"Gigaton" and its tracks on the charts

2456710

Comments

  • jimjam1982jimjam1982 Posts: 380
    Green Day is probably spending money to promote their album and songs because their upcoming tour was too ambitious and there are a ton of empty seats at these stadiums. Green Day was down to pay for promotion or play half full stadiums.

    PJ doesnt need to spend any money doing that. The fanbase will carry the album sales and the tour is almost sold out except some behind the stage upper deck seats at a few shows.
  • NEweatherNEweather Posts: 157
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    ( yeah- kinda listen to radio-but it's past the time for a revolution with radio. Bust outta the "formula-genre - this is what the masses want"  corp. decisions".  Break it Open-I know you can...I can feel it. )
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • radarradar Posts: 725
    radar said:
    Polish Radio LP3: 1st place (as of February 16th)
    https://www.polskieradio.pl/9,Trojka/340,LP3
    Two weeks later and DOTC remains on the first place in Polish radio 
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    Yes!  Believe it or not, the aggregate radio audience is still much larger than the streaming audience.  (One illustration: the number one song at radio this week had a total audience of 101 million.  The most-streamed song was streamed 48 million times.)  Radio is free and it is everywhere.  People listen in cars, homes, offices, restaurants, etc.

    Artists still receive royalties when songs are played on the radio or streamed, so it's not like there's no financial incentive to get your song played and streamed.  Plus, hits have a long shelf life and generate revenue essentially forever, so it's very lucrative to have hits.  Granted, Pearl Jam is not really in the business of making "hits," per se.

    Just to give you an example of this in practice, Arizona Zervas got a $12 million deal on the strength of his hit "Roxanne."  The general feeling in the industry is that it's a good deal for the record company even if he never has another hit because that one hit will generate revenue for years-- royalties, film/TV synchs, publishing, etc.
  • KN219077KN219077 MontanaPosts: 820
    Great response! I wasn’t being as sarcastic as that question sounded. I listen to the radio, but I also still buy cd’s...so I’m not the right person to ask. Young people own a shockingly low amount of music, I’m probably in that last generation that isn’t procuring their music through a subscription.
  • KN219077KN219077 MontanaPosts: 820
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I miss igotid88
  • KN219077KN219077 MontanaPosts: 820
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I don’t think they should count, it’s kind of a lame way to get a number one album.  DMB would have likely got it anyway based on their track record. It will be interesting to see if Gigaton sells more than 150-200k in its first week.
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    BF25394 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    Yes!  Believe it or not, the aggregate radio audience is still much larger than the streaming audience.  (One illustration: the number one song at radio this week had a total audience of 101 million.  The most-streamed song was streamed 48 million times.)  Radio is free and it is everywhere.  People listen in cars, homes, offices, restaurants, etc.

    Artists still receive royalties when songs are played on the radio or streamed, so it's not like there's no financial incentive to get your song played and streamed.  Plus, hits have a long shelf life and generate revenue essentially forever, so it's very lucrative to have hits.  Granted, Pearl Jam is not really in the business of making "hits," per se.

    Just to give you an example of this in practice, Arizona Zervas got a $12 million deal on the strength of his hit "Roxanne."  The general feeling in the industry is that it's a good deal for the record company even if he never has another hit because that one hit will generate revenue for years-- royalties, film/TV synchs, publishing, etc.
    I can't be the only person who had to google "Arizona Zervas" right?
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    KN219077 said:
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I don’t think they should count, it’s kind of a lame way to get a number one album.  DMB would have likely got it anyway based on their track record. It will be interesting to see if Gigaton sells more than 150-200k in its first week.
    What's a typical number one album sell nowadays?
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    KN219077 said:
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I don’t think they should count, it’s kind of a lame way to get a number one album.  DMB would have likely got it anyway based on their track record. It will be interesting to see if Gigaton sells more than 150-200k in its first week.
    What's a typical number one album sell nowadays?
    Anywhere between 40k-400k
    But the younger artists, mostly hip hop will get it from streams. I gave an example before where The Who sold 89k in physical sales and and close to 1k in streams or track sales. But had the #2 debut. Roddy Rich sold under 1k in physical sales. But had 90k in streams and had the #1 that week.

