| November 24th, 2004 10:28 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
NEW RECORD: Live Licks is out of the Billboard 200 and any Billboard chart in his third week, by far this is the worst US charting album EVER for the Stones beating No Security (8 wks) and Rewind (11 wks). Live Licks sold only 33,000 copies in three weeks.
Alfie is out of the chart too while Jump Back is steady at #127 selling more than 10,000 copies each week (191,000 so far), why this album is selling is a mistery...
Billboard Update - Issue Date: Dec. 4, 2004
JUMP BACK
The Billboard 200 - #127 (Run so far: *30*-52-58-65-75-93-103-105-103-98-104-115-127 - 11,300 copies sold / 191,000 copies so far)
Comprehensive Albums - #130 (Run so far: *30*-52-58-65-75-94-104-106-104-100-106-118-130)
SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL (remix)
Hot Dance Singles Sales - #23 (58 wks on chart)
ALFIE SOUNDTRACK
Top Soundtracks - #18 (Run: 20-17-12-*11*-18)
[Edited by Soldatti] |
| November 24th, 2004 10:30 PM |
|
|
| mac_daddy |
ouch. |
| November 24th, 2004 10:30 PM |
|
|
| Madafaka |
Shit happens! |
| November 25th, 2004 04:49 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Soldatti wrote:
NEW RECORD: Live Licks is out of the Billboard 200 and any Billboard chart in his third week, by far this is the worst US charting album EVER for the Stones beating No Security (8 wks) and Rewind (11 wks). Live Licks sold only 33,000 copies in three weeks.
Well done, lads!!!
quote:
Alfie is out of the chart too while Jump Back is steady at #127 selling more than 10,000 copies each week (191,000 so far), why this album is selling is a mistery....
As HL Mencken said - "no one ever went broke understimating the bad taste of the American public".
[Edited by Gazza] |
| November 25th, 2004 05:34 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
justice has been done |
| November 25th, 2004 06:08 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
F505 wrote:
justice has been done
Hi F505
you re right, people are not sheeps! |
| November 25th, 2004 06:10 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
hi jumacfly,
maybe they will learn something from it  |
| November 25th, 2004 06:29 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
F505 wrote:
hi jumacfly,
maybe they will learn something from it
the Stones should fire their marketing department!! |
| November 25th, 2004 06:30 AM |
|
|
| egon |
it's official now, the beatles ARE bigger than the stones! |
| November 25th, 2004 06:38 AM |
|
|
| keith_tif |
It's normal! With this album without interest The Stones trat theirs fans like people who have no brain!
It's a lesson, the Fans want a SERIOUS new album!
We aren't Sheeps! Bei! Bei! Bei! |
| November 25th, 2004 07:17 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Jumacfly wrote:
the Stones should fire their marketing department!!
as 191,000 have bought Jump Back - even though all of the songs on it were already on a superior sounding multi-million selling double CD hits album released two years earlier which was sold at the same price as a single album -they're more likely to give the fuckers a pay rise and release MORE re-packages! |
| November 25th, 2004 11:25 AM |
|
|
| waaghals |
Wasn't Charlie Watts the president of the sheepdog association (border collies). Now it all makes sense to me why they released Live Licks.
B�hB�hB�hB�h...B�h....B�hB�hB�h. |
| November 25th, 2004 11:33 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
waaghals wrote:
Wasn't Charlie Watts the president of the sheepdog association (border collies). Now it all makes sense to me why they released Live Licks.
B�hB�hB�hB�h...B�h....B�hB�hB�h.
welcome aboard! 
cheers
JU |
| November 25th, 2004 11:39 AM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
I think that the new step for Virgin is this:
- Re-release of Made In The Shade
- Re-release of Rewind
- Another "Jump Back" but including songs from Voodoo, Bridges and Don't Stop, all this before the new album.
Virgin is the WORST record company around, his marketing sucks, his releases sucks twice. The "inteligent department" of Virgin fired Rod Stewart three years ago for low sales and after that he released 3 albums with "J" records, all reached the Top 5 in US and the last one was his first #1 since 1979, and for recent acts Green Day was fired from Virgin too and his new album with Warner is selling as hotcakes.
Virgin is the "perfect" company for the Stones, they are lazy and Virgin more than that...
Great release! They did it for Christmas but the album will be selling less than 10 copies in four weeks. |
| November 25th, 2004 11:46 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
They also managed to release "Goddess In the Doorway" in the same week in the UK as they put out Robbie Williams' album - completely underpromoting Jagger's release at the expense of the megamarketing behind Williams (reasonably understandable that they should promote it heavily as hes the biggest selling artist in the UK - but to release an album by another major act on their roster at the same time was nonsensical and insulting to the artist in question.)
then they decided to release "40 Licks" - which would have been a certainty for #1 any other week in the year - in the same week as BMG released Elvis' "No. 1"'s compilation which was issued on the heels of a worldwide #1 single. |
| November 25th, 2004 12:16 PM |
|
|
| Lazy Bones |
At #166 in Canada... |
| November 25th, 2004 03:32 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
A richly deserved rebuke. |
| November 25th, 2004 03:43 PM |
|
|
| Navin |
Wait....
1. 'Jump Back' has 2 singles not present on 40 Licks - "Respectable" and "Bitch" - also liner notes that are exclusive to the set. I have the 1993 version which is 20-bit remastered (it must be 24-bit or 28-bit remastered now) and quite liked the sound on this one as it sounds better than the other Virgin re-releases or even 40-Licks.
