Has 'New' album reached Platinum sales yet?
-
Paul's best album since Tug of War. I would hope so.
-
JoeySmith:
Paul's best album since Tug of War. I would hope so.
I like "New," too, but there is NO way it is ever going to reach platinum status (1,000,000 albums sold). It's only sold 190,000 copies in the U.S.
-
I doubt it would ever get platinum. I would hope it one day might get gold. Is this 500 000 in US ? What is New's sales figure for UK ? It really deserves more sales than it has got. I think perhaps Paul's days of huge sales are long gone. The mass youth market is certainly not interrested in the muisic of 70 plus artists.
-
Apollo C. Vermouth:
I doubt it would ever get platinum. I would hope it one day might get gold. Is this 500 000 in US ? What is New's sales figure for UK ? It really deserves more sales than it has got. I think perhaps Paul's days of huge sales are long gone. The mass youth market is certainly not interrested in the muisic of 70 plus artists.
True, but I also wonder where the first-generation and second-generation Beatles/Wings/McCartney fans went. I mean, there are a hell of a lot of people still around who lived the Beatles first-hand and a shite load of others who got into them a little later, either through their parents or other means. Sadly, it seems a lot of them have moved on (of course I am preaching to the converted), or not interested in any of their new material.... Gawd, I am sounding like an old man.
-
'New' sold 190,000 copies in March 2014 in the US, 5 months after the release. Since it was only on the charts for a few weeks in total over there, that total won't be much higher than 200,000 at the most at the moment. And not even near Gold. In the UK, 'Driving Rain' got Silver in a few weeks and stuck there since, 'Chaos And Creation' was Gold after one week, 'Memory Almost Full' wasn't Gold until July 2013 and 'New' has no certification whatsoever. Silver is 60,000, Gold is 100,000 in the UK.
-
If my band's upcoming CD sells 190,000 I won't complain.
-
nobodytoldme:
'New' sold 190,000 copies in March 2014 in the US, 5 months after the release. Since it was only on the charts for a few weeks in total over there, that total won't be much higher than 200,000 at the most at the moment. And not even near Gold. In the UK, 'Driving Rain' got Silver in a few weeks and stuck there since, 'Chaos And Creation' was Gold after one week, 'Memory Almost Full' wasn't Gold until July 2013 and 'New' has no certification whatsoever. Silver is 60,000, Gold is 100,000 in the UK.
...which probably means it is Paul's worst selling studio album of New material. Don't think that even Press did so poorly. That is sooo disappointing. For me New easily makes it into his TopTen Post - Beatles releases.
-
Everything's all skewed around now. He will make far more and have more exposure playing the NEW songs live than he ever will from radio play or album sales. Here's a man consistently selling out stadiums, but his album wasn't in either the 2013 or 2014 Billboard Albums of the Year. Unfortunately, that's the reality of the music scene now.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Here's a man consistently selling out stadiums, but his album wasn't in either the 2013 or 2014 Billboard Albums of the Year. Unfortunately, that's the reality of the music scene now.
Unfortunately,that's the reality of a Paul McCartney live concert audience. They are more interested in going to gawp at a (gasp) living Beatle playing Beatles songs than going out and buying his latest product. It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
-
Kestrel:
It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
It's hard to top yourself when you're already a living legend when you're in your 20's. Maybe you had to be there when the group was together, but for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God. All The Beatles spent the 70's and 80's trying to live it down. You still see people absolutely freak out when they meet him. I'm glad to see Paul being able to enjoy it, and to celebrate the songs he wrote with thousands, while still making millions. That's gotta make him feel pretty great!
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Kestrel:
It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
It's hard to top yourself when you're already a living legend when you're in your 20's. Maybe you had to be there when the group was together, but for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God. All The Beatles spent the 70's and 80's trying to live it down. You still see people absolutely freak out when they meet him. I'm glad to see Paul being able to enjoy it, and to celebrate the songs he wrote with thousands, while still making millions. That's gotta make him feel pretty great!
They were the biggest thing going in the mid 60s. But they were not God. Let's not get ridiculous. Even Lennon knew that.
-
RMartinez:
beatlesfanrandy:
Kestrel:
It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
It's hard to top yourself when you're already a living legend when you're in your 20's. Maybe you had to be there when the group was together, but for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God. All The Beatles spent the 70's and 80's trying to live it down. You still see people absolutely freak out when they meet him. I'm glad to see Paul being able to enjoy it, and to celebrate the songs he wrote with thousands, while still making millions. That's gotta make him feel pretty great!
They were the biggest thing going in the mid 60s. But they were not God. Let's not get ridiculous. Even Lennon knew that.