    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    edited March 10
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    Post edited by BF25394 on
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I miss igotid88
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I don’t think they should count, it’s kind of a lame way to get a number one album.  DMB would have likely got it anyway based on their track record. It will be interesting to see if Gigaton sells more than 150-200k in its first week.
    What's a typical number one album sell nowadays?
    Anywhere between 40k-400k
    But the younger artists, mostly hip hop will get it from streams. I gave an example before where The Who sold 89k in physical sales and and close to 1k in streams or track sales. But had the #2 debut. Roddy Rich sold under 1k in physical sales. But had 90k in streams and had the #1 that week.

    I can't be the only one who had to google Roddy Rich right?
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I don’t think they should count, it’s kind of a lame way to get a number one album.  DMB would have likely got it anyway based on their track record. It will be interesting to see if Gigaton sells more than 150-200k in its first week.
    What's a typical number one album sell nowadays?
    Anywhere between 40k-400k
    But the younger artists, mostly hip hop will get it from streams. I gave an example before where The Who sold 89k in physical sales and and close to 1k in streams or track sales. But had the #2 debut. Roddy Rich sold under 1k in physical sales. But had 90k in streams and had the #1 that week.

    I can't be the only one who had to google Roddy Rich right?
    To be honest. I found out that week he had the #1 album. His has the #1 song for 9 week straight
    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I'm not talking about the percentage of the population that it represented.  I'm accounting for declining record sales and talking about the percentage of record sales that it represented.  Pearl Jam sold 900,000+ copies in an era when there were about 12 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Adele sold 3.4 million CDs in a week in an era when there were about 2.4 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Her sales that week represented some ridiculous percentage of all records sold that week-- I don't have the number but I recall that it was over 75 percent.  75 percent of 12 million is 9 million.
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282

    igotid88 said:
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    igotid88 said:
    KN219077 said:
    KN219077 said:
    I’m guessing because album sales are such a minimal percentage of an artists income that they’d probably rather just not. Do people still listen to the radio?
    I don't know...pride plays a factor too. I remember being at the show the week Lightning Bolt debuted at #1. Ed spent a considerable amount of time gloating about it...It still means a lot to them. How could it not, if you used to be as big as they were?

    Absolutely ! DMB even gave away free albums with a ticket to their summer tour to ensure 8 straight number one albums and securing the record.
    Starting this year Billboard won't count those anymore. Also artists have where you buy merch and get a digital download of the album.  I think those won't count anymore 
    I don’t think they should count, it’s kind of a lame way to get a number one album.  DMB would have likely got it anyway based on their track record. It will be interesting to see if Gigaton sells more than 150-200k in its first week.
    What's a typical number one album sell nowadays?
    Anywhere between 40k-400k
    But the younger artists, mostly hip hop will get it from streams. I gave an example before where The Who sold 89k in physical sales and and close to 1k in streams or track sales. But had the #2 debut. Roddy Rich sold under 1k in physical sales. But had 90k in streams and had the #1 that week.

