Hello. Respectfully, I Dont 100 % Understand?

[David A]

Hello All

Ok, I am trying and will try to make this as clear as possible, and please be advised I am not trying at all to bash anyone, and or to instigate, I am really just trying to understand this, and for the most part this is a Forum, where we are all allowed to express our opinion and ask questions 
. “ I don’t care what it sells, as long as I enjoy it, that’s all I care about” = I understand that

. “As long as Stevie is happy with the album, then so am I” = I get that, sort of, but I get it

. “This album is the best she’s ever done, and that’s all I care about” = I get that

However, what I don’t completely understand is

“well, since she is a cult artist, or the state of the music business” etc.

Now , I want to be clear, I just don’t understand that logic. I agree Music is different now than 10 or 20 years ago, but it is still Music right? I mean, CD’s are still sold, people are buying them right? I mean, isn’t it something that is very important to sell records?. I mean, if that is the case, then couldn’t the case be made that RUMOURS sales are mis leading, as the music business was different then, and since they were the “popular group” of the time, that most people bought it because they were popular. I guess what im saying, here is a good example. Richard Marx just released a new album, called “Stories To Tell”, now based off the fact that he is with a record label I have never heard of, and the fact the album isn’t even in stores, only via Walmart, that I can safely assume he is just releasing It for HIS fans and because he still loves to make music. But, the fact is SN is with a major record label, and regardless of the amount, she is being advertised and promoted by a major record label, so that tells me that, even though it may not be SN #1 reason, but the fact is that they are trying to sell records. I guess what im saying is I don’t completely understand the argument that is being made for the fact that IYD will drop to #27 or below, but yet that is understandable because “she isn’t doing it for the sales”. Remember, I am just trying to have healthy conversation, and IYD appears to me to be with a major label and being promoted, so therefore why should it get a pass if it doesn’t sell well on the charts?

I hope you understand what im confused about. Using my example is good, and so are the artist who release music on their own, I get the assumption from them that they don’t care about sales, but IYD isn’t like those examples, but I don’t understand how IYD will get a free pass. I love this Forum, and I am not bashing anyone, and or offending anyone, I am just trying to understand other people’s views on this, that’s all 


Last example, Nascar. If someone has a car, and they decide to not run it in the race, and rather just practice, then I understand that the car isn’t up to race performance, but if that car is entered in the race, and lines up as part of the 43 car field, then that means they are ready to battle it out with the other 42 cars, and at the end, finishes 39th , then I would safely assume that’s a failed race for that car? And I wouldn’t want to say , “well, they never had any intention of competing”

Thank you

[chriskisn]

You can be assured that regardless of what the fans say, there will be disappointment in the Stevie camp if the album doesn't sell and there will be disappointed record execs.

Though to be honest, I think that their expectations from this album would be very different from the fan expectations.

I doubt that Stevie and co ever expected a number one album and three hit singles from this record.

[RavenOfRhiannon]

I am going to try to answer this for you, but someone else on this board will probably do a better job.

There are actually 2 different things we are talking about sales vs. art. Of course, a record company is not going to put up money for production and promotion for an album without expecting some kind of return on the investment. That means x number of copies have to be sold to break even. I get that. I want In Your Dreams to be successful saleswise so that:
A. Stevie will want to record again
B. Warner/Reprise is happy enough to keep her on the label
C. More people are introduced to her new music
As many people on this board have pointed out, the music business is not the same as it was in 2001, when TISL came out. Yes, it is still about selling music, but they are still in transition: Should there even be physical cds? Is that even cost effective? What about piracy? Digital Downloads?What's the best way to promote a new release? Internet, Oprah, Ellen? So success may not be measured the same way either.
That's the sales argument.

The art argument is that Stevie is happy with the album, and I am happy with the album. In the grand scheme of things, that's the only thing that matters to me. What is great about The Ledge, and other forums, is chatting, dissecting, and sharing our views on the album, but even if I were the only person on this planet that loved the album, I would be ok with that. It's Art, and it's subjective. I tend to want people to enjoy the things I love, so I try to introduce them to Stevie and such. If the like it, great!, If they don't, Oh Well...

