Skip to main content

One of the music scribes mentioned the other day that to make #3 in Australia a particular act only had to sell 3500 units.

If you sold 3500 in NZ you'd be half way to gold instantly!

I wonder with CD/download sales at an all time low if that means the industry will lower what it takes to receive a gold record. I doubt it but when sales peaked in the early eighties it jumped what you needed for gold.

Gryph
quote:
Originally posted by Poptartjen:
Fortunately, my local independent record store, Waterloo Records in Austin TX, had plenty of copies of the CD in stock including the CD/DVD version.

If you don't see it on the shelves, speak up ! Tell the record store and hopefully they'll be smart enough to stock more copies or maybe special order for you. You know, good "old fashioned" customer service. Dwindling CD sales is a more than good enough reason to support your local independent record store, keep them in business, and support the bands you love.

*gets off soapbox now* Razzer

Checking Waterloo Records website, Intriguer is #36 in their weekly top 50 chart : http://www.waterloorecords.com/waterlootop50.html


I guess diehard fans in Austin are excited to see them this week as Intriguer has moved up to #29 (from #36) in their Top 50 store chart Smiler
Has anybody in Australia actually heard any songs from Intriguer recieving much or any airplay on the radio?
I work on a construction site and depending on whatever day, we listen to Nova, triple M and Triple J and I can honestly say that I haven't heard a single song from the album played.

I realise I'm biased but a little airplay would help with it's longevity on the charts I'm sure.
At least my local JB HiFi store is still doing their part and displaying it promenantly, yay.
quote:
Originally posted by Finngirl:
TripleM Sydney was playing Saturday Sun quite a bit when it first came out as a 'single'
(well put it this way, each time I tuned in online they seemed to play it, I don't actually own a working radio so the only way I can listen is thru the computer)


Thank-you for your reply Finngirl, I guess that Triple M in Brisbane probably did the same as well, but I've probably missed it ( It was probably Nova week for our radio that week Laughs).
It seems that the only Crowded House music I hear is from before the last two albums, oh well have to keep an ear out, lucky we have the CD.
quote:
Originally posted by BART:
quote:
It seems that the only Crowded House music I hear is from before the last two albums


Sticksy - 'Either Side of the World' it's the same story. This link shows the most recent Crowdies songs played by the BBC. New album? what? where?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/art...8a0cdd885f5#p0081f0y



Ha ha yes Loved the pun, it seems commercial radio believes in playing safe, wait till the tracks become popular before playing them a lot.

Thank-you Bart for the link BTW, jeeze had a bit of a Crowdiesfest on July 16th didn't you, two songs in one day. cheers
I think the US sales show why the touring is very important.

For most acts these days with the advent of downloads they make little money off their album/song sales. Their main revenue source is touring.

They may not sell alot of albums but they will make a decent amount of revenue with a large tour.

I'm not surprised by the US album sales. This is an act that hasn't had a hit in the US in about 20 yrs and has only been back together for 3. it also is a band that will never get any real airplay in the US again ever (please don't take that as a dig at the quality of the material - i'm a Beatles/Macca guy first and he could write the best song of his career right now and he wouldn't get any US airplay for it, neither are in the demographic the radio stations are interested in).

My wife is the big CH fan and I am planning on stopping on the way home and see if I can find the new album - I thought the songs played very well live.

Neil in a recent interview that was linked on another thread I think understands where this band is in terms of popularity. He mentioned he didn't expect to achieve the heights of DDIO again and was happy playing to crowds of maybe 2000 that knew and loved the music, new and old.
That's actually a great attitude imo.

IMO CH right now is a band that has a small (relatively speaking), but very enthusiastic fanbase. Nothing wrong with that at all.

They key is that you as an individual enjoy their music.
You make some really excellent points RamblinRed and your quite right that touring is generally more profitable than album sales for a lot of bands.

