being successful in the US leads to WW success.

as always.

No, it doesn't.

WW success because the US GP moves on quickly and you need WW success to fall back on.

[ABEL-o-matic]

Originally posted by Katamari

smash in their home country

Well, Michael Buble is from Canada so that makes US a part of his worldwide territory. 30+ million albums worldwide doesn't hurt.

[Watch'N'Learn]

WW success by far.
Being successful in the US is important but it won't break you. especially considering the decrease in music sales here in the states.

and if US success leads to WW success then why do most of our rap/country/r&b artist have such a hard time? touring WW from country to country > touring from state to state.

[touchofmyhand]

Um, last time I checked, the US was part of the world too @ some of you

[Callisto.]

You're asking if Success only in the US is better than Success in the US + other countries?

[T.C]

Originally posted by Monroe

As the US market shrinks worldwide importance becomes paramount, once upon a time you could dominate the US to the extent that you didn't need to worry about outside international sales (Shania, Nsync, Janet, country artists for instance). Now though you need to be global in order to be successful.

[newwil7l]

I think he is asking if you would rather have success in the US, but be a flop everywhere else. Or be a success around the world but be a flop in the US.

[J a y]

Worldwide includes the United States, so..

[mike_10]

Originally posted by newwil7l

I think he is asking if you would rather have success in the US, but be a flop everywhere else. Or be a success around the world but be a flop in the US.

This! i would have put more but i can't write more words in the title

[flawlessflaws]

both

[fortheloveofmusic]

Originally posted by Cap10Planet

WW success is probably ideal to some people, but it has never broken anyone. You haven't truly made it until you crossed over to the U.S. There is a reason why labels continue to push international artists here.

Exactly. It's great to have WW success, but if you can sell 5 million in just one country, while others are struggling to sell 5 million worldwide, what is the problem? Once you make it in the U.S, it's easier to become known or at least appear on WW charts.

[I'm JAVIng Fun]

World WIde of course

[DvnR]

Worldwide; but both are crucial tbh.