You missed the point. Let's not misread what I wrote. OK? I did not say they were God. Do not overreact because I used the word "God". Read it again...carefully. Then make a comment.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
RMartinez:
beatlesfanrandy:
Kestrel:
It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
It's hard to top yourself when you're already a living legend when you're in your 20's. Maybe you had to be there when the group was together, but for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God. All The Beatles spent the 70's and 80's trying to live it down. You still see people absolutely freak out when they meet him. I'm glad to see Paul being able to enjoy it, and to celebrate the songs he wrote with thousands, while still making millions. That's gotta make him feel pretty great!
They were the biggest thing going in the mid 60s. But they were not God. Let's not get ridiculous. Even Lennon knew that.
You missed the point. Let's not misread what I wrote. OK? I did not say they were God. Do not overreact because I used the word "God". Read it again...carefully. Then make a comment.
Randy, I was actually just going to defend you. I agree with what you wrote in your first post.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
RMartinez:
beatlesfanrandy:
Kestrel:
It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
It's hard to top yourself when you're already a living legend when you're in your 20's. Maybe you had to be there when the group was together, but for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God. All The Beatles spent the 70's and 80's trying to live it down. You still see people absolutely freak out when they meet him. I'm glad to see Paul being able to enjoy it, and to celebrate the songs he wrote with thousands, while still making millions. That's gotta make him feel pretty great!
They were the biggest thing going in the mid 60s. But they were not God. Let's not get ridiculous. Even Lennon knew that.
You missed the point. Let's not misread what I wrote. OK? I did not say they were God. Do not overreact because I used the word "God". Read it again...carefully. Then make a comment.
THIS is what you wrote: "for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God." You said that for YOU they were equal to God. THAT is what you wrote. I didn't misread anything. YOU did. Or you miswrote something. I commented they were not God, and I am correct. I stand by my comment.
-
Nancy R:
beatlesfanrandy:
RMartinez:
beatlesfanrandy:
Kestrel:
It's equally unfortunate that Paul only has himself to blame, by constantly pandering to an audience who are only interested in living in the past.
It's hard to top yourself when you're already a living legend when you're in your 20's. Maybe you had to be there when the group was together, but for millions of us they really were bigger than, or at least equal to, God. All The Beatles spent the 70's and 80's trying to live it down. You still see people absolutely freak out when they meet him. I'm glad to see Paul being able to enjoy it, and to celebrate the songs he wrote with thousands, while still making millions. That's gotta make him feel pretty great!
They were the biggest thing going in the mid 60s. But they were not God. Let's not get ridiculous. Even Lennon knew that.
You missed the point. Let's not misread what I wrote. OK? I did not say they were God. Do not overreact because I used the word "God". Read it again...carefully. Then make a comment.
Randy, I was actually just going to defend you. I agree with what you wrote in your first post.
Doesn't sound like a god to me.
-
Surprises me a bit thought the new CD would have wider appeal shows who buys music these days seems after a certain age music not that important
-
I still believe something happenned in the long wait between Memory Almost Full and New. Paul was concentrating on his special niche projects, excepting the live album GENYC and also The Fireman's Electric Arguments, which should of been turned into a mainstream Paul McCartney album with a bit of rejigging and editing. So I think alot of casual fans and the general public sort of believed this was where Paul's music solely was at and they weren't that interested. Paul had become a niche artist. I still don't know why people after probably hearing some of the tracks didn't realize this is a excellent album and buy it. Maybe the album is really not as good as a lot of us fans believe but I really don't think it is the case as most of those usually harsh Paul critics liked it.
-
RMartinez:
Doesn't sound like a god to me.
-
toris:
Apollo C. Vermouth:
I doubt it would ever get platinum. I would hope it one day might get gold. Is this 500 000 in US ? What is New's sales figure for UK ? It really deserves more sales than it has got. I think perhaps Paul's days of huge sales are long gone. The mass youth market is certainly not interrested in the muisic of 70 plus artists.
True, but I also wonder where the first-generation and second-generation Beatles/Wings/McCartney fans went. I mean, there are a hell of a lot of people still around who lived the Beatles first-hand and a shite load of others who got into them a little later, either through their parents or other means. Sadly, it seems a lot of them have moved on (of course I am preaching to the converted), or not interested in any of their new material.... Gawd, I am sounding like an old man.
I know several die hard Beatles fans who have made up their minds that Paul's solo work is terrible. Bear in mind that they can't name any of his songs apart from Band on the Run. It's strange, there's no reasoning with them.
-
Sgt._Pepper:
RMartinez:
Doesn't sound like a god to me.
Well, THAT is just the truth!!