But every market is different - small, densely populated islands like the UK have the potential for both album sales and profitable touring for groups like CH as evidenced by that fact that CH played 15 concerts (excluding the IOW Festival) over here most of which I believe were sold out or virtually sold out (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here).

If each venue had 2000 punters that's 30,000 fans on one tiny island - so why aren't CH riding high in the charts on album sales?

The simple answer is lack of any type of "timely" promotion for Intriguer over here - most particularly radio promotion - and before anyone shouts about stratified radio stations - that is not generally the way it works over here we are not dominated by urban/hiphop radio - BBC radio 2 is the dominant player with 7 million listeners in the morning (according the listening figures). They churn out hours of pop/rock/mor music - but they do not want to play anything from Intriguer, despite countless requests/pleas etc. from me and others.

If they did - CH could have a really strong sales base over here that would benefit and roll into the whole of Europe.

Now don't get me wrong - I agree with your post largely RRed, I don't want CH to be huge and I hate it when they play arenas and stuff like that - but in Europe they could definitely be more successful than they are now and I like many other fans are worried that if Intriguer stiffs then CH's days with UM will be numbered and NF has shown no desire to create his own record label. This is why I can't be content with the status quo.
Despite repeated grumblings here by many, I don't think promotion is the key ingredient: Time on Earth's singles got lots of promotion on the radio in the UK, yet it appeared very briefly in the charts and then plummeted: Pour Le Monde and Don't Stop now were very regular fixtures on daytime Radio 2, yet neither sold more than a few thousand copies. In all, the album didn't sell a huge amount more here than Intriguer has.

And this album has been showcased on the BBC quite a bit - not many bands get featured on hour long radio prime time specials or get prime billing on Jools Holland's show. Millions of people must have been exposed to the new material between those two occasions. Yet only a few thousand bought it. The rest, for whatever reason, didn't want to buy it. Hell, those 30000 fans within the UK venues haven't all bought the new album, by any means, despite hearing much of the new material and all being aware the new stuff is out. If they can't reach those guys, the band aren't likely to reach out any further.

If I was a radio playlist maker, I wouldn't necessarily play stuff by a group few want to hear either. I think the fans need to accept that the band have had their day in the sun: but it's now distant. (See what I did there?) As RamblinRed says, there's nothing to be ashamed of in having a small, loyal fanbase and I'm sure in this day and age whatever Neil produces will be put out, even if it's via his own website or whatever.
quote:
Originally posted by Kittybear:
If each venue had 2000 punters that's 30,000 fans on one tiny island - so why aren't CH riding high in the charts on album sales?


I agree with Cobardon about the fact that, barring an appearance on X Factor, CH aren't going to get a meaningful hit in the UK.

But I just wanted to comment on Kittybear's question (above). In the UK, Intriguer sold 18,000 copies in the first two weeks (it's only weeks on the chart). First week it sold 14,000, second it sold 4,000 (falling to 40-something).

The worst case scenario - as Cobardon noted - is that the band haven't even been able to sell copies to all those fans who attended the shows. Maybe CH brings along a phalanx of people who love the old stuff but just aren't interested in buying new music.

Even if sales have crept up since then, it appears that many fans who saw the band live haven't bothered picking up the album, and only a very few non-diehards (including those who don't attend shows) were interested.

At this point, I think the weight of the band's previous success rests heavily on our shoulders. The two recent CH albums have done reasonably well compared to Neil's previous post CH projects and I think that if they had been solo albums, we wouldn't be so disappointed with their commercial performance.
quote:
Originally posted by Cobardon:
If I was a radio playlist maker, I wouldn't necessarily play stuff by a group few want to hear either. I think the fans need to accept that the band have had their day in the sun: but it's now distant.


This point was discussed in another thread around the time that the BBC was refusing to playlist Saturday Sun in preference to, among other things, Rick Astley.

