Ari29 Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 3 hours ago, Axelios said: She was looking up to Beyonce the person not Beyonce the solo artist. It’s not even clever… So she was looking up to her on a personal level, despite not knowing her personally? That’s what you’re trying to tell me. Again, at least make it funny or clever. This is bottom of the barrel and you just look dumb 1
WildHeart Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 5 minutes ago, AxelFox said: Nobody claimed a timeless and remembered catalogue is not important. But what is the detriment that you are using to claim Beyoncé's catalog isn't timeless and remembered? The fact that her streams are not on par with acts that debuted 15 years AFTER her? How idiotic of an analogy is that No, catalogues of Elton John, The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Fleetwood Mac, Queen and Nirvana is on par or outstream Beyonce's catalogue for example (1M more or less with all of them). All of them are artists that debuted decade(s) before her and performing similar to her catalogue (Ren is not old enough to be considered as a catalogue album yet) despite her ongoing stadium tour's boost on her catalogue. 15 minutes ago, AxelFox said: No, they indicate that her marketing actually works despite you claiming it does not. what indicate the entertaining abilities is the TYPE of marketing she uses, and that is of a queen/goddess. And she can use it because she is indeed the BEST at what she does. Same type of marketing would not works for others who can't back it up unfortunately. What i am reading from this is, she is the best at what she does and her marketing is aimed at showing that but she doesn't get the best results aka most ticket sales which basically shows that... marketing fails to convince people she's truly the best. 1
Bobyonce Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 9 minutes ago, Artistofthedecade said: No, catalogues of Elton John, The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Fleetwood Mac, Queen and Nirvana is on par or outstream Beyonce's catalogue for example (1M more or less with all of them). All of them are artists that debuted decade(s) before her and performing similar to her catalogue (Ren is not old enough to be considered as a catalogue album yet) despite her ongoing stadium tour's boost on her catalogue. What i am reading from this is, she is the best at what she does and her marketing is aimed at showing that but she doesn't get the best results aka most ticket sales which basically shows that... marketing fails to convince people she's truly the best. Olodo
WildHeart Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 1 minute ago, Bobyonce said: Olodo Aloha
AxelFox Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 18 minutes ago, Artistofthedecade said: No, catalogues of Elton John, The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Fleetwood Mac, Queen and Nirvana is on par or outstream Beyonce's catalogue for example (1M more or less with all of them). All of them are artists that debuted decade(s) before her and performing similar to her catalogue (Ren is not old enough to be considered as a catalogue album yet) despite her ongoing stadium tour's boost on her catalogue. None of them have more daily streams than her (Renaissance excluded). So we established her re-current streams are slightly better than those of established legends that came before her (even though she's been around for a long ass time already too) and much better than those that were her contemporaries when she debuted, and the streams for her current album are way ahead the streams of her contemporaries' most recent effort. On top of that she also performs on par with with some major artists that have debuted long after her. Yet we're supposed to believe her music is forgotten, nobody cares about it, it's not timeless, not cross-generational. Is this the argument you are trying to make? 21 minutes ago, Artistofthedecade said: What i am reading from this is, she is the best at what she does and her marketing is aimed at showing that but she doesn't get the best results aka most ticket sales which basically shows that... marketing fails to convince people she's truly the best. If they are paying top dollar for it you better believe they are convinced she's the top performer as well And if she ain't selling more tickets it's because she decided not to, not because she can't . Do you really believe she wouldn't be able to add more international dates to her current tour such as a few LATAM dates, a few in Asia, some in Australia, maybe even Africa. Not to mention a second European and NA leg where her demand is through the roof. The tour is already one of the most successful of all time as it is, how is the marketing not working? Worms for brains. This is my last response, you can continue with the mind gymnastics about Beyonce's supposed irrelevance if that is the validation you seek in order to uplift the excuse of an entertainer you stan. Cheers! 2
ForgottenSoul Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 I feel her last few albums have not really been that catchy.
Kisuke Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 Not comparing an 90s artist to the biggest of the current gen and thinking its an drag Poor op.
