Flop?

[Travis]

Originally Posted by Bryan

Lots of great views & input everyone!

If artists like Adele can sell *millions* with what I consider substandard tracks,then artists with GREAT ones should be selling more.

Adele substandard? More of today’s music could stand to be like hers.

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by Travis

Adele substandard? More of today’s music could stand to be like hers.

Yeah,I don't wanna hate on her really,I knew people are digging her right now but to me she's another stage school singer marketed perfectly that won't last (Winehouse,Bedingfield) etc.
I should have chosen a better example:Katy Perry.Now she's selling millions and *is* substandard for sure

[Macfanforever]

Great CD.I have to 50/50 on it .awesome reviews from critics.Poor promotion from WB records here in the states.Little or no radio airplay of any of the tunes on IYD.Of course Stevie being sick on the first week of relese did not help.

[Heartboy]

It's only been two months! Give it time!

Chill!

[Heartboy]

Originally Posted by Travis

Adele substandard? More of today’s music could stand to be like hers.

I'm 'bout to take that Adele song to the shed! Radio has KILLED it! I'm tired of the song, already!

[louielouie2000]

IYD has sold pretty much exactly like I expected it to, so I don't view it as a flop. I'd like to have seen it sell a lot better, but I knew that wasn't in the cards given the state of the industry, the economy, Stevie's age, etc.

[Christopher]

Originally Posted by APerfectLie

Sales wise, I would consider it a let down, but not a total flop. All this nonsense about "It sold really well in this day and age!" is crap. It has moved a decent amount of copies, but it is still selling lower than TISL when accounting for the general loss in album sales over the past 10 years. Mama should have sold over 217,000 in the US by now to be comparable to TISL.

I agree. Sales wise strictly, I'm a little disappointed IYD has not shifted over 200K by now in the US. As of last week it had sold over 120K in the US and over 10K in the UK, so it's probably @ 150K world wide - having charted in the top 40 album charts in @10 countries, which is still decent business for Stevie not having a high profile as a solo artist in 10 years and being a classic female rock artist of 63 years (young)
I do think sales were affected (by how much we'll never know) being sick at the onset of release & canceling TV appearances and concerts and such.

But the album is far from being a considered a "flop". Now, had IYD sold 20K during it's debut week & @50k copies to date (in this new record sales reality), received lukewarm critical reviews, in addition to fans by & large being disappointed in it's contents & artistic merit - then, under these circumstances, IYD would absolutely be considered an outright flop by now. This album could still climb to over 200K in the US by years end, with her up coming tour, possible TV appearances on late shows, The IYD documentary with more promotional videos culled from that made available online. But I don't see it going Gold anytime soon, or her having another top 20 AC or top 25 triple AAA charting song. The 1st release was her best chance of getting major radio exposure on those formats that will play her. Unless she has a fluke tie-in to a hit movie or TV show, the probability has dwindled considerably.

Personally, I'm very VERY happy with IYD - the album. And am extremely proud that Stevie released a solo record of its caliber at this time in her career. IMO, it's exactly the record that she's needed to record for a long time, probably since RAL. We can debate this forever, but I do strongly believe as a whole, IYD is a much stronger, cohesive record than TISL (and for me that is high praise, cause I loved TISL). And had IYD been released 10 years ago coming off the 2nd coming of Stevie Nicks following "The Dance" - IYD would have been a bigger hit album than TISL was imo.

Also consider, in addition to CD sales being 50% higher or more 10 years ago, communally we had a lot less distractions in our daily lives. Technology universally has sped us up and the outcome is a communal ADD-ish syndrome squeezing our attention spans to all time low thresholds for practically anything. We have everything at our fingertips...more music & entertainment then ever before to mull from, with very few people having the attention or desire to listen to a whole record by any one artist.

[skuncles]

As I said in my earlier post the ENTIRE industry is selling half of what it was selling a decade ago.
So if you want to judge how well In Your Dreams is selling, TISL shipped gold (shipped does not mean sold) gold (500,000 copies) after six weeks. As of 2011 it has SOLD roughly 660,000 copies. IYD is at about 121,000 sold so far. All things being equal and taking into account today's sales rate, if you cut TISL's sales in half for this point you get about 250,000 (shipped), if you double ITD's sale to date you get 242,000. It's right on par.
It's no different then when they list the highest grossing movies of all time, but to do so they adjust the numbers to today's ticket prices. "Star Wars" may have sold fewer tickets than say "Avatar", but when you jack up the 1977 ticket price to today, you see how it comes out in the top 5. Do the same thing with album sales.
For anyone who thought for a second IYD would sell on par with Bella Donna or The Wild Heart, you're insane. That was never going to happen with all the promotion in the world.
In Your Dreams is doing EXACTLY what any album from this point in Stevie's career would sell.

