Thanks to bigham from CW
HOUSTON, WHITNEY WHITNEY: THE GREATEST HITS MAY 16, 2000 JUNE 21, 2012 ARISTA STANDARD 5.00X MULTI PLATINUM ALBUM SOLO
Whitney Houston: 13xp
Whitney: 9xp
I'm Your Baby Tonight: 4xp
The Bodyguard: 17xp
The Preacher's Wife: 3xp
My Love is Your Love: 4xp
Whitney: The Greatest Hits: 5xp *new*
Just Whitney: 1xp
One Wish: No cert
I Look To You: 1xp
Total: 57xp
(WTE soundtrack not counted)
When are they finally recertifying all her other albums? Diamond for Whitney, Gold for OW, 5xp for IYBT, 15xp for WH. Don't understand why it takes so long to do that. I mean what does it take to certify an album?
0
Great news: Whitney: The Greatest Hits re-certified 5x platinum by RIAA
Started by remamamama, Jun 27 2012 02:07 AM
18 replies to this topic
#2
-
- 137 posts
Member
Posted 27 June 2012 - 08:59 AM
Good question. I am not sure what the process is anymore. In the age of digital, I really haven't kept up as well as I could on the topic.
#3
-
- 7 posts
Newbie
Posted 27 June 2012 - 10:02 AM
I am listening to Whitney's music now....damn, it is good. Stars like MJ, Mariah Carey, Beatle, etc, they have maybe 5 or 6 songs I really like. With Whitney I can honesty say there about 20 songs I really like. And like 5 or 6 songs I consider to masterpiece. The "Greatest Love of All" song is a gift from GOD given through Whitney.
#4
-
- 1,461 posts
Senior Member
Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:22 AM
Her certifications are now pretty up to date in the USA, but in almost every other country she is heavily under certified, like many major artists. It seems the only ones they care about about are the RIAA.
One Wish must be due certification as I think it's only a few thousand off selling 500,000 and Whitney probably will be soon as it's sold over 1 million since 1991 and was last certified in 1995.
But why do you think WH album is due for certification for 15 mill? It's sold 1.2 million since 1991 and was certified in 13 mill in 1999, so hasn't sold a full million since then. I think IYBT is up to date as well because it was certified in 1995, it won't have sold too much since 1995.
One Wish must be due certification as I think it's only a few thousand off selling 500,000 and Whitney probably will be soon as it's sold over 1 million since 1991 and was last certified in 1995.
But why do you think WH album is due for certification for 15 mill? It's sold 1.2 million since 1991 and was certified in 13 mill in 1999, so hasn't sold a full million since then. I think IYBT is up to date as well because it was certified in 1995, it won't have sold too much since 1995.
#5
-
- 1,461 posts
Senior Member
Posted 27 June 2012 - 12:13 PM
Are they releasing any "new" material? I thought this was going to happen?
If they timed things right I think an album of new material could sell close to 1 million this year, or even a repackaged greatest hits like The Ultimate Collection which every country outside of the USA has. So she could end the year on 58-59 million if they tried to maximise commercial potential, like MJ's execs did.
If they timed things right I think an album of new material could sell close to 1 million this year, or even a repackaged greatest hits like The Ultimate Collection which every country outside of the USA has. So she could end the year on 58-59 million if they tried to maximise commercial potential, like MJ's execs did.
#6
-
- 3,156 posts
Senior Member
Posted 27 June 2012 - 12:54 PM
Whitney~Lover, on 27 June 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:
Her certifications are now pretty up to date in the USA, but in almost every other country she is heavily under certified, like many major artists. It seems the only ones they care about about are the RIAA.
One Wish must be due certification as I think it's only a few thousand off selling 500,000 and Whitney probably will be soon as it's sold over 1 million since 1991 and was last certified in 1995.
But why do you think WH album is due for certification for 15 mill? It's sold 1.2 million since 1991 and was certified in 13 mill in 1999, so hasn't sold a full million since then. I think IYBT is up to date as well because it was certified in 1995, it won't have sold too much since 1995.
One Wish must be due certification as I think it's only a few thousand off selling 500,000 and Whitney probably will be soon as it's sold over 1 million since 1991 and was last certified in 1995.
But why do you think WH album is due for certification for 15 mill? It's sold 1.2 million since 1991 and was certified in 13 mill in 1999, so hasn't sold a full million since then. I think IYBT is up to date as well because it was certified in 1995, it won't have sold too much since 1995.
Oops I was going to say 14xp for WH. I really thought it would have sold more, especially after the re-release 2 years ago and her posthumous sales surge. You may be right about IYBT though. I'm not too much into all the certifications etc so I may be wrong.
MJ's estate did really well with Bad 25. I hope Whitney's people do something similar but I know I'm gonna be disappointed if all they care about is a reality show.
Edited by remamamama, 27 June 2012 - 12:54 PM.
