| |
Discussion: Why Can't Rihanna & Katy Able To Debut With Over 500K
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 41,074
|
Quote:
Originally posted by KingSebert
...on ATRL. That doesn't translate to sales, otherwise BWET wouldn't be flopping
|
Are these ATRL members?
X
X
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 9/13/2010
Posts: 14,033
|
Katy & Rihanna have a lot of general appeal but small dedicated fanbases, so they sell more over time.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/1/2011
Posts: 19,016
|
Their fanbase isn't as big. People are more here for their singles.
The key to impressive debuts is a large fanbase. Katy and Rih don't command the spotlight and the fans as much as Gaga, Bey, or Taylor. I mean, they do have a lot of fans but they don't depend on them. I mean even looking at the people I know, I'm the only Katy stan whereas I know multiple Taylor, Gaga, and Bey stans/fairly dedicated fans. Same with Rih, I don't know any stans of her's.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/21/2012
Posts: 55,134
|
I don't know why first week sales are so important on this broad . rihanan had debuted less than half of her peers and have outsold them in the long run ..
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/4/2014
Posts: 6,778
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Desert Rain
These numbers 
OOTB isn't past 4M.
Prism isn't past 3M.
TTT isn't past 4M.
IASF is at 8M, 4 is at 3.5M and BEYONCÉ is close to 4M.
The only Katy & Rihanna albums to get past 4M required rereleases and exceptionally heavy promotional schedules, especially in Katy's case.
Radio support can only take you so far. Other girls are more fortunate to sell of the quality of their craft. |
Prism has been at 3.3 million for over a month now lol
Not you attempting to drag someone for posting inflated numbers and then adding 1 million to IASF and 600,000 to 4 and BEYONCE.  IASF is at 7 million, 4 is around 2.8 million and self-titled is so far at 3.4 million.
Beyonce rereleased B'Day, I Am Sasha Fierce and now self-titled so I'm not sure what that tired attempt at shade was.. and let's not forget Beyonce had more promo than any other pop girl for her first 4 albums  Also Loud sold 6 million without a rerelease. Please stop lying
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/1/2011
Posts: 19,016
|
The true tea is that Rih and Katy have less artistic integrity and aren't as furiously marketed as "sing-songwriter/musical prodigy/performer of our generation..." superstars like Bey, Gaga, and Taylor are. For good reason ofc. 
So they don't draw as many dedicated fans.
However, they are doing things right because they are drawing a very good balance by appealing more to the GP as a whole. I mean, it's proven by their VEVO streams, presence on social media, radio spin records, demographic studies, etc. They both have a ton of broad (if weaker) appeal so they can move singles and have longevity with their sales. It's also why their tours do very well. So  They're still moving just as many units as the other girls, but they just don't have a huge rabid fanbase checking for them constantly.
Someone please quote and agree with me to validate my thoughts
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/29/2010
Posts: 19,664
|
Rihanna really has no excuses. She is a crossover star- getting airplay from urban, rhy and pop. I guess the quality just does not cut it.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/5/2014
Posts: 29,111
|
I think it's because people know them for their singles and just assume that Katy and Rihanna will release their best songs eventually so don't immediately rush out to buy their albums.
People then gradually buy the albums as they like more and more singles. I don't really think there's anything wrong with their opening numbers honestly.
Quote:
Originally posted by h.u.r.r.i.c.a.n.e
The true tea is that Rih and Katy have less artistic integrity and aren't as furiously marketed as "sing-songwriter/musical prodigy/performer of our generation..." superstars like Bey, Gaga, and Taylor are. For good reason ofc.
So they don't draw as many dedicated fans.
However, they are doing things right because they are drawing a very good balance by appealing more to the GP as a whole. I mean, it's proven by their VEVO streams, presence on social media, radio spin records, demographic studies, etc. They both have a ton of broad (if weaker) appeal so they can move singles and have longevity with their sales. It's also why their tours do very well. So They're still moving just as many units as the other girls, but they just don't have a huge rabid fanbase checking for them constantly.
