October 25, 200915 yr Author This single is not for poor starving children it is for a hospital in London that treats sick kids. The hospital is known to get 50 million pounds worth of donationsd per year, so anything this single brings in is next to nothing compared to usual donations. Simon Cowell has one thing on his mind ruining the music industry he has been quoted on several occasions stating he doesn't even like music. Go figure eh?
October 25, 200915 yr Except a million pounds is a lot of money no matter how much money they get in the first place.
October 25, 200915 yr Author Oh please stop trying to defend that the main reason behind this single being released is for charity. It is completely disgusting.
October 25, 200915 yr Oh please stop trying to defend that the main reason behind this single being released is for charity. It is completely disgusting. Calm yourself down! I think you have this point enough times in this thread :wacko:
October 25, 200915 yr Author Calm yourself down! I think you have this point enough times in this thread Don't talk to me like I am a child. Either way no one who buys this will even listen to it.
October 25, 200915 yr Oh please stop trying to defend that the main reason behind this single being released is for charity. It is completely disgusting. I think you've repeated yourself a lot more times than I have.
October 25, 200915 yr Don't talk to me like I am a child. Either way no one who buys this will even listen to it. What a ridiculous generalisation! You have come out with some ridiculously obsessive stuff in your day-long crusade against the X Factor - while it is fairly annoying how it dominates the charts in the latter 3 months of the year, you can't exactly fault him for giving it to charity...I mean, let's face it, the song would probably sell a bucketload without the charity tag on it. How else are all the X Factor releases doing so well, eh? DEMAND. Hence why your 'they should do a 10K run for charity instead' theory is stupid - it's an easy way of raising money which plays to the participants' strengths AND meets demand! As much as we all dislike it, we cannot say that there isn't demand for this...and your point about a monopoly is stupid anyway. Monopolies work in terms of practices, not popularity. X Factor has a hegemony when it comes to music sales but it is nowhere near a point where it is drowning everything else out...I'd say it makes up about 20% of music sales? It's verging on an oligopoly, but nowhere near enough to a monopoly to make it illegal. Now, pray tell why you seem to have such venom for an issue which doesn't affect you in any way whatsoever? Who cares about a chart position? It makes no difference to the actual sales...
October 25, 200915 yr Don't talk to me like I am a child. Either way no one who buys this will even listen to it. Don't act like one then! :lol: You have made your point enough times, please allow others to discuss the single.
October 25, 200915 yr Don't talk to me like I am a child. Either way no one who buys this will even listen to it. Perhaps when you stop acting like a child in tantrum mode people won't talk to you as if you are...
October 25, 200915 yr Jesus I think thats a bit harsh Yeah maybe it was, sorry if I offended anyone (doubt I did :lol:) But he really needs to f*** off.
October 25, 200915 yr Author What a ridiculous generalisation! You have come out with some ridiculously obsessive stuff in your day-long crusade against the X Factor - while it is fairly annoying how it dominates the charts in the latter 3 months of the year, you can't exactly fault him for giving it to charity...I mean, let's face it, the song would probably sell a bucketload without the charity tag on it. How else are all the X Factor releases doing so well, eh? DEMAND. Hence why your 'they should do a 10K run for charity instead' theory is stupid - it's an easy way of raising money which plays to the participants' strengths AND meets demand! As much as we all dislike it, we cannot say that there isn't demand for this...and your point about a monopoly is stupid anyway. Monopolies work in terms of practices, not popularity. X Factor has a hegemony when it comes to music sales but it is nowhere near a point where it is drowning everything else out...I'd say it makes up about 20% of music sales? It's verging on an oligopoly, but nowhere near enough to a monopoly to make it illegal. Now, pray tell why you seem to have such venom for an issue which doesn't affect you in any way whatsoever? Who cares about a chart position? It makes no difference to the actual sales... Of course the song would not sell without the charity tag. The whole campaign is centred round this charity issue. They would not even get away with releasing these dreadful covers if it was not for the charity tag. Plays to the participants strengths? Half of them can't sing a note in tune. There is not a demand for this single. There is demand for Leona and Alex but are you really telling me X Factor fans are demanding a group song to buy? Please. It completely is drowning everything else out. Other acts may aswell stop releasing from October to December as they have no chance at making number one. I'm pretty sure that X Factor related sales make up over80% of the top ten this week. It does affect my enjoyment of the chart actually. I'm not the only person with venom towards the X Factor just check the 100,000 plus that bought Hallelujah last year just to make a point.
October 25, 200915 yr my 2nd fave MJ song but seriously I dont want these average people to wreck the song and get #1 with it! too much X-Factor chart topping fo rmy liking!
