Initially, you said 10 was disappointing. I explained to you why Missy was #10 and now you're saying if you removed the Top 3, she's be higher. That was my point. The chart positions are irrelevant because literally any sales figure could score you a higher or lower chart position based on individual sales AND the competition. This is why 129K in 1997 was enough to get her a #3, while 131K (although more than 129K) only got her a #10 in 1999. 9 other albums did more than she did that week.
YOUR Top 10 Singles Of 1999
- Thread starter Wacky D
- Start date
Initially, you said 10 was disappointing. I explained to you why Missy was #10 and now you're saying if you removed the Top 3, she's be higher. That was my point. The chart positions are irrelevant because literally any sales figure could score you a higher or lower chart position based on individual sales AND the competition. This is why 129K in 1997 was enough to get her a #3, while 131K (although more than 129K) only got her a #10 in 1999. 9 other albums did more than she did that week.
Don’t do that. You know that’s not the entirety of the argument being made. You know it’s just about 1999 on top of that. If you’re going to say what other posters are saying, say it accurately, or don’t say it at all.
Your chart positions argument. They don't tell you much. I could drop an album today that goes #1 and sell 50K. I could drop an album next week and it debut at #10 even though it sells 200K. Why? I dropped my latest album on a week where 9 other albums outsold mine.
Because she should have dropped a better single. (Better in the sense of driving first week album sales).
Imagine if her single was as big as The Rain. Do you think her first week album sales would have been higher or lower?
Clearly you don’t understand my point.
Which is frustrating.
How many other #1 albums in 99 did 121k or less?
You don't really have a point. I'm showing you that 121K was enough for a #1 in 1999. This is consistent with the article saying 131K would've gotten a Top 5 in normal times. This disproves your entire argument about how chart positions being a disappointment or determining whether an album flopped. Why? Because you obviously don't/didn't understand how it works.
Personally, she would've done the same numbers. In order for her to do more, she needed a runaway hit as a lead, but I don't think that was the focus. She attempted to make a statement with her lead single and "She's a bytch"coming from Lil' Kim, it might've been a bigger single. Coming from Missy, "Smooth Chick" would've been far more suitable:
If she wanted something that was more of a hit, this would've sufficed:
I remember saying that and it applies. I mean, an artist comes out of the gate and does a certain amount of numbers, it isn't expected that those numbers will be bigger next go round without having logical reasons. Simply having a higher profile in comparison to the previous album doesn't translate into people buying the album.
I reviewed every single week.
The pattern was steady decline. Sure. If it was #50 one week, it might have been #47 the next, but if you charted a graph there wouldn’t be any significant spikes. It would be steady decline for five months Until it disappeared.
I agree with this. But my hunch that Hot Boys led to additional copies of the album being pressed up and shipped is the most logical inference from all available evidence.
Given that the certification is units shipped minus returns. Something must have happened to put more albums in stores in early January. That something was the success of Hot Boys.
They could have shipped 1.5 million copies on release date and certified it one month later, but they didn’t.
Is respectable generally positive? Yes or no.
Is unspectacular generally negative? Yes or no.
Different time.
I understand the point you’re making, but on the flip side, your have a higher chance of making money on your investment with a proven artist. So I can see he logic in putting all the time and money into Juvi and telling Wayne to kick rocks.
Exactly. Just like Missy didn’t have the singles to catapult sales in 99.