Pet Shop Boys Community

Kris wrote:

patrick wrote:But sales of an album are largely dependent on the strength of its lead single - after all, punters don't know what the album sounds like until they buy it. PSB chose two substandard leads for Nightlife, charting at #15 and #14 respectively. The album sold poorly. Home and Dry was decent but lacked hit potential and it only made #14. Release sold poorly. I'm with stupid was much better received by radio and it charted at #8. Fundamental sold several thousand more units than either Release or Nightlife in its first week. That's no coincidence.

Didn't Home and Dry sell the same as I'm with Stupid? I thought both sold near to 15,000 in their first week.

I've always thought Nightlife was full of b-sides. A few poor tracks but a relativly good album that didn't really have a song crying out to be a single. Similar to Release. A few bad songs but mainly an album full of album tracks (if that makes sense) Only 'I Get Along' and 'Here' being near to single quality. However, Fundamental probably contained a potential 5 singles. 'Sodom', 'Minimal', 'Luna park', 'Stupid' and 'Integral'. Maybe thats why it sold a lot better.

Finally, regarding Before. I thought the reference to the prison cell and loving too much was referring to Michael Jackson. Pobably talking bolocks but i've read it somewhere.

patrick wrote: I think it's actually far more of a coincidence than you're making out. Hence no skyrocketing of Nightlife sales when it eventually cranked out a Top 10 hit.

But Drunk was released in the first week of January, the quietest time of the year for both singles and albums. It made the top 10 because it was pretty much the only new release that week, and also because it was released in three CD formats, a first for PSB (I think). It was also the first PSB single ever to be rejected by Radio 1 and Capital FM so it got very little airplay. As a result it crept into the top 10 almost unnoticed and drifted out again.

The pattern I mentioned in the previous post doesn't just apply to PSB, it applies to every artist. For example, Dido sold 400,000 copies of Life For Rent in its first week following White Flag, Dido's biggest hit. It stayed in the upper reaches of the album charts for over a year. Now compare that to her current album, which was one of the most eagerly awaited of 2008. It was preceded by Don't Believe In Love, her worst single to date, which was rejected by Radio 1 and it didn't even make the top 40. The album sold only 60,000 in its first week, that's nearly seven times less. It's disappeared without a trace since.

And what about Madonna? Ray Of Light and Music were both preceded by number one hits and the albums sold bucketloads. American Life failed to reach number one and nosedived the following week. The album sold very poorly in the UK. In fact, Confessions Of A Dancefloor, preceded by Hung Up (number one for three weeks), had outsold its predecessor within a month.

patrick wrote:
The album sold well because it was the best thing they'd done in a decade. The reviews were great. The press was genuflecting.

I don't think reviews have a huge influence, to be honest. Release got very good reviews, for example, and Bilingual got some of the best reviews of PSB's career. Going back to Dido, her album was extremely well received by the press but it didn't stop it bombing. Ultimately, the lead single tends to be a more significant barometer because if the average person is underwhelmed by a single, he/she is far less likely to fork out for the accompanying album.

patrick wrote:
I find it difficult to imagine a universe where it did so well because general audiences were blown away with I'm with stupid while shopping.

And how many artists get a free hour-long infomercial to promote their new album on telly?

Oh, I'm not suggesting the public were blown away by I'm with stupid. But it was considered by some radio DJs to be PSB's best single for years, and it got more airplay than previous singles. I think it did sell beyond the fanbase as I believe we have at least one poster here who became a fan on the back of it. Who's to say there weren't others?

As for A Life In Pop, I could be wrong but I think it was broadcast quite late during a weekday, so I don't think viewing figures would have been that big. I doubt that many people beyond the fanbase saw it.

as I believe we have at least one poster here who became a fan on the back of it

me! hehe

As for A Life In Pop, I could be wrong but I think it was broadcast quite late during a weekday, so I don't think viewing figures would have been that big. I doubt that many people beyond the fanbase saw it.

Yea I remember Life in Pop being shown on channel 4 for the first time around 11ish.

Kris wrote:But Drunk was released in the first week of January, the quietest time of the year for both singles and albums. It made the top 10 because it was pretty much the only new release that week, and also because it was released in three CD formats, a first for PSB (I think). It was also the first PSB single ever to be rejected by Radio 1 and Capital FM so it got very little airplay. As a result it crept into the top 10 almost unnoticed and drifted out again.

I think I get it now. The chart matters when it supports your argument but not when it contradicts it. In any event as Undertaker points out (and as alluded to in your explanation of why Drunk reached the Top 10) I'm with stupid and H&D sold to approximately the same number of people yet the albums sold quite differently. That demolishes your entire argument as far as I can see.

Dido sold 400,000 copies of Life For Rent in its first week following White Flag, Dido's biggest hit. It stayed in the upper reaches of the album charts for over a year. Now compare that to her current album, which was one of the most eagerly awaited of 2008. It was preceded by Don't Believe In Love, her worst single to date, which was rejected by Radio 1 and it didn't even make the top 40. The album sold only 60,000 in its first week, that's nearly seven times less. It's disappeared without a trace since.

The album is also incredibly dull and even Dido/Rollo fans can't be bothered to play it. Do you honestly think there's no link there, that people don't go into work on a Tuesday and tell their friends not to bother because the record's crap?

I think it did sell beyond the fanbase as I believe we have at least one poster here who became a fan on the back of it. Who's to say there weren't others?