Kisuke Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 1 hour ago, Artistofthedecade said: No, catalogues of Elton John, The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Fleetwood Mac, Queen and Nirvana is on par or outstream Beyonce's catalogue for example (1M more or less with all of them). All of them are artists that debuted decade(s) before her and performing similar to her catalogue (Ren is not old enough to be considered as a catalogue album yet) despite her ongoing stadium tour's boost on her catalogue. What i am reading from this is, she is the best at what she does and her marketing is aimed at showing that but she doesn't get the best results aka most ticket sales which basically shows that... marketing fails to convince people she's truly the best. This person thot they ate too oldtrl could never 7
WildHeart Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, AxelFox said: None of them have more daily streams than her (Renaissance excluded). Queen - 9.77M (debuted 25 years before) The Beatles - 7.75M (debuted 35 years before) Beyonce - 6.75M (currently on a tour) Fleetwood Mac - 5.93M (debuted 31 years before) Michael Jackson - 5.69M (34 years before) Beyonce - 5.64M (before her tour in March) Nirvana - 5.53M (debuted 11 years before) After her tour ends, her catalogue is at risk of getting outstreamed by multiple acts that debuted 30 years before her. And if her catalogue is somehow comparable to acts from 60s and 70s, her catalogue should be comparable to acts from 00s as well... 1 hour ago, AxelFox said: Yet we're supposed to believe her music is forgotten, nobody cares about it, it's not timeless, not cross-generational. Is this the argument you are trying to make? I wouldn't say it is forgotten but 4 being 23rd, ST being 21st and Lemonade being 46th daily most streamed albums of their respective release years despite how they performed during their release years show that they are not aging well for older generations and transferring to new generations. And that's with her being active and still relevant currently. 1 hour ago, AxelFox said: If they are paying top dollar for it you better believe they are convinced she's the top performer as well And if she ain't selling more tickets it's because she decided not to, not because she can't . Do you really believe she wouldn't be able to add more international dates to her current tour such as a few LATAM dates, a few in Asia, some in Australia, maybe even Africa. Not to mention a second European and NA leg where her demand is through the roof. So you believe she can add 80-100 more shows (like some other artists) with her needing months to sell those tickets in her strongest markets, but you somehow don't believe that those artists can sell more expensive tickets with performing to less and less people... I fear it works both ways. Edited September 28, 2023 by Artistofthedecade
Axelios Posted September 28, 2023 Author Posted September 28, 2023 5 hours ago, Draper. said: We went from local to global but unknown in the US. Nobody can’t catch up with these narratives haters make. Saying that TS didn't break through with her debut is crazy. Most Beyonce albums didn't perform as well as Taylor 2006 debut even in terms of global total units.
Draper. Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 35 minutes ago, Axelios said: Saying that TS didn't break through with her debut is crazy. Most Beyonce albums didn't perform as well as Taylor 2006 debut even in terms of global total units. It only charted in 3 countries, it’s really not that crazy. But whatever, if you want to think she had an established name globally… fine. I don’t care. That’s still not the point of what I was saying initially.
Axelios Posted September 28, 2023 Author Posted September 28, 2023 5 minutes ago, Draper. said: It only charted in 3 countries, it’s really not that crazy. And its US sales alone were enough to make it bigger than most Beyonce albums globally.
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, Artistofthedecade said: What i am reading from this is, she is the best at what she does and her marketing is aimed at showing that but she doesn't get the best results aka most ticket sales which basically shows that... marketing fails to convince people she's truly the best. I do not know how you came to this conclusion, considering she's on an acclaimed (from fans and critics) hit tour. Not to mention, being "the best at what one does" does not necessarily translate into popular success. That's like, the entire story of pop music, actually. And THEN there's the fact that (currently) she has the Best Selling Female Tour Of All Time. That is definitely subject to change but why act like she's not getting huge tour success? Edited September 28, 2023 by swissman
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 (edited) 7 hours ago, Axelios said: She was looking up to Beyonce the person not Beyonce the solo artist. If she's looking up to Beyoncé the person then she must also be looking up to Beyoncé the lead singer of Destiny's Child though. No? And correct me if I'm wrong, but Dangerously in Love came out before Rihanna said this too? So where's the lack of "solo artist" in this? Edited September 28, 2023 by swissman
Kristie Kuwa Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 35 minutes ago, Axelios said: And its US sales alone were enough to make it bigger than most Beyonce albums globally. How is Nicole S. doing?