I made the point that, as far as the wider listenership of Radio 2 is concerned, RA was a much bigger/more interesting draw than CH. And I got (politely but firmly) shot down for saying so. Smiler
quote:
But I just wanted to comment on Kittybear's question (above). In the UK, Intriguer sold 18,000 copies in the first two weeks (it's only weeks on the chart). First week it sold 14,000, second it sold 4,000 (falling to 40-something).


Love these stats Paul where did they come from? Have you got comparable stats for TOE?

BTW are you ever going to forget the RA joke? Wink
quote:
Originally posted by Paul H:
quote:
Originally posted by Cobardon:
If I was a radio playlist maker, I wouldn't necessarily play stuff by a group few want to hear either. I think the fans need to accept that the band have had their day in the sun: but it's now distant.


This point was discussed in another thread around the time that the BBC was refusing to playlist Saturday Sun in preference to, among other things, Rick Astley.

I made the point that, as far as the wider listenership of Radio 2 is concerned, RA was a much bigger/more interesting draw than CH. And I got (politely but firmly) shot down for saying so. Smiler


I'm not sure he is. Even with all that promotion, his comeback stiffed, reaching #97 in the UK singles charts. So much for regular playlisting. It's kind of like with CH: people are happy enough to hear the hits from the late 80s, but...new stuff? Nah, just play the ones we know, will you?

Not sure there's a way round that, in terms of mass popularity barring some sort of freak occurrence. Better then to carry on not searching for a 'hit'. It's not like it used to be, as far as singles are concerned, so why pretend it is?
quote:
Despite repeated grumblings here by many, I don't think promotion is the key ingredient: Time on Earth's singles got lots of promotion on the radio in the UK, yet it appeared very briefly in the charts and then plummeted: Pour Le Monde and Don't Stop now were very regular fixtures on daytime Radio 2, yet neither sold more than a few thousand copies. In all, the album didn't sell a huge amount more here than Intriguer has.

And this album has been showcased on the BBC quite a bit - not many bands get featured on hour long radio prime time specials or get prime billing on Jools Holland's show. Millions of people must have been exposed to the new material between those two occasions. Yet only a few thousand bought it. The rest, for whatever reason, didn't want to buy it. Hell, those 30000 fans within the UK venues haven't all bought the new album, by any means, despite hearing much of the new material and all being aware the new stuff is out. If they can't reach those guys, the band aren't likely to reach out any further.


I've no idea about the sales figures for TOE in the UK, maybe Paul H can enlighten us?

However,my general view is that if a album gets the promotion and then stiffs then so be it - my gripe is when it gets no promotion or as in the case of Intriguer poor or untimely promotion.

The Drivetime session was prime time coverage but the Mermaid Theatre was not prime time radio its a specialist programme and Jool Holland is on too late and on BBC2 so that is not prime time TV either, its a late night music special interest show. But all of those things would have been forgiven if the timing hadn't been so appallingly wrong - the promotion was wasted because by the time Intriguer came out the publicity was a distant memory, the tour (that hardly mentioned the new album) was over and the alleged single SS never trailed the album release or linked in with the promotion so never got any radio coverage.

Under those circumstances I think the Intriguer has sold really well. Its not surprising that a lot of fans didn't buy Intriguer on the back of the tour since hearing maybe 5 new songs once in the midst of another 10 more familiar songs is not a good sale technique. I bet all the fans went away humming the familiar songs rather than the newer tunes. Regular repeated radio play works to sell albums if not singles which is why record companies still use it.

As regards Mr Astley, his single may have stiffed but was it trailing an album? I couldn't see one on Amazon but there might be one due in the next few months and the radio coverage Mr Astley gets will not harm his future sales and profile with his record company.

If someone can reassure me that CH can continue to tour and make records successfully with their current dwindling profile and sales then I will be happy for them to stay a small niche market, but if they are going to be dropped by UM, tour less or give up making new records I will not be happy Frowner
Don't really want to take issue with you Kittybear because you & I have been fighting the same thing (aka BBC) but 8PM on Radio 2 I would class as primetime. Also Later is THE music show everyone watches/records/watches on iPlayer or YT if clips get posted!