October 25, 200915 yr Um, the fact that there is demand for whatever happens on the X Factor shows you to be wrong. Why else do you think the winner's song sells so much? Why else do you think almost every X Factor contestant does well with their first single? Because of the demand that X Factor spawns - as the first single from all of them, do you really think there isn't demand for it? I am indeed telling you that there is a massive X Factor fanbase which demands a group song - do you really think Simon Cowell would allow it to fail? Even bloody Leon Jackson managed to get a top three with barely any backing... The participants strengths are obviously (John and Edward aside) in singing, even if it isn't their biggest strength. Why should they not raise money for charity with something they can do easily purely for the sake of a chart anorak who can't handle what other people want? X Factor related sales may make up a massive amount of the sales of the top 10 this week, but that's because of the anomalous state of affairs this week - Cheryl smashing records etc. In terms of data collection Cheryl would be rightly noted as being an anomaly! In any case, I was referring to single sales as a whole, not the top 10 (because it isn't that hard to be dominant in a top ten...). X Factor is not dominating single sales as a whole, merely boosting them. It doesn't affect YOU. It affects your enjoyment of statistics, which is all the chart is. I would suggest you go outside and do something if you are finding yourself brought to such a state of anger by a manipulation of otherwise meaningless statistics which most people are happy to enjoy, even be annoyed by, but realise them for what they are...let's face it, I doubt Lady GaGa will be crying into her corn flakes on Monday morning when she finds out she got to #2 with still stellar sales. After all, sales are what matter, not the chart position - you can't pay the bills with a McFly number one! No, you aren't the person with venom towards the X Factor. You're the only person that seems to have been whipped into such a massive frenzy by it however...and on the Hallelujah note, I'm shocked you don't see that as a manipulation unto itself. I'm sure Simon Cowell was just rubbing his hands given he managed to 'manipulate' the entire top three (including Run) last Christmas...
October 25, 200915 yr Author Um, the fact that there is demand for whatever happens on the X Factor shows you to be wrong. Why else do you think the winner's song sells so much? Why else do you think almost every X Factor contestant does well with their first single? Because of the demand that X Factor spawns - as the first single from all of them, do you really think there isn't demand for it? I am indeed telling you that there is a massive X Factor fanbase which demands a group song - do you really think Simon Cowell would allow it to fail? Even bloody Leon Jackson managed to get a top three with barely any backing... The participants strengths are obviously (John and Edward aside) in singing, even if it isn't their biggest strength. Why should they not raise money for charity with something they can do easily purely for the sake of a chart anorak who can't handle what other people want? X Factor related sales may make up a massive amount of the sales of the top 10 this week, but that's because of the anomalous state of affairs this week - Cheryl smashing records etc. In terms of data collection Cheryl would be rightly noted as being an anomaly! In any case, I was referring to single sales as a whole, not the top 10 (because it isn't that hard to be dominant in a top ten...). X Factor is not dominating single sales as a whole, merely boosting them. It doesn't affect YOU. It affects your enjoyment of statistics, which is all the chart is. I would suggest you go outside and do something if you are finding yourself brought to such a state of anger by a manipulation of otherwise meaningless statistics which most people are happy to enjoy, even be annoyed by, but realise them for what they are...let's face it, I doubt Lady GaGa will be crying into her corn flakes on Monday morning when she finds out she got to #2 with still stellar sales. After all, sales are what matter, not the chart position - you can't pay the bills with a McFly number one! No, you aren't the person with venom towards the X Factor. You're the only person that seems to have been whipped into such a massive frenzy by it however...and on the Hallelujah note, I'm shocked you don't see that as a manipulation unto itself. I'm sure Simon Cowell was just rubbing his hands given he managed to 'manipulate' the entire top three (including Run) last Christmas... Believe me I am not stupid enough to buy Hallelujah on that basis, I was suggesting there were people out there who bought it just for their hate of the X Factor cover singles. Read other forums today including Michael Jackson ones and it is clear the anger towards this. Had these 'singers' released an original song I wouldn't have even bothered posting but they are ruining a classic and spitting on Michael Jacksons grave. I am passionate about music and to see one man manipulate an entire generation for years [Westlife, X Factor] is disgusting. No matter what people say about Americans at least they have a backbone and can formulate their own musical tastes instead of having it dictated to them. Edited October 25, 200915 yr by Rated R
October 25, 200915 yr People either version of Hallelujah because they thought it was the better cover from the 2, Both songs were covers, the original only charted in the 30's. Also you can only record a cover with the authority from the owner of the music. Edited October 25, 200915 yr by Just Plain Steve
October 25, 200915 yr Didn't R Kelly write 'You Are Not Alone'? He's probably desperate for the funds these days :kink:
Create an account or sign in to comment