Fleetwood Mac & Mick Fleetwood sales figures
 

This is from ask Billboard on Billboard's website.

MICK VS. FLEETWOOD

Hi Keith,

I check your column weekly and really enjoy the questions asked and answered, so thank you for that. My questions are regarding Fleetwood Mac and Mick Fleetwood.

Both have released albums this year. Fleetwood Mac with "Live In Boston," and the Mick Fleetwood Band's "Something Big." I was just wondering how well these two releases are doing sales-wise and whether or not you can provide us with any sales numbers for Fleetwood Mac's albums during the Nielsen SoundScan era.

Thanks for your time.

Peter Taylor

Hello Peter,

Since its release in June, Fleetwood Mac's "Live In Boston" (Reprise) has moved 50,000 units in the United States, according to Nielsen SoundScan. The Mick Fleetwood Band's Sanctuary album "Something Big" has shifted less than 2,000 copies since it bowed in late September.

Here is a list of Fleetwood Mac's other Nielsen SoundScan-era major U.S. releases, with their sales-to-date:

"25 Years: The Chain" (1995, 79,000)
"Time" (1995, 50,000)
"The Dance" (1997, 4.3 million)
"The Very Best of Fleetwood Mac" (2002, 958,000)
"Say You Will" (2003, 838,000)

Cool!!!!!

That question was asked by MEEEEEEEE.......

awww, say you will shoulda sold better. Although, i didn't buy my copy, hehe.

You WHAT? please tell me someone else bought it for you as a gift.

uh, sorry, downloaded as a gift? I was gonna buy it, then this guy brought it over...and i'm poor...I may still buy it, though! :sorry:

:distress:

For that... You must buy the limited edition! :eek:

oh, hush, Mr. No Votey. What was i supposed to do? be all "no, i'm sorry, i can't accept this thoughtful gift, it was dl'd"? ok, how bout this - you send me $15, and i'll buy Say You Will with it... :D Deal?

I wonder if the band and/or Warners broke even on those sales (in terms of recording expenses, and not counting touring).

I hope not!

It might be nice to see the big labels dump Fleetwood Mac entirely. They'd be forced to sign with a tiny label or an indie, & might even have to play clubs for $35 a ticket!

Remember, their loss is your gain.

Albums or not, I doubt Fleetwood Mac would EVER have to play clubs. They are known as such a great live band, which is why their tickets were so expensive this time around. SYW wasn't a huge success, and they could have been scared enough by that fact to say, "We'd better lower the tour prices." But I think they know that they didn't even have to make SYW in order to launch a successful tour. Maybe when they're 90 and can barely move will they have to play clubs, but their still good enough live to do the arenas.

Playing clubs does not connote poor performances.

Some would argue that the intimate setting of a club makes for a better musical show and a more intimate and fun fan experience.

You bet!! In total agreement here.

Somehow I have the feeling that Fleetwood Mac would retire before the members collectively agreed to sign with some tiny little label that wouldn't have the ability to front them a million dollars to record an album.

So I think their loss would be our loss in turn. :shrug:

No, it definitely doesn't connote poor performances, and, yes, it definitely does allow for a more intimate experience... but, then, it's also not exactly feasible when you have about ten thousand people, on average, attending your shows.

The dates on a Fleetwood Mac club tour would probably sell-out in a matter of minutes, and unless they did five shows in each city, then about 9 thousand+ fans would miss out on the opportunity to see them.

Stevie and Lindsey could do club tours as solo acts, but I have a hard time imagining Fleetwood Mac doing a club tour, without leaving thousands of disappointed people out in the proverbial rain.
Now, if FM toured more frequently, maybe it would be a different story. But their tours tend to be "events" that happen only every 5-6 years (or more).