All the promo work was tied in with the tour dates, quite why the release of the album was then delayed is a mystery! I think there was some advertising of Intriguer in the UK around release date - think someone mentioned seeing an ad on fathers day?

Crowded House will continue, although they will make more money from touring than CD sales, unless of course they get that big comeback 'hit'. Even if they decide to call it a day, although I can't see that happening for another album at least, Neil will still be making music in some shape or form - there's the 3rd solo album, 3rd Finn Bros album, Pajama party, Finn family ensemble etc etc.

One other point - at this level of success, we get to see the band at relatively small venues. Not quite sure why that hasn't applied in Aus, though!
quote:
Originally posted by BART:
Don't really want to take issue with you Kittybear because you & I have been fighting the same thing (aka BBC) but 8PM on Radio 2 I would class as primetime. Also Later is THE music show everyone watches/records/watches on iPlayer or YT if clips get posted!

All the promo work was tied in with the tour dates, quite why the release of the album was then delayed is a mystery! I think there was some advertising of Intriguer in the UK around release date - think someone mentioned seeing an ad on fathers day?

Crowded House will continue, although they will make more money from touring than CD sales, unless of course they get that big comeback 'hit'. Even if they decide to call it a day, although I can't see that happening for another album at least, Neil will still be making music in some shape or form - there's the 3rd solo album, 3rd Finn Bros album, Pajama party, Finn family ensemble etc etc.

One other point - at this level of success, we get to see the band at relatively small venues. Not quite sure why that hasn't applied in Aus, though!


Fair points Bart - But I was thinking about the the longer pre-recorded Later with Jools when I wrote my piece - I don't want to see CH become huge but I'm not reassured that they won't change their touring habits on the back of poor record sales - can other Frenz clarify how well did the European and US gigs sell? are they selling out or virtually selling out or selling poorly?
Does anyone know approximately how much the band actually does make from touring as apposed to CD sales? I mean in one night, 2000 people, how much do they actually make? In a year, how much would a guy like Mark Hart make from Crowded House touring? We know Neil Finn gets more royalties and probably makes good coin in a one year period without having to tour.....
A lot of really interesting points on this thread.I'm suprised how low in the charts rick astley faired with all the promotion radio 2 gave him.Maybe it doesn't make much difference afterall!

As to what the individual members of the band make - the band were pretty much selling out in UK venues,so I reckon they would be doing alright financially.They're still happy touring the states even though the turn out is more modest,so they must be happy with their income,otherwise it would probably just be the rod laver arena,and a few nights in the albert hall! Also last tour they played the SECC in Glasgow - thats around 8,000 people.

Regarding recording - perhaps someone can verify this,but do musicians not get performance royalties as well as publishing royalties?Then there's the deal with Universal.The guys won't be honouring that for nothing.I also read somewhwere that Neil gave the other band members some of the publishing royalties from recurring dream.
Kittybear,
Great comments.
My comments were made through a prism of a US centric view.
Now obviously CH is a bigger draw in Europe and especially Australia/New Zealand.

I would love for them to be a larger act - but I don't think that is overly likely.

There was no major advertising for CH here in the US -that is not by coincidence imo. Record label likely believes they will sell a certain amount of albums (to at least the hard core fans) without any advertising and then must way whether additional money spent on promotion would be offset by increased sales. My belief is they likely feel no.
Now they did appear on Jimmy Fallon here in the States, but that is a lesser late night program (Tonight Show with Jay Leno or Late Show with David Letterman would be the big 2).

I can't speak for any other dates but in Atlanta they played at the Tabernacle - which is a roughly 2,500 seat venue. The third floor balcony was closed off and not in use so my guess would be 1,600 to 1,800 in Atlanta. Most of the venues they are playing in the States are in the range of 1,500 to 2,500 seats. Start doing the math and I would guess each band member could gross somewhere between $2000 to $4000 a show. Not a massive payday, but hardly slumming it either.

