The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies. Music artists make very little off of streaming and CDs are obsolete. Their best source of income these days is touring. If she can't make money on her own by touring why should Apple finance her act?
LOL? Which one of these random, half-baked criticisms of Adele equates to a valid reason why Apple Music shouldn't sponsor or do some kind of co-promotion with her? Maybe not $30 million, but you know, Apple has the mad negotiating skills to find a deal where they come out ahead.
I'm sure Foxconn pitched a similar greedy deal before Apple twisted their arm out of its socket. Cupertino is shrewd, if anything: they're not throwing their cash horde around recklessly like an NBA baller.
Her last album (21) sold more than any album since 1998 and had 3 #1 songs on the Hot 100, a chart never dominated by "mom and pop" songs these day., including rolling in the deep which is one of the top 10 all time digital single at over 10M unit sales. The album before was also one of the top selling album of the last 15 years. Considering how little albums sell these days, it's even more impressive; she sold like 3-4 times more than the next top selling album in both years she topped the end of year chart.
Adele is a perfect artist for sponsorship, but only under better terms. I went to the Bose store and they had an adel concert playing to show off the clarity of sound.
The problem with paying 30m for a sponsorship is that it is hard get that value back into the customers hand in the long term. I think some minor tweaks to what they did with u2 would help.
She's currently massively popular, so it's good for Apple to be linked to her.
The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies. Music artists make very little off of streaming and CDs are obsolete. Their best source of income these days is touring. If she can't make money on her own by touring why should Apple finance her act?
Huh! She had the top selling album of two separate years by a mile, not even close.
I don't think you really have a clue. Her demos are really wide.
The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies.
What?! '19' and '21' were great albums, and "Hello" is reminding us just how great her voice is. It's been 4 years since her last album. I'm expecting '25' to go Platinum.
I don't think sponsoring a huge artist is a bad thing at all. Instead of physical CD's, I can see the possibility of a special iTunes Store card ,that when purchased, is used for Adele's latest album or other older albums.
If she only had half the success of that album with this one, she'd still have a massive hit.
She had the 13th highest all time selling album at a time when Album sales are maybe 1/10 what they were at their peek.
If we were in a time were people bought more albums, she'd likely be in the top 5 all time in sales.
She had the top selling all time digital album (3M); meaning they bought all the tracks' album as a whole.
She had 3 #1 songs in the US and UK (and in dozens of countries too).
This comes from the Wiki
****
21 was the best-selling album of both 2011 and 2012 in the United States and Canada despite being over a year old.[203][204][205][206] It is the first album to be the best-selling album two years in a row since Michael Jackson's Thriller was the best-selling album of 1983 and 1984. Despite being over a year old, 21 sold more copies in 2012 than the best-selling albums of 2006 through 2010 sold in their respective years. It is also one of only four albums in the Nielsen SoundScan era to sell over 4 million copies in each of two calendar years. Due to these successes, Billboard declared Adele the Artist of the Year for the second year in a row, making her the first artist to receive the honour twice.[207][208][209] In February 2013, it was announced that 21 had spent two full years on the Billboard 200, never charting lower than number 35 on the chart. This makes 21 the best-selling album of the past 10 years and the fifth best-selling album released since January 2000.[210] In March 2013, after Adele won an Academy Award for "Skyfall", the album reentered the Top 10 of the Billboard 200. This marked the album's 81st week in the Top 10. Only two other albums have spent as much time in the Top 10: Born in the U.S.A. and The Sound of Music.[211] In November 2013, it was announced that 21 had become the first album to sell three million digital copies in the United States and that the album is the 13th best-selling overall in the United States since Nielsen SoundScan began tracking sales in 1991.[212]
The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies. Music artists make very little off of streaming and CDs are obsolete. Their best source of income these days is touring. If she can't make money on her own by touring why should Apple finance her act?
You're usually on point, but you are completely off this time around. Adele is very popular worldwide with all types of people.
I wonder if a card with a scan code on it you buy, then scan with an iDevice counts as "physical media?" IIRC, Starbux did this with a freebie code of the day. It's a type of gift card.
She had the 13th highest all time selling album ...
Must be a lot of fat old ladies in the world. Maybe some millenniums still buy albums, but young people today mostly stream, buy tracks or just listen on YouTube. I've heard a couple short clips of her on TV, and I admit she has a very strong vocal range but I think the music itself is really boring and old fashion. Honestly, I think Apple's relationship with U2 is a mistake as well. They are a has been group. As much as I dislike modern popular music, I believe Apple should stick with young hip artists to complement their Beats brand.
Must be a lot of fat old ladies in the world. Maybe some millenniums still buy albums, but young people today mostly stream, buy tracks or just listen on YouTube. I've heard a couple short clips of her on TV, and I admit she has a very strong vocal range but I think the music itself is really boring and old fashion. Honestly, I think Apple's relationship with U2 is a mistake as well. They are a has been group. As much as I dislike modern popular music, I believe Apple should stick with young hip artists to complement their Beats brand.
