Born This Way still has the highest digital sales debut in Billboard history tho

Of which 440k were old at 99c :lol:

 

 

Hmm, I don't think we were, really! I think it was fair to assume Taylor's monstrous success and mass appeal had been mainly down to her accessible, modern country sound and wholesome image. Despite the fact 'Red' was pop-centred and still achieved massive opening sales, there were songs on it that clearly would have appealed to the country music market, who are obviously much more loyal album-buyers than others. Also, since the debut of 'Red', she's had quite a bit of negative media attention about her private life which may have tainted the relatable image on which her success was built. So in further alienating her original country fanbase by transitioning completely to pop with '1989', I don't think anyone could have expected her first week to actually increase on that of 'Red', especially considering the state of 2014 album sales in general.

 

In saying that though, I'm very happy to have been proven wrong! It just shows how much of a phenomenon Taylor Swift is as a personality and brand, considering that her music and other factors have changed significantly and yet her sales are higher than ever.

 

I think 1989's success is a validation of some things I've been reading about for a while regarding the traditional, strict separation of country and non-country audiences. Namely that the line is blurred today. Young country listeners also listen to pop and don't feel so protective of their artists as before. Taylor is only one of many artists in the last five years that hasn't just crossed over, but hops back and forth all the time. I think gone are the says of a pop That Don't Impress me Much with synths and country one with twang.

 

It's also the result of an extraordinary branding and marketing campaign as you say. She went from singing about the mean 14 year old popular girl stealing her boyfriend only a few years ago to... MULTIPLE front page reviews and articles in the New York Times for 1989. She always had fans in young people and parents who want to let their children listen to wholesome music... but something happened with 1989 where she was suddenly viewed as an adult, as a serious artist. This is a reflection of how her music has improved, to be sure, especially lyrically. But it's also the result of an incredibly smart and world class promotional campaign (you can read more about that at Hits Daily Double).

Of which 440k were old at 99c :lol:

The 99c deal is nothing to be ashamed of, it's brilliant marketing. People don't even realize after 3 years that Amazon actually paid Interscope and Gaga full price for the album but they made a deal to sell it for 99c because they thought they would make a big profit out of it. Amazon did the deal to promote their new streaming service, the price was the deal offered by Amazon, but Amazon paid FULL PRICE to Interscope and Gaga for every copy sold.

 

If people didn't want the album then they wouldn't have bought it whether it be $14 or 99c.

The 99c deal is nothing to be ashamed of, it's brilliant marketing.

But it has tarnished her record because everyone remembers it as the album where nearly half the sales were 99c, and the album that brought about the Billboard rule change.

 

 

 

 

 

True. I kinda feel bad for her in that regard - as much as the 99c thing may not even have had anything to do with her, she's never gonna be seen as a legitimate million seller.

A record is a record

 

http://38.media.tumblr.com/3417c2c067b266ceb69b9bdf0d7b8488/tumblr_n3qdbbhvV41rfduvxo1_250.gif

 

I don't see what's tarnishing or non-legitimate about it, if Amazon used the album to promote their new streaming service at the time. It has nothing to do with Gaga or being desperate for sales. Regardless if it was offered by one retailer for 99c for 2 days. "Sold" implies that there's an intent to purchase from the consumers. It wasn't offered for "free". People wouldn't buy the album if they didn't like it even if it was for free.

Edited November 7, 201410 yr by Kath ♡

You have good points Kath, but the reason it's "tarnished"/I feel bad for her is because no matter how legit the sales were, this argument will come up every time Born This Way's first week does :P The general public that are aware of what happened with BTW's first week will always think "oh yeah that's the thing where she sold them for 99c isn't it?", which devalues her achievement quite a bit :(

A record is a record

 

http://38.media.tumblr.com/3417c2c067b266ceb69b9bdf0d7b8488/tumblr_n3qdbbhvV41rfduvxo1_250.gif

 

I don't see what's tarnishing or non-legitimate about it, if Amazon used the album to promote their new streaming service at the time. It has nothing to do with Gaga or being desperate for sales. Regardless if it was offered by one retailer for 99c for 2 days. "Sold" implies that there's an intent to purchase from the consumers. It wasn't offered for "free". People wouldn't buy the album if they didn't like it even if it was for free.

If Taylor's 99c Microsoft sales had been included in her total and she had beaten Britney's record because of it, what would have happened?

 

Need I say more :lol:

 

 

 

This isn't exactly the same situation as Born This Way, but I'm hearing a lot that 1989's huge opening is because of Taylor's lack of cooperation with Spotify and the resulting inability of consumers to stream the album. I don't think it necessarily devalues the achievement but it has caused a number of people to shrug it off with an (overly) simple explanation.

If Taylor Swift beat Britney with 99c offers I wouldn't consider it a legit record-breaker then. Lady Gaga still sold 600k of legit copies which is still huge

... I'm hearing a lot that 1989's huge opening is because of Taylor's lack of cooperation with Spotify and the resulting inability of consumers to stream the album.

That's just ridiculous :lol:

 

 

Yeah that's a joke. If I want to listen to music for free and a way to listen to it for free is taken away, I'm going to choose the other extremely obvious way to listen for free.

 

Taylor has another entry this week in the Top 30 with her 401k, and will probably enter again next week :lol:

 

 

Top 10 Group Sales Weeks:

Rank. Chart Date - Sales - TITLE - Artist

 

01. 13/10/12 - 599,915 - BABEL - Mumford & Sons

02. 14/12/13 - 546,230 - MIDNIGHT MEMORIES - One Direction

03. 01/12/12 - 539,665 - TAKE ME HOME - One Direction

04. 27/02/10 - 501,665 - SOLDIER OF LOVE - Sade

05. 13/02/10 - 480,922 - NEED YOU NOW - Lady Antebellum

06. 12/11/11 - 447,411 - MYLO XYLOTO - Coldplay

07. 06/12/14 - 387,098 - FOUR - One Direction (2014 debut)

08. 07/06/14 - 382,665 - GHOST STORIES - Coldplay (2014 debut)

09. 01/10/11 - 347,479 - OWN THE NIGHT - Lady Antebellum

10. 08/06/13 - 338,677 - RANDOM ACCESS MEMORIES - Daft Punk

It's quite funny to see how one-note the group sales list is right now. 3 acts make up 70% of the list, with 2 acts taking up 50% alone. There aren't very many successful groups right now.

 

J Cole is the only solo male to crack 300k this year.