    I can't be the only one who had to google Roddy Rich right?
    To be honest. I found out that week he had the #1 album. His has the #1 song for 9 week straight
    It's an indication of how screwed up the Hot 100 is.  The chart overweights streaming so much that Roddy Ricch's "The Box" initially hit No. 1 without even being in the top 50 at radio (it's now No. 8 in airplay).  Radio still has the largest aggregate audience, so if your formula is telling you that a song with very little airplay is the "most popular" song in the country, it's a sign that your formula is not capturing the right data.  The fact that you guys hadn't heard of Ricch until the past couple of weeks is further evidence that this song's audience and appeal is narrower than its chart performance would lead you to think.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I'm not talking about the percentage of the population that it represented.  I'm accounting for declining record sales and talking about the percentage of record sales that it represented.  Pearl Jam sold 900,000+ copies in an era when there were about 12 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Adele sold 3.4 million CDs in a week in an era when there were about 2.4 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Her sales that week represented some ridiculous percentage of all records sold that week-- I don't have the number but I recall that it was over 75 percent.  75 percent of 12 million is 9 million.
    Yea but I don't think she would sell 10 million in a week in 91 or 93. But it's more possible that vs. if released today would sell more than 950k. Especially if there was no streaming.
    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I'm not talking about the percentage of the population that it represented.  I'm accounting for declining record sales and talking about the percentage of record sales that it represented.  Pearl Jam sold 900,000+ copies in an era when there were about 12 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Adele sold 3.4 million CDs in a week in an era when there were about 2.4 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Her sales that week represented some ridiculous percentage of all records sold that week-- I don't have the number but I recall that it was over 75 percent.  75 percent of 12 million is 9 million.
    Yea but I don't think she would sell 10 million in a week in 91 or 93. But it's more possible that vs. if released today would sell more than 950k. Especially if there was no streaming.
    I'm definitely speculating, but mostly I'm just trying to get across the point of how staggering a 3.4 million figure was for 2015.  I'm not sure that anyone other than Adele could sell more than 950,000 copies in today's environment.  Even Taylor Swift, who is the only artist to sell over 1 million copies in a single week for four different albums, only sold 679,000 copies of her 2019 album "Lover" in its first week of release.  (I realize that your hypothetical assumes that 2019 Pearl Jam is at the level of popularity of 1993-94 Pearl Jam.)
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    Original post updated for March 14 charts.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I'm not talking about the percentage of the population that it represented.  I'm accounting for declining record sales and talking about the percentage of record sales that it represented.  Pearl Jam sold 900,000+ copies in an era when there were about 12 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Adele sold 3.4 million CDs in a week in an era when there were about 2.4 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Her sales that week represented some ridiculous percentage of all records sold that week-- I don't have the number but I recall that it was over 75 percent.  75 percent of 12 million is 9 million.
    Yea but I don't think she would sell 10 million in a week in 91 or 93. But it's more possible that vs. if released today would sell more than 950k. Especially if there was no streaming.
    I'm definitely speculating, but mostly I'm just trying to get across the point of how staggering a 3.4 million figure was for 2015.  I'm not sure that anyone other than Adele could sell more than 950,000 copies in today's environment.  Even Taylor Swift, who is the only artist to sell over 1 million copies in a single week for four different albums, only sold 679,000 copies of her 2019 album "Lover" in its first week of release.  (I realize that your hypothetical assumes that 2019 Pearl Jam is at the level of popularity of 1993-94 Pearl Jam.)
    Streaming either has helped or hurt certain artists
    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I'm not talking about the percentage of the population that it represented.  I'm accounting for declining record sales and talking about the percentage of record sales that it represented.  Pearl Jam sold 900,000+ copies in an era when there were about 12 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Adele sold 3.4 million CDs in a week in an era when there were about 2.4 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Her sales that week represented some ridiculous percentage of all records sold that week-- I don't have the number but I recall that it was over 75 percent.  75 percent of 12 million is 9 million.
    Yea but I don't think she would sell 10 million in a week in 91 or 93. But it's more possible that vs. if released today would sell more than 950k. Especially if there was no streaming.
    I'm definitely speculating, but mostly I'm just trying to get across the point of how staggering a 3.4 million figure was for 2015.  I'm not sure that anyone other than Adele could sell more than 950,000 copies in today's environment.  Even Taylor Swift, who is the only artist to sell over 1 million copies in a single week for four different albums, only sold 679,000 copies of her 2019 album "Lover" in its first week of release.  (I realize that your hypothetical assumes that 2019 Pearl Jam is at the level of popularity of 1993-94 Pearl Jam.)
    Streaming either has helped or hurt certain artists
    I'm speaking only about sales.  Adele's album (and the four million-selling Swift albums) were not available to be streamed in their first weeks.  Rock (and country) acts sell more albums than pop and hip-hop acts, but pop and (especially) hip-hop acts dominate streaming.  Rock acts sold four times as many physical albums as hip-hop acts in 2019 and twice as many digital albums. 

    If Pearl Jam was as big today as it was in 1993-94, I think that would translate into about 400,000 in first-week sales.  Metallica's first-week sales for Hardwired... to Self-Destruct in 2016 were 291,000, and Metallica is the best-selling contemporary rock act in the U.S.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    edited March 11
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    igotid88 said:
    BF25394 said:
    The lowest sales total for a Billboard 200 number one album was-- unless this has been "bested" since and I forgot-- 823 by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie last year.  I think the lowest sales total for a number one album in sales was 29,000 for Drake's "Scorpion."