Man, this is tiresome, she SOLD 3M digital albums (that means they bought ALL THE TRACKS ON THE ALBUM),
and had more than 30M in digital single sold.,
Plus 15M albums//...
It's not "old fashion" because it sold a shitload.
She's part of the UK soul sound that hit the charts post 2000.
That kind of sound is even more popular in the UK but its pretty popular in the US too, Sam Smith, etc.
Her stats don't disprove that a lot of people now stream or buy less of well, everything.
She's just got an exceptional following. She's not like the rest of the market.
Also, There is place for more than one style in the world.
You can imagine whatever demo you have in your head, but they're wrong.
As for U2, yeah they're kind of out of phase with the current sound,
There is very little straight rock on the current chart, but not Adele.
For $30 million they need to offer Apple Music exclusives and mad placement at concert halls. Overall, I like the general idea, just not the suggested implementation. They should have approached Apple before releasing "Hello," especially with all the hype it generated upon release.
William Morris is still too old school and safe. Apple (maybe Eddie Cue) should take over the project and use it to their advantage. Adele will sell massively and Apple Music can only gain from a sponsorship.
"...The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies..." Wow! Just Wow. Fat.Old.Ladies. Before my gf barged in with her opinion I was trying to figure out what kind of xxxx would write that. My gf has chimed in with plenty of suggestions (including paying to see a pic of the person posting that), but no need to step into somebody else's trash.
I like some of her music, Rolling plays great on good speakers, my Pops even has her on his play list. 30 mil for tour is not heavy, she outdrew Beebs and Swifted Swift. A million downloads an hour of Hello for first two days. Nobody can predict ticket sales, but smart ppl in mx biz put money on her. She would be a good draw for Apple to sponsor, imho a safe bet. She doesn't carry the baggage that alienates audience (except maybe aging men who have trouble with women). I wouldn't go to her concert, likely buy some tunes. Like to see where they go on this.
I'm sure they'll work something out minus the physical CDs in stores. The amount of money they've thrown on exclusivity in Apple Music with Drake, Pharell, etc.. Why not get Adele in?
Yes they will. How about an "Adele" co-branded ?Watch? It could come pre-loaded with her new album, and a custom watch face featuring her actual face. The box can be a custom "?Watch|Adele" box with the CD incorporated into it as a bonus ... so no clutter in the store. And like the U2 iPod, Adele can pick the color combo.
Comments
LOL? Which one of these random, half-baked criticisms of Adele equates to a valid reason why Apple Music shouldn't sponsor or do some kind of co-promotion with her? Maybe not $30 million, but you know, Apple has the mad negotiating skills to find a deal where they come out ahead.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Have you seen the artists at the Apple Music (formerly iTunes Music) concerts? Top of the line talent there.
I'm sure Foxconn pitched a similar greedy deal before Apple twisted their arm out of its socket. Cupertino is shrewd, if anything: they're not throwing their cash horde around recklessly like an NBA baller.
Sounds like a horrible idea.
Her last album (21) sold more than any album since 1998 and had 3 #1 songs on the Hot 100, a chart never dominated by "mom and pop" songs these day., including rolling in the deep which is one of the top 10 all time digital single at over 10M unit sales. The album before was also one of the top selling album of the last 15 years. Considering how little albums sell these days, it's even more impressive; she sold like 3-4 times more than the next top selling album in both years she topped the end of year chart.
Adele is a perfect artist for sponsorship, but only under better terms. I went to the Bose store and they had an adel concert playing to show off the clarity of sound.
The problem with paying 30m for a sponsorship is that it is hard get that value back into the customers hand in the long term. I think some minor tweaks to what they did with u2 would help.
She's currently massively popular, so it's good for Apple to be linked to her.
The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies. Music artists make very little off of streaming and CDs are obsolete. Their best source of income these days is touring. If she can't make money on her own by touring why should Apple finance her act?
Huh! She had the top selling album of two separate years by a mile, not even close.
I don't think you really have a clue. Her demos are really wide.
What?! '19' and '21' were great albums, and "Hello" is reminding us just how great her voice is. It's been 4 years since her last album. I'm expecting '25' to go Platinum.
I don't think sponsoring a huge artist is a bad thing at all. Instead of physical CD's, I can see the possibility of a special iTunes Store card ,that when purchased, is used for Adele's latest album or other older albums.
The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies.
You must be thinking of Susan Boyle.
As for 21,
If she only had half the success of that album with this one, she'd still have a massive hit.
She had the 13th highest all time selling album at a time when Album sales are maybe 1/10 what they were at their peek.
If we were in a time were people bought more albums, she'd likely be in the top 5 all time in sales.
She had the top selling all time digital album (3M); meaning they bought all the tracks' album as a whole.
She had 3 #1 songs in the US and UK (and in dozens of countries too).
