September 14th, 2005 11:53 AM |
|
|
Steel Wheels |
The Stones settle for a No. 3 entry for "A Bigger Bang" (Virgin), with first week sales of 129,000 copies. The band opened the North American leg of its world tour Aug. 21 in Boston and last night (Sept. 13) played New York's Madison Square Garden. The group recently donated $1 million to the American Red Cross' Disaster Relief Fund to help those suffering in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
|
September 14th, 2005 12:51 PM |
|
|
Stones |
#3 is pretty good for an album with pretty much zero radio airplay. |
September 14th, 2005 12:58 PM |
|
|
Ten Thousand Motels |
I hate to imagine who's #1 and #2....don't tell me because I don't want to know. |
September 14th, 2005 01:02 PM |
|
|
Honky Tonk Man |
quote: Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
I hate to imagine who's #1 and #2....don't tell me because I don't want to know.
Well whoever is number 1 in the States, it can't be worse than the bastard who kept the boys at number 2 over here!
Fuckin' James Blunt! |
September 14th, 2005 01:04 PM |
|
|
Jair |
Hey, this morning, when I woke up and went to a café, the local radiostation was playing Biggest Mistake! Love it! One of the best ABB songs!!!
Man, checking Billboard, even Coldplay's "X&Y" reached the number 1.
[Edited by Jair] |
September 14th, 2005 07:40 PM |
|
|
Soldatti |
US First week sales:
1994 - Voodoo Lounge (#2 - 154,000)
1995 - Stripped (#9 - 105,000)
1997 - Bridges To Babylon (#3 - 160,000)
1998 - No Security (#34 - 38,141)
2002 - Forty Licks (#2 - 309,832)
2004 - Jump Back (#30 - 29,046)
2004 - Live Licks (#50 - 19,676)
2005 - A Bigger Bang (#3, 128,705) |
September 14th, 2005 08:13 PM |
|
|
Steel Wheels |
AOL just announced that the album stumbled into US charts at #3.
At #3, it's the top rock album in the country. At #3, it's also the best album since I don't know when.
In honor of the lads, I'm gonna get me some beers and groove on out to A Bigger Bang.
|
September 14th, 2005 08:42 PM |
|
|
The Wick |
Chart numbers don't really mean much to me personally because the music on the charts is almost without fail, horrid, but #3 is what they deserve for what has been one of the lamest publicity productions ever. I honestly believe they are not as commercial as people think they are (how many bands put their entire album on their websites before release, especially one of the biggest bands ever), and that might add to the lack of publicity, but this has been beyond lame.
1) The confusion over what the single is has been evident, because the radio airplay claims RJ one minute and SOL the next.
2) Releasing a piece of garbage like SOL as the first single is terrible because it doesn't represent the album at all and would make anyone think it's a disaster (and please don't give me figures around the world). As fans, we were bloody SOL in hoping for something better.
3) The delay of the release of the video has been pathetic. Unless they have some hope of the video causing a rebound and they have some fancy advertising team trying to time these things surreptitiously, it has been a disaster.
4) The interviews they have done have been pathetic. Bloody Extra is about as lame as you can get. A performance here or there on an awards show would have helped. That World Music Awards thing was one of their lamest appearances ever.
They simply failed to capitalize on all the positive reviews of the album. |
September 14th, 2005 08:53 PM |
|
|
Phog |
Doesn't mean shit. Kanye West #1, 50-Cent #2, Stones #3. All this tells me is that the US is completely in love with the hip hop genre. That the Stones made it to #3 in this day and age is a minor triumph. Sad but true. |
September 14th, 2005 09:50 PM |
|
|
Soldatti |
quote: Phog wrote:
Doesn't mean shit. Kanye West #1, 50-Cent #2, Stones #3. All this tells me is that the US is completely in love with the hip hop genre. That the Stones made it to #3 in this day and age is a minor triumph. Sad but true.