    Amazingly, the single best sales week since 1991 (and probably ever) was 3.4 million for Adele's "25" in its debut week in 2015.  This is roughly equivalent to an artist selling 10 million copies in a week back when PJ was setting records at just under 1 million for "Vs." and just under 900,000 for "Vitalogy." 
    I don't think that's right about it being equivalent to 10 million copies back in the early 90s. There are more people now. 250 million in the 90s to 300 in the 2010s. 
    I'm not talking about the percentage of the population that it represented.  I'm accounting for declining record sales and talking about the percentage of record sales that it represented.  Pearl Jam sold 900,000+ copies in an era when there were about 12 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Adele sold 3.4 million CDs in a week in an era when there were about 2.4 million CDs sold in total in an average week.  Her sales that week represented some ridiculous percentage of all records sold that week-- I don't have the number but I recall that it was over 75 percent.  75 percent of 12 million is 9 million.
    Yea but I don't think she would sell 10 million in a week in 91 or 93. But it's more possible that vs. if released today would sell more than 950k. Especially if there was no streaming.
    I'm definitely speculating, but mostly I'm just trying to get across the point of how staggering a 3.4 million figure was for 2015.  I'm not sure that anyone other than Adele could sell more than 950,000 copies in today's environment.  Even Taylor Swift, who is the only artist to sell over 1 million copies in a single week for four different albums, only sold 679,000 copies of her 2019 album "Lover" in its first week of release.  (I realize that your hypothetical assumes that 2019 Pearl Jam is at the level of popularity of 1993-94 Pearl Jam.)
    Streaming either has helped or hurt certain artists
    I'm speaking only about sales.  Adele's album (and the four million-selling Swift albums) were not available to be streamed in their first weeks.  Rock (and country) acts sell more albums than pop and hip-hop acts, but pop and (especially) hip-hop acts dominate streaming.  Rock acts sold four times as many physical albums as hip-hop acts in 2019 and twice as many digital albums. 

    If Pearl Jam was as big today as it was in 1993-94, I think that would translate into about 400,000 in first-week sales.  Metallica's first-week sales for Hardwired... to Self-Destruct in 2016 were 291,000, and Metallica is the best-selling contemporary rock act in the U.S.
    If Pearl Jam were as big today as in 93-94. Physical sales might be close to 2 million. Since there's about 50 million more people in the U.S. now than back then. 
    Post edited by igotid88 on
    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    The overall population has grown, but the record-buying population has precipitously declined.  Adele is the outlier.  For many of the people who bought her album, it was the only album they bought that year.

    In 1991, Metallica's Metallica sold 600,000 copies in its first week.  Two years later, Pearl Jam sold 950,000 copies of Vs. in its first week.  Using Metallica-- which is the top-selling rock album artist today-- as a baseline, with 291,000 in first-week sales in 2016 (as compared to Lightning Bolt's 166,000 in 2013*), there's no way a Pearl-Jam-at-peak-popularity outsells Metallica six- or sevenfold, which is what it would take to get close to 2 million.  Even Taylor Swift, who is the biggest album artist of the 2010s with four different albums topping 1 million in first-week sales, fell short of 700,000 in the first week for her 2019 release.  There's no way peak PJ sells three times that in the world of 2019.

    *Overall, there were 172 million CDs sold in 2013 and 122 million in 2016, so selling 291,000 in 2016 is even more impressive than selling 166,000 in 2013 than the difference between the numbers suggests.  There were almost 1 billion CDs sold in 2000; there were only 47.5 million CDs sold in 2019.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    But we're going with their popularity and physical sales. Rock bands don't stream well. So those people will buy the physical or downloads. Also in 2013 Billboard didn't count streams. Not that it would have made much difference. But you could add a few more. 
    I'm basically taking what a $1 was back in the day to what it's worth now.
    Adele selling that many in 2015 does not mean more will buy it back then. It will most likely be the same percentage which is something like .01%.
    Pearl Jam will probably sell something like 1.1 million if you inflate the vs. first week sales. Plus more for the extra 2 days they didn't count then for the first week
    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    Original post updated for week ending March 21, 2020.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    Both should go up next week in downloads 
    I miss igotid88
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 1,282
    And streams, too, but that would actually show up on the chart for April 11, which is two charts from the current chart.

    Updated for March 28.
  • igotid88igotid88 Posts: 18,945
    BF25394 said:
    And streams, too, but that would actually show up on the chart for April 11, which is two charts from the current chart.

    Updated for March 28.
    Yes
    I miss igotid88
Sign In or Register to comment.