The big problem in the US is the highly fragmented airwaves leave no real niche for them to get airplay and they aren't 18-34 in age.

also, as far as album sales - as mentioned most people will likely leave the concert signing the more familiar tunes - that's just how it tends to work. Best sales opportunity is if you sell the CD right there at the show with the other concert items. For example, McCarney is letting his 2 guitarists sell their new albums at the sales stands at his shows this summer. Besides just being a kind thing to do, that will likely sell more copies for them then anything else they will do.
People are more likely to make an immediate purchase decision if you have it right there for them while they are still thinking of the songs.


RamblinRed
Someone in the industry really ought to be answering this, not me, but from the little I gleen hither and thither I would expect that the band agree a price with each venue. Say it's £45,000 (£10,000 each plus £5,000 for management etc). It's then up to the venue to sell enough tickets in order to recoup that cost and turn a profit (in this case, 1,300 seats at £35 each would break even). If a venue fails to sell, I assume its them who suffers rather than the band.

I guess there are clauses that provide protection to the venue or the band's fee alters depending on eventual sales. Equally, I'd assume that the band makes the money from merch and pays the venue a fee for the table (plus maybe a percentage).

As far as who gets what from CD sales, it'll depend on the nature of the contract the band has with the record company.

Most "genuine" bands (for want of a better phrase) will have all members as signatories to the contract so they all get the same cut. However, in cases where a band is formed by means of auditioning, it is likely that more minor members will be salaried.

Take, for example, the case of Mr James Paul McCartney.

All four Beatles signed their EMI contract and got paid the same rate by EMI. Lennon and McCartney, of course, earned far more than Harrison and Starr because they earned additional songwriters' royalties.

When the Fabs broke up McCartney formed Wings. He was the one contracted to EMI; the others were paid a wage by him. Which is why he earned more during the 70's than he did during the 60's; he earned royalties from the sale of Wings albums, and the others were paid a weekly wage.

Now, if Chris Bourke's book is correct, the original contract CH signed featured Neil, Paul and (added at the very last minute) Nick. Whether the contract included for new members at any time, or was renegotiated to include Mark Hart, I don't know. If not, Mark would have to have been paid a salary by their management company on behalf of "the band".

Given that Neil was the only one signed to EMI when the band reformed, I can only speculate as to the nature of the deal they were on. Equally, I have no idea what deal they arranged with Universal.

My guess is it will feature all four of them. But equally, Neil may have demanded a bigger slice of the pie, as he's the main man, in which case maybe he's the only signatory and the others are paid a wage. (Of course, there are other permutations: it could be Neil and Nick, as founders; it could be Neil, Nick and Mark, as the ones not auditioned.)

As to Kittybear's enquiry about where I got the sales figures from: it was another poster somewhere on this Forum!
Addendum:

a trip to the BPI website confirms that Crowded House have, in the UK, received the following awards (Gryph should be able to confirm if this is up to date):

Woodface: 2xPlatinum
Together Alone: Platinum
Recurring Dream: 4xPlatinum
Time On Earth: Silver

(Silver = 60,000 sales, platinum = 300,000).

Additionally, Neil has been awarded:
Try Whistling This: Gold
One Nil: Silver

(Gold = 100,000 sales).

Finn Brothers:
Everyone Is Here: Silver.

It should be noted that record companies have to submit proof of sales in order to receive the award so if they don't "bid" they won't get certified. So, if EMI haven't bothered to submit new figures, actual sales may be far higher than certified ones.

Of course, it may be that a record is very close to the next certificate. F'rinstance, Time On Earth may have sold 95,000 copies but until it sells the next 5,000 it will still only be certified with sales of 60,000.
quote:
Originally posted by Paul H:
Someone in the industry really ought to be answering this, not me, but from the little I gleen hither and thither I would expect that the band agree a price with each venue. Say it's £45,000 (£10,000 each plus £5,000 for management etc). It's then up to the venue to sell enough tickets in order to recoup that cost and turn a profit (in this case, 1,300 seats at £35 each would break even). If a venue fails to sell, I assume its them who suffers rather than the band.