Someone please quote and agree with me to validate my thoughts |
I think you're selling them a little short, but I agree with this also.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2012
Posts: 4,549
|
Quote:
Originally posted by AvrilLaQueen
What is up with the 10's getting so much little album sells, people these days would rather spend their money on one song rather than a full album |
There is so much more competition for the money of the youth nowadays than back then. Subscription based gaming costing much more in the long run than buying a game in the past (gaming industry adapted to the digital age), app stores, micropayments, more expensive devices in higher quantity to buy like smartphones, tablets,... Computers (ultrabooks) nowadays are too thin to have a CD or DVD player in it.
After all the music industry started because it was cheaper and more convenient to spin a record than hiring a band to play in your pub. The natural next step is when the technology made transporting music to the customer almost for free, no more shopowners selling CDs for twice the price they paid for it, no more distribution/printing/... costs,...
People were also tired of 3 5 euro single (3 items to be shipped/sold with overhead costs) costing as much as a 15 euro album, if you like 3 singles, it was cheaper to buy the album with the 9 fillers you don't like. With almost for free transporting music over the Internet, there is no reason why a single shouldn't be 1/12 of the album price and consumers only get the song they like. The economical reasoning behind buying albums is gone.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/3/2014
Posts: 3,992
|
Quote:
Originally posted by idkher
Prism has been at 3.3 million for over a month now lol
Not you attempting to drag someone for posting inflated numbers and then adding 1 million to IASF and 600,000 to 4 and BEYONCE. IASF is at 7 million, 4 is around 2.8 million and self-titled is so far at 3.4 million.
Beyonce rereleased B'Day, I Am Sasha Fierce and now self-titled so I'm not sure what that tired attempt at shade was.. and let's not forget Beyonce had more promo than any other pop girl for her first 4 albums Also Loud sold 6 million without a rerelease. Please stop lying |
IASF is at 7.5 million MORE than 7 million
4 is at 3 million (maybe around 3.1)
and BEYONCE is at 3.5 mil MINIMAL.
And Beyonce's promo for 4 was not even close to the entire eras of LOUD, TD, GGGB, RED, 1989 
Beyonce's promo for 4 literally was the summer of 2011 and after that there was no more promo.
all those aforementioned albums had a year plus (sometimes even 2 years plus) of promo.
And IASF's platinum edition re-release that NO ONE knew about and sold like 15k? Yeah im sure that helped the album sell.
Whereas Katy's re-released was heavily promoted. GGGB re-release was heavily promoted. The only re-release that Beyonce has done that was heavily promoted was for B'Day. Every one after that no one knew about unless you were a fan or you randomly saw it in your local store or on itunes.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/16/2010
Posts: 69,775
|
They have longevity.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/16/2010
Posts: 69,775
|
Quote:
Originally posted by umich
They're both singles artists. Let's not.
|
Singles artists that can sell millions of albums, even during their weaker eras (IE Rated R).
All they do is win win win, no matter what
AND THEY STAY THERE
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 37,384
|
Because they aren't front loaded and people actually buy their music more than 2 months into an era 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/2/2014
Posts: 18,038
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Desert Rain
These numbers
OOTB isn't past 4M.
Prism isn't past 3M.
TTT isn't past 4M.
IASF is at 8M, 4 is at 3.5M and BEYONCÉ is close to 4M.
The only Katy & Rihanna albums to get past 4M required rereleases and exceptionally heavy promotional schedules, especially in Katy's case.
Radio support can only take you so far. Other girls are more fortunate to sell of the quality of their craft. |
IASF never crossed the mark  and BEYONCE isn't even close to 4M 
Quote:
Originally posted by Baby Boy
Why are Katy & Rihanna fans running in here talking about longevity as if arists haven't managed both huge first week sales AND longevity?
A Beyoncé can't sell singles because the entire world bought her album sized tea.
Oops!...I Did It Again, Red, etc..
