Yes aphrodite had great songs but didnt have stand out singles which i hope is not the case with the new album,

Of course you can say the wrong single was picked. It didn't perform well and was only the second single. Whether you like the track or not, the general public didn't connect with it. I also agree that a deluxe edition of the album could have been released including new unheard material. Other artists like pixie Lott and gaga have done it to significantly boost album sales and reignite interest in a flagging album. I believe there was talk of this when the album was first released but they abandoned it too quickly.

 

Both Pixie and Gaga had successful albums before the deluxe editions came out though :lol:

Many albums are successful pre-deluxe but the deluxe rockets to different heights. Lady Gaga sold well before the deluxe but the deluxe sold more and likewise with Emeli Sande.

Aphrodite was not a big seller though and I doubt there was much interest in a re-release.

Do re-releases of flop/under-performing albums ever work? I'm trying to think of an example and, well, I can't.

 

Do re-releases of flop/under-performing albums ever work? I'm trying to think of an example and, well, I can't.

 

Caro Emerald's Deleted Scenes from the Cutting Room Floor, I think Shania Twain's Come On Over, Maroon 5's Hands All Over. In fact, many of the multi-million sellers only became successful after the re-release. Of course, a massive lead single for the re-release would need to be in store.

Edited May 7, 201312 yr by liamk97

Maroon 5 Hands all over really only became successful with the deluxe

Both David Guetta's album benefited hugely from re-releases as they had not sold overly strong pre the re-releases.

Chris Brown exclusive had totally bombed until the re-release

Atomic Kittens first album was the same

 

They are just a few albums that spring to mind but i am sure i will think of others. That said, the re-releases appear to only be successful if a new single is released to promote the re-release, run by Leona Lewis rocketed sales of spirit for Leona, Bad romance did it for Lady Gaga, so Kylie needs a have in a sense 2 killer lead singles if she was to really make a a success of the new album and a re-release.

Come on Over was never a flop at any point. It did well out of the gate.

 

The re-release of come on over from my memory is where it really started to sell in big numbers though.

I'd say with the cases of Maroon 5 and Atomic Kitten, they had extremely rare career saving smashes with the singles which boosted their albums (the ones which were tacked on to the existing albums, I don't believe 'Moves Like Jagger' was a part of that era before they did this). They were both as good as dead in the water before this.

Edited May 8, 201312 yr by Silver Rocket

Some of the more recent best selling albums would make you question if without deluxes would the sales be as good. Emeli Sande's deluxe version has sold more than the original. Bruno Mars doowops and hooligans got a great boost from the deluxe as did plus deluxe by Ed Sheeran. Granted these albums were successful beforehand but i would wonder would the sales have been as strong overall had the deluxes not been released.

They likely would have been. All those albums had sold well more than Aphrodite before their deluxe editions, added to the fact they were big names at the time.

Whats the point in having a killer lead single and then saving another one for a re-release? Makes more sense to have more than one killer single on the main album

rather than having to reply on a re release to sell.

Is the whole point that the fans go out and buy the album again so in essence they get double the sales from the fans and hope to grab the extra casual buyers, that is how i have viewed the deluxe thinking. I have no issue at all about purchasing deluxe album when they are worth purchasing, in my opinion the fame/fame monster by lady gaga was well worth purchasing a second time as was progress/progressed by Take That as both are examples of great value for money.

Most of the time it is 2 or 3 extra tracks and a different cover. Much as I love Kylie, I wouldn't buy the album again.

If it had 8-9 brand new tracks would you buy it?

Maybe, but thats nearly a whole album, why just waste the tracks on a re-release of an already flagging album?

I am not a massive fan of re-releases in any shape tbh, I'd rather have a killer album with single worthy tracks from the get go.

Aphrodite was not a good album imo, it just didnt click with me. Hopefully no re-releases, I want fresh material.

Kylie's never been one for re-releases, except for like special 'tour edition's which are limited releases so I'm sure we won't have to worry.

im split on re-releases but i have been a sucker in the past for a good re-release.

Re-releases can be a good thing. It depends whats on them. Gaga's first album was re-released and that was worth getting because it had 8 or 9 new songs on it but I hate it when record companies re-release an album with one or two new songs and a previously unreleased remix. Its just milking it and not fair on the fans who bought the first ediiton.