From my experience, that isn't quite right. I used to work for a performing arts center with 5 major performing spaces. The largest held 1,100 people, so perhaps not big enough for a CH show, but here's how we did things:

An artist pays to rent the venue ($3,000 for our 1,100 seat venue). They then pay substantial additional fees for staff and labor depending on the type of event. Now, maybe larger venues lump it all together into a single fee but the results are the same: the artist is on the hook for bringing the audience, not the venue. We charged $2 for every ticket we sold but the rest went straight to the artist. Therefore, if nobody comes to see the show it's the artist who is hurt and the venue is fine.

I think venues would go out of business if they lost money every time an audience wasn't as big as the artist had hoped. This also makes sense because venues don't want to be solely responsible for promoting events (which is what would happen if the artist was not financially invested in getting people to show up).

On the other hand, we did sponsor certain audiences annually which meant that we would cover the cost of the performance. These were typically either educational performances or performances by extremely well known artists that would boost the reputation of the venue (like Philip Glass). CH typically would not fall into that category for us, but for some venues they might. Still wouldn't be the "norm" for a touring rock band.

So, that's just my experience at one performing arts center. If that's not how it works from the Crowdies then I'm sure Peter Green will correct me.
Happy to stand corrected. Your model makes more sense. My paragraph should be corrected to read "it's up to the band to sell enough seats". The direction of payment being the opposite way round to my hypothesis.

But the point is that the band's management must be aware of their pulling power and the fees charged by the venue and must be confident of recouping those costs plus sufficient profit to make it worthwhile.
These are all fascinating comments to which I think the following points should be added:

Stuartjb for every artist that stiffs using radio 2 as a promotional tool there are dozens that use it successfully. Looking at the album charts now I see Eliza Doolittle, Paolo Nutini, Scissor Sisters, Michael Buble, Mumford & sons, Kylie Minogue, Scouting for Girls, Pixie Lott, Biffy Clyro, Amy MacDonald, the Gaga creature and Paloma Faith. All heavily featured on the radio 2 playlist. The singles chart also has similar names, not that I ever to expect CH to have a single hit in the future - I'm not a fantasist!

TOE has sold quite a lot of records in the UK, silver isn't bad bearing in mind it wasn't their best stuff, it was quite downbeat and a lot of fans don't think it really sounds like a CH record - thanks for finding those stats Paul Smiler

Intriguer is selling badly in comparison, but I 'd like to think its early days, if CH and UM could get the promotional act together it will sell more and I hope that it will sell better than TOE because IMO its a better record.

Added into the touring equation you must factor in the costs of Livenation and Ticketmaster and also the general costs of touring, transport, hotels/living costs, staffing the tour (roadies, drivers, catering etc), set dressing, insurances, musical instruments etc. all these surely must be covered before the band make any money - I'm sure touring can be expensive as well as lucrative therefore bands will only tour if they believe they have an audience or potential audience to play to and they can cover their costs and make some money.

Which neatly leads me back to worrying about the lack of publicity for Intriguer which will affect audiences and sales unless it can be rectified. People are fickle, CH need to re-engage the Recurring Dream buyers if they aren't to sink into obscurity.
quote:
Originally posted by Kittybear:

Which neatly leads me back to worrying about the lack of publicity for Intriguer which will affect audiences and sales unless it can be rectified. People are fickle, CH need to re-engage the Recurring Dream buyers if they aren't to sink into obscurity.



So true about the lack of publicity Kittybear, I don't profess to know anything about the Nth American, the UK and the European markets, and even though I really don't know much about the Australian and New Zealand industry, I can speak as a layman who has been exposed to everybit of publicity concerning the band throughout their career, here in Brisbane.
I would agree that the publicity for this album has been woeful over here, I think TOE benefited from the novelty of being the band's comeback album but I keep an ear out concerning Intriguer, and besides the usual blurb at the start, I hear nothing now, Although it is nice to see quarter size colour adverts in the paper for the upcoming tour.