Agreed, a US #3 album in 2005 (and #2 in UK) it's great. |
September 14th, 2005 10:28 PM |
|
|
Phog |
As others here have said, if the Stones had delayed or pushed-up the release date that might've gotten them the #1 slot. Still, I just don't seem to care. I'm happy they put out a solid record and are on the road.
Most kids (aka-record buyers) today in the US don't care about the Stones. They care about Kanye, 50-Cent, Eminem, etc... Even if the Stones sold concert tickets for $40 a huge majority of the hip hop crowd wouldn't give a shit. Guess what? Eminem could play for free and I wouldn't walk across the street to see him. Fair is fair. They have their music, we have ours.
On the other hand, it is a little depressing to see the general lack of enthusiasm over a new Stones platter. One can only hope that the Stones "sold" more copies via free downloads. |
September 14th, 2005 11:40 PM |
|
|
IanBillen |
The Stones Timing from their last two studio releases has been horrible and idiotic. Why release an album weeks into a tour? What happened to the good old days when the album came out a few weeks before the tour?
Instead of releasing it in early August as they should of they decided to wait (for who knows what ungodly reason) until the tour and most media hype about it had slowed because the tour had already began a couple weeks earlier. Secondly they chise to release it percisely in time to go up against West.
This leads me to believe that Virgin, nor the Stones were never really concerned about a number one spot. If they were they almost purposely set themselves up for a let down.
Ian
[Edited by IanBillen]
[Edited by IanBillen] |
September 14th, 2005 11:51 PM |
|
|
Child of the Moon |
quote: IanBillen wrote:
The Stones Timing from their last two studio releases has been horrible and idiotic. Why release an album weeks into a tour? What happened to the good old days when the album came out a few weeks before the tour?
Didn't Let It Bleed come out well after the '69 US tour? |
September 14th, 2005 11:56 PM |
|
|
Soldatti |
I said it three weeks ago: the right release date was Aug. 23. The #1 album during that week sold 101,000 copies.
Great idea: the Stones going against the rapers and the guy with the US #1 single. The Virgin marketing team must be fired, morons. |
September 15th, 2005 02:02 AM |
|
|
pdog |
Kids, not us, buy most of the music. If you want to make money, create and market something teenage girls would use or want.
Who was the biggest crush for a 15 year old girl in 1971?
Not Mick, it was David Cassidy!
It's not that younger kids don't like The Stones, right now they're doing what kids do, rebel and fuck and listen to music their parents hate. We did it too! There's exceptions, but not many!
Kurt Cobain killed himself b/c he feared growing old with all the baggage from his success. He never wanted to succeed like he did and then was afraid he'd fail.
I just enjoy enjoy The Stones, I could give a rats ass if anyone buys the record. |
September 15th, 2005 07:02 AM |
|
|
IanBillen |
[quote]Child of the Moon wrote:
Didn't Let It Bleed come out well after the '69 US tour?
One or two out of how many over how many years. Not two in a row, not in this day and age. Let's face it, if The Stones want a number one album these days they better do everything right.
Ian |
September 15th, 2005 07:37 AM |
|
|
Gazza |
quote: Child of the Moon wrote:
Didn't Let It Bleed come out well after the '69 US tour?
didnt really matter, then. |There was less of a tie-in between an album and a tour as there is now. Besides that was a short tour (less than a month) anyway |
September 15th, 2005 07:39 AM |
|
|
Gazza |
quote: Soldatti wrote:
Great idea: the Stones going against the rapers
I presume thats a typo. Or going by the lyrical content of some of those rap artists, maybe its not! |
September 16th, 2005 03:54 AM |
|
|
wgwalsh |
[quote]IanBillen wrote:
Let's face it, if The Stones want a number one album these days they better do everything right.
Ian
Mr. Ian:
The Stones don't do everything right. They are human beings like you and me. We make mistakes and so do they. At least they had the nuts to try.
wgw |