This comes from the Wiki
****
21 was the best-selling album of both 2011 and 2012 in the United States and Canada despite being over a year old.[203][204][205][206] It is the first album to be the best-selling album two years in a row since Michael Jackson's Thriller was the best-selling album of 1983 and 1984. Despite being over a year old, 21 sold more copies in 2012 than the best-selling albums of 2006 through 2010 sold in their respective years. It is also one of only four albums in the Nielsen SoundScan era to sell over 4 million copies in each of two calendar years. Due to these successes, Billboard declared Adele the Artist of the Year for the second year in a row, making her the first artist to receive the honour twice.[207][208][209] In February 2013, it was announced that 21 had spent two full years on the Billboard 200, never charting lower than number 35 on the chart. This makes 21 the best-selling album of the past 10 years and the fifth best-selling album released since January 2000.[210] In March 2013, after Adele won an Academy Award for "Skyfall", the album reentered the Top 10 of the Billboard 200. This marked the album's 81st week in the Top 10. Only two other albums have spent as much time in the Top 10: Born in the U.S.A. and The Sound of Music.[211] In November 2013, it was announced that 21 had become the first album to sell three million digital copies in the United States and that the album is the 13th best-selling overall in the United States since Nielsen SoundScan began tracking sales in 1991.[212]
You're usually on point, but you are completely off this time around. Adele is very popular worldwide with all types of people.
I wonder if a card with a scan code on it you buy, then scan with an iDevice counts as "physical media?" IIRC, Starbux did this with a freebie code of the day. It's a type of gift card.
She had the 13th highest all time selling album ...
Must be a lot of fat old ladies in the world. Maybe some millenniums still buy albums, but young people today mostly stream, buy tracks or just listen on YouTube. I've heard a couple short clips of her on TV, and I admit she has a very strong vocal range but I think the music itself is really boring and old fashion. Honestly, I think Apple's relationship with U2 is a mistake as well. They are a has been group. As much as I dislike modern popular music, I believe Apple should stick with young hip artists to complement their Beats brand.
Must be a lot of fat old ladies in the world. Maybe some millenniums still buy albums, but young people today mostly stream, buy tracks or just listen on YouTube. I've heard a couple short clips of her on TV, and I admit she has a very strong vocal range but I think the music itself is really boring and old fashion. Honestly, I think Apple's relationship with U2 is a mistake as well. They are a has been group. As much as I dislike modern popular music, I believe Apple should stick with young hip artists to complement their Beats brand.
Man, this is tiresome, she SOLD 3M digital albums (that means they bought ALL THE TRACKS ON THE ALBUM),
and had more than 30M in digital single sold.,
Plus 15M albums//...
It's not "old fashion" because it sold a shitload.
She's part of the UK soul sound that hit the charts post 2000.
That kind of sound is even more popular in the UK but its pretty popular in the US too, Sam Smith, etc.
Her stats don't disprove that a lot of people now stream or buy less of well, everything.
She's just got an exceptional following. She's not like the rest of the market.
Also, There is place for more than one style in the world.
You can imagine whatever demo you have in your head, but they're wrong.
As for U2, yeah they're kind of out of phase with the current sound,
There is very little straight rock on the current chart, but not Adele.
For $30 million they need to offer Apple Music exclusives and mad placement at concert halls. Overall, I like the general idea, just not the suggested implementation. They should have approached Apple before releasing "Hello," especially with all the hype it generated upon release.
William Morris is still too old school and safe. Apple (maybe Eddie Cue) should take over the project and use it to their advantage. Adele will sell massively and Apple Music can only gain from a sponsorship.
"...The only people who listen to her are fat old ladies..." Wow! Just Wow. Fat.Old.Ladies. Before my gf barged in with her opinion I was trying to figure out what kind of xxxx would write that. My gf has chimed in with plenty of suggestions (including paying to see a pic of the person posting that), but no need to step into somebody else's trash.
I like some of her music, Rolling plays great on good speakers, my Pops even has her on his play list. 30 mil for tour is not heavy, she outdrew Beebs and Swifted Swift. A million downloads an hour of Hello for first two days. Nobody can predict ticket sales, but smart ppl in mx biz put money on her. She would be a good draw for Apple to sponsor, imho a safe bet. She doesn't carry the baggage that alienates audience (except maybe aging men who have trouble with women). I wouldn't go to her concert, likely buy some tunes. Like to see where they go on this.
It's not "old fashion"
I think it is purposefully old fashion. I found her Hello music video and it IS old fashion to the Nth degree.
Old flip phones, 1980s style land lines old fashion clothing, and furnishings, etc.
And BORING! it just goes on and on.
Over 130 million views in just 6 days.
I'm sure they'll work something out minus the physical CDs in stores. The amount of money they've thrown on exclusivity in Apple Music with Drake, Pharell, etc.. Why not get Adele in?
Yes they will. How about an "Adele" co-branded ?Watch? It could come pre-loaded with her new album, and a custom watch face featuring her actual face. The box can be a custom "?Watch|Adele" box with the CD incorporated into it as a bonus ... so no clutter in the store. And like the U2 iPod, Adele can pick the color combo.