John J. Hlavaty ([email protected])
Sun, 13 Sep 1998 22:39:57 -0400
I find this incredulous and very disconcerting. It's
almost as if there's this "fail before one begins" attitude.
There's no way that this album could be this
big of a seller.
Since 1990 (using that at the "start" of this decade),
there have been several HUGE selling albums. U2's
own "Achtung Baby" sold over 8 million copies
in the U.S. M.C. Hammer, Hootie and the Blowfish and
Alanis Morrisette all have one 11 million+ selling
album to their credit (just U.S. sales). The "Titanic" soundtrack also
sold over 11 million copies in the U.S. Considering that U2's
"Best Of" is really a collection of "old" material
(i.e., nothing new) can it really outsell any of them?
U2's best selling album, "The Joshua Tree", still
"only" sold 10 million copies in the U.S. It seems
difficult to believe that a "Best Of" will really top that.
Given that "Zooropa" and "POP" have sold between
1.3-2.3 million copies each (depending on what source
one reads) and that OS1 was basically "ignored" here
in the U.S. (reaching only #76 on the U.S. charts),
I really wonder how well this "Best Of" will do in the
U.S.
I do, however, feel that the "Best Of" album will be a bigger seller
outside the U.S. than in (as was "Zooropa", OS1 and "POP")
for U2 seems to be gaining more of an international audience
while losing some of their U.S. audience.
With that in mind, could the release of this "Best Of"
really be a way to pull U.S. audiences back to U2?
Comments?
Ciao,
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Sun Sep 13 1998 - 19:44:22 PDT