Jump to content

BB: "Reputation" 2M WW


Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, WonderstruckFR said:

Mediatraffic has it at 1,921,000 sales first week though.

We use MT because there's nothing else tracking WW sales but you do realize that it's far from 100% accuracy right ?

So Gaga's label reporting 80K sales more doesn't sound like a reach or over-shipment.

 

 

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, H-I-M said:

We use MT because there's nothing else tracking WW sales but you do realize that it's far from 100% accuracy right ?

So Gaga's label reporting 80K sales more doesn't sound like a reach or over-shipment.

 

 

I know it's not 100% accurate thanks but you do realize that labels report shipments and not actual sales + tend to over-estimate total sales just for the hype, right?

 

Also, let's not forget to put the asterisk.

1,921,000*

Edited by WonderstruckFR
Posted
57 minutes ago, WonderstruckFR said:

I know it's not 100% accurate thanks but you do realize that labels report shipments and not actual sales + tend to over-estimate total sales just for the hype, right?

 

Also, let's not forget to put the asterisk.

1,921,000*

This thread is literally about your fave's label reporting 2M, so what is the difference between them and Interscope reporting BTW's 2M ?

 

 

Posted

It's just not realistic.

Posted
7 minutes ago, H-I-M said:

This thread is literally about your fave's label reporting 2M, so what is the difference between them and Interscope reporting BTW's 2M ?

 

 

It’s the hypocrisy :deadbanana2: 

Posted
1 hour ago, WonderstruckFR said:

Mediatraffic has it at 1,921,000 sales first week though.

That's not 100 percent accurate. Sales are more than that 

Posted
2 hours ago, H-I-M said:

This thread is literally about your fave's label reporting 2M, so what is the difference between them and Interscope reporting BTW's 2M ?

 

 

Never said they were right about Reputation neither.

Posted

Global queen :clap3:

Posted
12 minutes ago, WonderstruckFR said:

Never said they were right about Reputation neither.

So if we go compare label and MT numbers.

 

Reputation

1.6M vs 2M => 400k/1.6m x 100 = 25% difference. 

 

Born This Way 

1.9M vs 2M => 100k/1.9M x 100 = 5% difference. 

 

 

Taking into account a margin of error from MT's random estimates, it seems like Gaga's label was most likely right, while Taylor's might have overshipped. 

 

MT would have to be wrong by a whooping 25% for Taylor's numbers to be real. Can you imagine? 

 

Posted

The album did like 300K+ in China which MT doesn’t really track so it’s possible 

Posted

We love a Global Legend :clap3:

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Robert said:

The album did like 300K+ in China which MT doesn’t really track so it’s possible 

And people still look to that racist site? :toofunny3:

 

Posted

1_gif.gif

Posted
6 minutes ago, H-I-M said:

So if we go compare label and MT numbers.

 

Reputation

1.6M vs 2M => 400k/1.6m x 100 = 25% difference. 

 

Born This Way 

1.9M vs 2M => 100k/1.9M x 100 = 5% difference. 

 

 

Taking into account a margin of error from MT's random estimates, it seems like Gaga's label was most likely right, while Taylor's might have overshipped. 

 

MT would have to be wrong by a whooping 25% for Taylor's numbers to be real. Can you imagine? 

 

We love facts

 

Serendipity

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.