Triple M over here, as Finngirl stated, has played 'Saturday Sun' but I really believe that given enough exposure here, songs such as ESOTW, Archer's Arrows or TIYL, ( well I'd like to say Isolation as it is a fave), could do well on triple M if given enough airplay from the station that would claim that they are the home of bands like Crowded House.
Yes I fully realise that the Crowdies maybe aren't labelled as contempory, as they once enjoyed, I also realise that the band may not reach the dizzying heights it achieved during the eighties and nineties, but this album is solid, and these songs listed, given enough exposure would be embraced, I have heard Triple M play the latest song of Robert Plant, 'Angels Dance' a few times, and whilst I am a fan of his, it pails (in my opinion) to the three songs I mentioned above.

If Crowded House were to break really big in the U.S. right now during their current tour, then I think the Australian media would jump on board and stations like Triple M would start giving the album more airplay, but for now it appears that Intriguer is a well kept secret.
I would love Painaporo's take on this.

Here in the US there has been alot of tours (or at least specific tour dates) cancelled this summer. This is more of an issue at an arena level than the smaller venues that Crowded House plays currently.

While often an excuse is given (Jonas Brothers management said they extended their European dates, one group said sickness) - it is generally believed that most of the dates being cancelled are happening because not enough tickets were sold. THis suggests that either the band, or more likely, the venue has the right to cancel a show if it hasn't sold enough tickets by a certain date.

The general feeling is that most bands/promoters are trying to charge too much money for performers trying to sell 15K+ tickets for arenas and outdoor sheds and most customers simply aren't willing to pay the cost.

RamblinRed
I am not even close to an expert on this issue but I would be surprised if venues went around cancelling shows. I think the artist/management probably looks at ticket sales and realizes at some point that it will cost more to put on the show (staff, crew, labor) then they will make from ticket sales and then decided to cancel the show to minimize their loses.

I've sometimes thought that the venues Neil played in the US during his solo albums were so small and tickets so cheap ($20) that it was hard to imagine he was making any money off it. Some artists may lose money on some shows rather than take the bad press that comes along with cancelling. On the other hand, no one wants to play to a relatively empty venue, especially if the venue is huge.

I think ticket prices have gone too high. the industry is trying to offset the lost revenue from CD sales and so has been charging more for shows. That, combined with the recession, has finally pushed fans to the point where in some cases they've just decided not to go.
I now have Intriguer so that's my contribution to its chart position. Smiler

I hasn't grabbed me straight up - all except Either Side of The World.

I am totally obsessed by that song. Eeker

Its not that I don't like the other songs on the album, I probably do, but the moment I heard ESOTW I had to go back and listen again. Its the song I start with, and when its finished, I have to go back and listen again... and again, and again. Roll Eyes

Spose I'll get over but really hoping to hear it live in Melbourne.... again, and again and again Razzer
Bart- no I'd say "Farewell" Live CD had poorer sales/chart (where as the DVD did very well).

I'd say it Intriguer will do around what Afterglow did, but with higher chart spots. Afterglow peaked here at #36, where Intriguer was #1. Afterglow #30 in NZ peak and Intriguer #3.

Afterglow is around Platinum here, and I'd say Intriguer will eventually hit that (depending if touring moves copies to the general public).

England is weaker, USA about the same as it has been since Together Alone was released.

But compared to the obvious CH album yes sales are much slower- I'd say our long term fans have it, but the general public is slow to buy.

Gryph

Add Reply

Post
    All times London, UK.

    ©1998-Eternity, Frenz.com. All post content is the copyrighted work of the person who wrote it. Please don't copy, reproduce, or publish anything you see written here without the author's permission.
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×