2. 'Rewind' is the first CD release of their post-1971 material and has a "bonus single" as well....as recently posted here, the remastering on 'Heartbreaker' is said to be something else. Also exclusive to this set are "Hang Fire" and "She's so Cold". Don't have the CD, but being the sucker that I am, will buy it if available....this was my first tape of Stones Hits.
|
| November 25th, 2004 04:41 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
Cool. That makes it all OK then  |
| November 25th, 2004 06:56 PM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
This is the best news i have ever heard. I cant wait for some journo to ask Jagger about this. Cant wait for the excuses!
Jump Back, for some odd reason, is getting flogged on tv ads here. So is a Beatles greatest hits (dunno which one). They are all discounted cd's for Xmas.
You know, i am not even sure Live Licks has been released here. |
| November 25th, 2004 08:52 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
corgi37 wrote:
This is the best news i have ever heard. I cant wait for some journo to ask Jagger about this. Cant wait for the excuses!
Jump Back, for some odd reason, is getting flogged on tv ads here. So is a Beatles greatest hits (dunno which one). They are all discounted cd's for Xmas.
You know, i am not even sure Live Licks has been released here.
Jump Back reached the Top 10 in Australia in 1995 and sold more than 100,000 copies there.
Live Licks was released too but didn't chart in the ARIA Top 100, one (or the only) of the big countries where the album failed in chart. |
| November 26th, 2004 06:31 AM |
|
|
| Monkey Woman |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
They also managed to release "Goddess In the Doorway" in the same week in the UK as they put out Robbie Williams' album - completely underpromoting Jagger's release at the expense of the megamarketing behind Williams (reasonably understandable that they should promote it heavily as hes the biggest selling artist in the UK - but to release an album by another major act on their roster at the same time was nonsensical and insulting to the artist in question.)
then they decided to release "40 Licks" - which would have been a certainty for #1 any other week in the year - in the same week as BMG released Elvis' "No. 1"'s compilation which was issued on the heels of a worldwide #1 single.
I completely agree with you on the timing, it was moronic for both albums. But I wonder about "underpromoting" GITD. In the contrary, I've read in several articles about Mick's career that it was overpromoted (at least in the UK) and that the public was fed up and felt they didn't need it. Maybe it's the journalists' lazy interpretation. But Mick certainly did a lot of promotion for "Goddess" himself via press conferences, interviews, and even the film "Being Mick". And they released two CD singles and one DVD single for the album.
But I do hope that the Stones draw from this an intelligent and courageous conclusion, instead of going the easy way of more greatest hits packages, remixes and re-releases. I mean new songs, new music, a new album in short. And with luck they'll also do serious rethinking about their relationship with Virgin...
[Edited by Monkey Woman] |
| November 26th, 2004 06:55 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
apart from timing: Goddes was a poor album and 40 Licks was superfluous. If an album is really good and the reviews are positive it will sell how bad the timing may be. |
| November 26th, 2004 07:09 AM |
|
|
| Monkey Woman |
I'd like to be as optimistic as you, F505. But if a good album always sells well no matter what, then why so many people are buying so much shit? Why are Popstars and American Idol a success? Why Britney Spears? Why didn't Keith Richards have more success with his own solo albums, while we're at it? |
| November 26th, 2004 07:22 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
Live licks received a very positive echo from french journalists and a bad one from fans, which is an interesting paradoxe compared to their whole 90's records , where papers were laughing about their old age while fans still believed in them...the "old farts" became "immortals"!
live licks is IMHO a premiere in Stones history: for the first time, the fans are really angree and disappointed cuz our favorite band career depends nowadays from Virgin Marketing office...
Music is not the Stones priority anymore, let s face it!
but the poor sales could make them change their way of acting. I really hope so...
a good new record, another tour with new ideas (who wants a Voodoo loung tour number 4??), and we could be proud, again, of our dear Rolling stones...
|
| November 26th, 2004 07:43 AM |
|
|
| Monkey Woman |
Amen, brother Jumacfly!  How are things in Montpellier? |
| November 26th, 2004 07:55 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
Monkey Woman wrote:
I'd like to be as optimistic as you, F505. But if a good album always sells well no matter what, then why so many people are buying so much shit? Why are Popstars and American Idol a success? Why Britney Spears? Why didn't Keith Richards have more success with his own solo albums, while we're at it?
People expect from the Stones high-quality which is quite rightly considering their status. A weak Stones album isn't interesting. People who buy Spears and all that shit are used to buy trash so their expectations are at another (very low) level. If Spears made a good cd (I know that's impossible) it wouldn't sell I tell you!
And Keith's albums sadly weren't too good either...  |
| November 26th, 2004 09:03 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
Monkey Woman wrote:
Amen, brother Jumacfly! How are things in Montpellier?
fine MW..i m working on creating a tee shirt company and my band is in top form and changed his name: we were Gecko, now we re ....
WELL DONE SIMONE...!!!!
so life is good you see
see ya et bon week end a Paname! |
| November 26th, 2004 10:30 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
F505 wrote:
And Keith's albums sadly weren't too good either...
The first sold very good (about 2 millions worldwide) and spent 23 weeks on the Billboard 200, from the solos albums only She's The Boss spent more time on the chart. |
| November 27th, 2004 05:03 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
Jumacfly wrote:
fine MW..i m working on creating a tee shirt company
maybe you can produce the long-awaited Rocks Off tee shirt....
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]