[Heartboy]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

Stevie's age

Age has nothin' to do with it, that was harsh.

[louielouie2000]

Originally Posted by Heartboy

Age has nothin' to do with it, that was harsh.

Age has everything to do with it. As Stevie lectured us in the Destiny Rules Documentary, the people who buy albums these days are from the ages of 10-30. People that age are buying the albums by the young, hot artists who are getting top 40 radio play, whose songs are showing up in their favorite tv shows, etc. Stevie's in her 60s now, so she just isn't a force in that demographic anymore.

Keep in mind, Cher was the oldest woman to ever have a #1 hit... and Stevie's now a full decade older than Cher was when she had that #1 song. So me saying Stevie's age is a factor isn't a dig at her one iota, it's just a cold hard fact that the woman herself is well aware of.

[Christopher]

Originally Posted by Heartboy

Age has nothin' to do with it, that was harsh.

I respectfully disagree. Age is indeed a factor to consider . There is more age bias today then ever before in Top 40 radio. Popular music is dominated by younger recording artists, even more blatantly manufactured as a "product". And, once your over 40, your appeal and commercial viability begins to dwindle twice as fast, even if your in the Dance/Pop or Hip Hop genre.

How many 60 year old+ female recording artists have sold over 100K cd's of a new release this year, or even a year back?? Even Madonna's last record 3 light years ago barely sold only over 700K copies in the US, and Madge is 10 years younger than Stevie and entrenched in the Dance/Pop genre. Had she not opportunistically teamed up w/ Justin Timberlake on her 1st and only hit single from that record, she probably would have sold much less.

[markolas]

Originally Posted by Heartboy

Age has nothin' to do with it, that was harsh.

It wasn't harsh, and yes, it has a lot to do with it. Women over 30 (and that's probably being generous) do not sell records. It's been that way for at least 15 years. It's not a swipe against Stevie to say that.

[markolas]

Honestly, it's done better than I expected it to. After 10 years, I really wasn't expecting it to debut in the top ten, or anywhere near it. I agree with others who've said it's done about as well as anyone could've realistically expected it to. Which is a good thing.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by skuncles

Robin Quivers then said that Lindsey Buckingham has a new album coming out and he says it's the best he's ever done.

What? Oh my goodness. I can't believe she knows anything about SWS. Great mention.

Michele

[APerfectLie]

Originally Posted by skuncles

As I said in my earlier post the ENTIRE industry is selling half of what it was selling a decade ago.
So if you want to judge how well In Your Dreams is selling, TISL shipped gold (shipped does not mean sold) gold (500,000 copies) after six weeks. As of 2011 it has SOLD roughly 660,000 copies. IYD is at about 121,000 sold so far. All things being equal and taking into account today's sales rate, if you cut TISL's sales in half for this point you get about 250,000 (shipped), if you double ITD's sale to date you get 242,000. It's right on par.
It's no different then when they list the highest grossing movies of all time, but to do so they adjust the numbers to today's ticket prices. "Star Wars" may have sold fewer tickets than say "Avatar", but when you jack up the 1977 ticket price to today, you see how it comes out in the top 5. Do the same thing with album sales.
For anyone who thought for a second IYD would sell on par with Bella Donna or The Wild Heart, you're insane. That was never going to happen with all the promotion in the world.
In Your Dreams is doing EXACTLY what any album from this point in Stevie's career would sell.

LOL WUT? Yeah, if you multiply IYD's sales by 10 it is doing amazing! Why would you cut TISL's sales in half AND double IYD's sales? You either cut TISL's sales in half OR double IYD, but doing both is pointless since you are then bringing TISL's sales up ten years and taking IYD's sales back ten years and comparing them. Record sales have fallen at 8% a year over the past ten years, meaning IYD should sell 43.44% of TISL. 43.44%*500,000=217,200 which leaves Stevie almost 100,000 short of where she should be.