Well as long as we're inventing thousands of new fans out of thin air I suppose I might as well argue that Numb tripled the fanbase.

As for A Life In Pop, I could be wrong but I think it was broadcast quite late during a weekday, so I don't think viewing figures would have been that big. I doubt that many people beyond the fanbase saw it.

It was seen by at least a few hundred thousand people. A different order of magnitude from I'm with stupid sales.

Quote:
As for A Life In Pop, I could be wrong but I think it was broadcast quite late during a weekday, so I don't think viewing figures would have been that big. I doubt that many people beyond the fanbase saw it.


It was seen by at least a few hundred thousand people. A different order of magnitude from I'm with stupid sales.

Why do you hate I'm With Stupid soo much, it was a querky pop song with a hint if irony.. Pet Shop Boys doing what they do best?!

Paddymacall wrote:Why do you hate I'm With Stupid soo much, it was a querky pop song with a hint if irony.. Pet Shop Boys doing what they do best?!

I just find it a bit boring. Nice lyrics, but how many records shift on the strength of those? I don't think I've claimed it was a disastrous choice or the worst single ever or anything like that but I also don't think the case can be made that it was a proper hit responsible for Fundamental outselling their last two albums. It takes a lot of logical contortions to make that case - especially if sales matched Home & Dry.

However I'm with stupid outsold home and dry globally.

Paddymacall wrote:However I'm with stupid outsold home and dry globally.

...which is irrelevant if we're talking about UK chart positions and UK album sales.

...which is irrelevant if we're talking about UK chart positions and UK album sales.

Really?

Paddymacall wrote:Really?

Well if you can put together a scenario where the sales of a single in Hong Kong have any bearing on the UK album chart then go right ahead.

Hong Kong becomes part of the UK?

DJ_Couture wrote:Hong Kong becomes part of the UK?

Or the record-buying public acquire time machines.

patrick wrote: I think I get it now. The chart matters when it supports your argument but not when it contradicts it. In any event as Undertaker points out (and as alluded to in your explanation of why Drunk reached the Top 10) I'm with stupid and H&D sold to approximately the same number of people yet the albums sold quite differently. That demolishes your entire argument as far as I can see.

Not really because sales are proportional to the era and that affects all artists, including PSB. Home and Dry and I'm with stupid may have sold similar numbers of units but in 2002 single sales were higher and you needed to sell more than 15,000 in a week to get a top 10 hit, whereas in 2006 15,000 was almost always good enough. Going back further, I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more sold around 26,000 units in its first week but back then you needed between 30,000 and 35,000 to go top 10. In other words, I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more and H&D sadly failed to reach the top 10 on merit whereas I'm with stupid did make the top 10 on merit.

The album market during the same period remained pretty much the same so I don't think it's a surprise that Fundamental sold more on the back of a top 10 hit than Release did following a top 15 hit.

patrick wrote: The album is also incredibly dull and even Dido/Rollo fans can't be bothered to play it. Do you honestly think there's no link there, that people don't go into work on a Tuesday and tell their friends not to bother because the record's crap?

My point is, had the album been preceded by a single as strong as White Flag, the album would have sold bucketloads more in the first place before word of mouth could set in. As I said previously, nobody knows what the album is like until they actually hear it. The fact that Don't Believe In Love was so underwhelming, both in its quality and in its chart position, put a lot of people off buying it.

The fact is, the bigger the hit single, the more likely it is to boost album sales. I gave you the example of Madonna's varying fortunes in the last post. Girls Aloud weren't huge album sellers until The Promise, and Kings Of Leon, a previously run-of-the-mill indie band, rocketed to stardom with gigantic album sales on the back of Sex On Fire, a number one record.

I'm not saying that I'm with stupid was a mindblowing single but I still believe it was the right choice as it was more popular than I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more and H&D were at the time and it prompted a boost in album sales.

patrick wrote: It (A Life In Pop) was seen by at least a few hundred thousand people. A different order of magnitude from I'm with stupid sales.

I'm not saying you're wrong here but I'd be interested to see some definitive viewing figures.

Kris wrote:Not really because sales are proportional to the era and that affects all artists, including PSB. Home and Dry and I'm with stupid may have sold similar numbers of units but in 2002 single sales were higher and you needed to sell more than 15,000 in a week to get a top 10 hit, whereas in 2006 15,000 was almost always good enough. Going back further, I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more sold around 26,000 units in its first week but back then you needed between 30,000 and 35,000 to go top 10. In other words, I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more and H&D sadly failed to reach the top 10 on merit whereas I'm with stupid did make the top 10 on merit.

Well no. At the end of the day you're still dealing with a set number of people buying shiny little discs and then making the argument that those transactions are somehow directly responsible for how the album fares. It's actually the chart placement that's irrelevant here.

I'm not saying that I'm with stupid was a mindblowing single but I still believe it was the right choice as it was more popular than I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more and H&D were at the time and it prompted a boost in album sales.

I find it utterly bizarre that you're arguing I'm with stupid was somehow "more popular" than I don't know what you want but I can't give it any more despite selling 11,000 fewer copies in its first week. If you lose a few thousand buyers surely you're less popular? Hence the folly of relying on chart placement for any sort of argument here - especially after dismissing Drunk as a Top 10 hit yourself.

I'm not saying you're wrong here but I'd be interested to see some definitive viewing figures.

Me too. But when was the last time a major broadcaster only got 15,000 viewers?