Big openings, longevity..
|
And what people are saying is that basically wwhat they lack in opening numbers they more than make up in longevity
Quote:
Originally posted by Howie
IASF is at 7.5 million MORE than 7 million
4 is at 3 million (maybe around 3.1)
and BEYONCE is at 3.5 mil MINIMAL.
And Beyonce's promo for 4 was not even close to the entire eras of LOUD, TD, GGGB, RED, 1989
Beyonce's promo for 4 literally was the summer of 2011 and after that there was no more promo.
all those aforementioned albums had a year plus (sometimes even 2 years plus) of promo.
And IASF's platinum edition re-release that NO ONE knew about and sold like 15k? Yeah im sure that helped the album sell.
Whereas Katy's re-released was heavily promoted. GGGB re-release was heavily promoted. The only re-release that Beyonce has done that was heavily promoted was for B'Day. Every one after that no one knew about unless you were a fan or you randomly saw it in your local store or on itunes. |
Are you really going to start with that dumb excuse that IASF and 4 never got any promo
IASF got way more promo than any Rihanna era let's not, and just because the re-release didn't do so good doesn't mean it doesn't exist 
Rihanna and Katy Perry don't sell a lot first week because they have more casual fans than a big hard core fanbase that rushes to buy albums the first week. Their singles push the album units through their eras so they still manage to sell millions and sometimes even more than the so called album artists with huge first week numbers.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/14/2007
Posts: 13,130
|
They aren't bigger enough.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 8,244
|
Because they don't have as many fans that will rush to buy their albums first week. But as they release singles, people feel more interested so they have longevity.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/6/2009
Posts: 2,574
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Materialboy215
I mean all the 'MAJOR GIRLS' has least had 1huge opening wk before everyone from Taylor, Britney, Gaga, Beyonce, MC, Madonna.... Even Ciara did almost 350K in one wk .... Mary J Blige and Alicia Keys did over 500K
|
This.
Except is poorly said. Mary and Alicia are way more respected in music than Rihanna so clearly they sell more. R&B used to sell strong.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/5/2011
Posts: 7,985
|
Because they are the QUEENS OF POP!
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/15/2012
Posts: 6,964
|
Quote:
Originally posted by katykater
There is so much more competition for the money of the youth nowadays than back then. Subscription based gaming costing much more in the long run than buying a game in the past (gaming industry adapted to the digital age), app stores, micropayments, more expensive devices in higher quantity to buy like smartphones, tablets,... Computers (ultrabooks) nowadays are too thin to have a CD or DVD player in it.
After all the music industry started because it was cheaper and more convenient to spin a record than hiring a band to play in your pub. The natural next step is when the technology made transporting music to the customer almost for free, no more shopowners selling CDs for twice the price they paid for it, no more distribution/printing/... costs,...
People were also tired of 3 5 euro single (3 items to be shipped/sold with overhead costs) costing as much as a 15 euro album, if you like 3 singles, it was cheaper to buy the album with the 9 fillers you don't like. With almost for free transporting music over the Internet, there is no reason why a single shouldn't be 1/12 of the album price and consumers only get the song they like. The economical reasoning behind buying albums is gone.
|
Yeah, it's kinda ridiculous the music industry is still selling CDs as the main music format when almost no music player is able to play them? What's the point? They should have moved on to a compatible and more portable physical music format a long time ago. As if a digital album download was gonna replace the CD. There's a hole in the market and no one's filling it.
I'm sure Rihanna and Katy Perry would have better first week sales if only the music industry would sell music in a physical format up to date instead of a CD.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 1,506
|
Firstly, like "500K", "400K" 1st week sales in the USA is such a common thing for popular artists. As you might have seen, sales decrease in years. Nowadays, annual decrease is about 13-15% (due to Billboard).
Secondly, as it was already said... their sales in a year, in 2 years are much bigger than some other artists' who have big numbers 1st week and then decrease rapidly. (Don't certainly know about Katy tho, never was her fan)
|
|
|
|
|
|