[mylittledemon]

I'd imagine to an artist that sales are an indicator of sorts as to their popularity, and whether or not people love her work. Glowing written reviews don't mean d*ck if people don't buy. But then if Stevie were to purely focus on that, she'd never make albums.

If she makes some money for Reprise they get to keep her and she goes on to make more records. Sales allow Stevie to stay on the label. That's really the only point of her needing to sell albums. She, no doubt, got an advance of some kind on her contract ... Unless of course she has a contract with them for multiple albums. But as we've learned... you don't need sales to keep making records. Look at Lindsey.

[MacMan]

^^ Aside from distribution and manufacturing I haven't the slightest idea why someone in Stevie's position would need the label. She's probably got enough money to fund recording of albums... and she can always generate money through touring.

She recorded in her home... So costs were kept down for producing the music - she may have covered all the production costs for the album and the filming out of her own pocket, we don't know - plus paid Dave out of her pocket for his services etc. The little bit of promotion on the side done by the label and the manufacturing, designs of the album and distribution costs for the cd maybe the only thing she owes the label for... So if those costs are kept to a minimum, she wouldn't need to sell a gazzilion cds to pay them back. Her team all appear to be separate from the label - Management and PR (Frontline and Liz) and they are likely paid a percentage of what ever money she brings in from touring and album sales over and above what she owes the label.


Chart success is great - but it's only one measure of success... The real measure is at the end of it all did come out ahead of what you spent on the project.. And we'll never really now that.

[Crystal_Elle]

^^ Aside from distribution and manufacturing I haven't the slightest idea why someone in Stevie's position would need the label. She's probably got enough money to fund recording of albums... and she can always generate money through touring.

She recorded in her home... So costs were kept down for producing the music - she may have covered all the production costs for the album and the filming out of her own pocket, we don't know - plus paid Dave out of her pocket for his services etc. The little bit of promotion on the side done by the label and the manufacturing, designs of the album and distribution costs for the cd maybe the only thing she owes the label for... So if those costs are kept to a minimum, she wouldn't need to sell a gazzilion cds to pay them back. Her team all appear to be separate from the label - Management and PR (Frontline and Liz) and they are likely paid a percentage of what ever money she brings in from touring and album sales over and above what she owes the label.


Chart success is great - but it's only one measure of success... The real measure is at the end of it all did come out ahead of what you spent on the project.. And we'll never really now that.

The readers digest version reason why she needs a label is for distribution, promotion, and marketing. Even the small independent labels have to outsource their distribution, and a lot of the times promotion. They just don't have the big time connections that it takes to get the album in most stores and get a single to the radio stations. Unfortunately, in the music industry they measure success by sales and chart position. Given the current sales, I'm thinking Reprise is still in the whole with this one. Let's cross our fingers that Dancing With The Stars helps sales.

My two cents. ~~~ I will admit that I think Reprise did not put as much effort into this album as they could have. They might not have expected it to sell much, so they didn't want to put that much money out. I guess that's why the videos they shot were so low budget. Commercials for the album would definitely have helped in a promotion sense. Putting a video out sooner would have helped a little bit. A second single most definitely should have been released already. Radio still matters. A lot of people still listen to radio and find out about new music from it. If they wanted to go balls to the wall they could have even released "For What It's Worth" to country radio. Turn it over to WB Nashville. Yes, I know, in my dreams. :laugh: Stevie seemed to do a ton of interviews. Getting sick and having to cancel a major tv appearance didn't help matters. I just wonder why she wasn't scheduled on more shows? Not that it matters now.

I hope I at least explained something. It's been a long day and I didn't get much sleep last night. I feel like I'm just rambling and talking in circles. haha.

[DeeGeMe]

It's called the music business for a reason.