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 5 hours ago, Great808 said: They already told y’all her albums always suffer from being frontloaded and serving the opposite of longevity so no surprise here. And the fact that stans thought she deserved AOTY over Harry Yes because AOTY should go to highest streamed album. 1
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 4 hours ago, Badgalbriel said: Taylor definitely broke through with her debut. It's bigger than any Beyoncé album sans IAMSF If this is what we're going with, then Beyoncé "broke through" in 1999 with The Writing's On The Wall, an album that sold more than Taylor's debut and featured hit, classic songs, one entirely sung by Beyoncé. 2
Draper. Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 1 hour ago, Axelios said: And its US sales alone were enough to make it bigger than most Beyonce albums globally. And here you are 25 later still making threads about her. Bey is more than fine. lol
Axelios Posted September 28, 2023 Author Posted September 28, 2023 36 minutes ago, swissman said: If this is what we're going with, then Beyoncé "broke through" in 1999 with The Writing's On The Wall, an album that sold more than Taylor's debut and featured hit, classic songs, one entirely sung by Beyoncé. Not as a solo artist. 1
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 3 hours ago, Artistofthedecade said: Queen - 9.77M (debuted 25 years before) The Beatles - 7.75M (debuted 35 years before) Beyonce - 6.75M (currently on a tour) Fleetwood Mac - 5.93M (debuted 31 years before) Michael Jackson - 5.69M (34 years before) Beyonce - 5.64M (before her tour in March) Nirvana - 5.53M (debuted 11 years before) And? Beyoncé still remains in the Top 20 most streamed female artists based on monthly listeners. The only woman who debuted before her who has more is Shakira. The only men are Coldplay and Eminem. Of this list, the only one in the Top 50 Most Monthly Listeners is Queen, five spots below Beyoncé. I think everyone realizes that Beyoncé's streaming numbers are not some astounding thing. That doesn't mean that it adds up to any major slight to her career, value or impact on music, culture, and people, especially when the lengths Beyoncé has gone to to NOT have hits, to NOT maximize Spotify numbers, and to often not release on Spotify at all...this shouldn't be surprising.
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 8 minutes ago, Axelios said: Not as a solo artist. So?
Kristie Kuwa Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 (edited) 11 minutes ago, swissman said: So? Say My Name, Jumpin, Jumping, She Cant Love (a song on TWOTW) are all examples of DC songs that Bey sang solo already. That user knows this very well Edited September 28, 2023 by Kristie Kuwa
swissman Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Kristie Kuwa said: Say My Name, Jumpin, Jumping, She Cant Love (a song on TWOTW) are all examples of DC songs that Bey sang solo already. That user knows this very well I mean, I get the point, the technically, but not the issue. Why, if we are not discussing plain black-and-white stats like "#1s" or something, does it matter if she was solo or not in the 1990s? She's still from that era of pop. It'd be like saying Diana Ross was not an entity in the 1960s, despite being one of the most iconic and successful singers of that time, just because her solo debut was in 1970. Edited September 28, 2023 by swissman 1
Kristie Kuwa Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 14 minutes ago, swissman said: I mean, I get the point, the technically, but not the issue. Why, if we are not discussing plain black-and-white stats like "#1s" or something, does it matter if she was solo or not in the 1990s? She's still from that era of pop. It'd be like saying Diana Ross was not an entity in the 1960s, despite being one of the most iconic and successful singers of that time, just because her solo debut was in 1970. Absolutely. Its just bs talk to diminish her career
Klein Posted September 28, 2023 Posted September 28, 2023 Imagine trying to argue that Beyoncé isn't a legend and that she'll be forgotten. Couldn't be me. I won't have kids but best believe every one of my friends' kids are gonna have to learn the Crazy In Love walk and drop. Whew. Spoiler Doesn't mean I support the Hive members that are shitt*ng on Taylor even though I understand why they do it. Y'all are just as bad 1
Recommended Posts