#7
-
- 1,461 posts
Senior Member
Posted 27 June 2012 - 01:03 PM
remamamama, on 27 June 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:
Whitney~Lover, on 27 June 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:
Her certifications are now pretty up to date in the USA, but in almost every other country she is heavily under certified, like many major artists. It seems the only ones they care about about are the RIAA.
One Wish must be due certification as I think it's only a few thousand off selling 500,000 and Whitney probably will be soon as it's sold over 1 million since 1991 and was last certified in 1995.
But why do you think WH album is due for certification for 15 mill? It's sold 1.2 million since 1991 and was certified in 13 mill in 1999, so hasn't sold a full million since then. I think IYBT is up to date as well because it was certified in 1995, it won't have sold too much since 1995.
One Wish must be due certification as I think it's only a few thousand off selling 500,000 and Whitney probably will be soon as it's sold over 1 million since 1991 and was last certified in 1995.
But why do you think WH album is due for certification for 15 mill? It's sold 1.2 million since 1991 and was certified in 13 mill in 1999, so hasn't sold a full million since then. I think IYBT is up to date as well because it was certified in 1995, it won't have sold too much since 1995.
Oops I was going to say 14xp for WH. I really thought it would have sold more, especially after the re-release 2 years ago and her posthumous sales surge. You may be right about IYBT though. I'm not too much into all the certifications etc so I may be wrong.
MJ's estate did really well with Bad 25. I hope Whitney's people do something similar but I know I'm gonna be disappointed if all they care about is a reality show.
Well the posthumous sales surge will mean that WH will get to 14 plat eventually. I don't know what MJ's estate did with Bad 25 but there was virtually nothing done for WH 25?! Her label are just not as good at selling Whitney's music as they should be. They could have milked that a lot more. Seemingly nothing is happening for "Whitney"'s 25 anniversary either, not even a reshipment and repackaging. It's such a shame.
#8
-
- 3,156 posts
Senior Member
Posted 27 June 2012 - 03:08 PM
Whitney~Lover, on 27 June 2012 - 01:03 PM, said:
Well the posthumous sales surge will mean that WH will get to 14 plat eventually. I don't know what MJ's estate did with Bad 25 but there was virtually nothing done for WH 25?! Her label are just not as good at selling Whitney's music as they should be. They could have milked that a lot more. Seemingly nothing is happening for "Whitney"'s 25 anniversary either, not even a reshipment and repackaging. It's such a shame.
Here's what they did with Bad 25. Live DVD and CD of his Wembley concert, demo versions, previously unreleased songs, new remixes, booklets, posters. Not to mention MJ's estate partnered with Pepsi to launch the 25th anniversary of Bad. It was just perfect.
http://www.michaelja...ease-new-bad-25
Whitney's estate could have easily done the same thing with "Whitney Houston" or "Whitney" including a live DVD + CD from the Greatest Love Tour or Moment of Truth tour.
#9
-
- 7,557 posts
GO TIGERS!
Posted 28 June 2012 - 09:44 PM
Whitney~Lover, on 27 June 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:
Are they releasing any "new" material? I thought this was going to happen?
If they timed things right I think an album of new material could sell close to 1 million this year, or even a repackaged greatest hits like The Ultimate Collection which every country outside of the USA has. So she could end the year on 58-59 million if they tried to maximise commercial potential, like MJ's execs did.
If they timed things right I think an album of new material could sell close to 1 million this year, or even a repackaged greatest hits like The Ultimate Collection which every country outside of the USA has. So she could end the year on 58-59 million if they tried to maximise commercial potential, like MJ's execs did.
I think that IF any new material is released, we won't hear about it until Sparkle has left theaters. The Sparkle soundtrack does feature new Whitney Houston, even if it's only two tracks... and the logic is probably that a "new" album would compete directly with the Sparkle soundtrack.
"The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will."
#10
-
- 3,156 posts
Senior Member
Posted 29 June 2012 - 05:59 AM
clemsonfight, on 28 June 2012 - 09:44 PM, said:
I think that IF any new material is released, we won't hear about it until Sparkle has left theaters. The Sparkle soundtrack does feature new Whitney Houston, even if it's only two tracks... and the logic is probably that a "new" album would compete directly with the Sparkle soundtrack.
Whitney will have a new release on September 25 (according to a source from CW).
#11
-
- 1,584 posts
Senior Member
Posted 06 July 2012 - 06:01 AM
Mid-Year Charts
4 Whitney Houston Whitney: The Greatest Hits 818,000
http://www.billboard...62.story?page=2
4 Whitney Houston Whitney: The Greatest Hits 818,000
http://www.billboard...62.story?page=2
Edited by Nik31, 06 July 2012 - 06:03 AM.
#12
-
- 3,156 posts
Senior Member
Posted 15 July 2012 - 06:06 AM
Whitney Houston, Other Catalog Records Outselling New Releases for 1st Time
In the two decades since Nielsen Soundscan started to keep track of U.S. album sales in 1991, the company has seen the industry fold in half, digital sales catch up to physical, and vinyl mount a resurgence. But until last week, they’d never seen old records outsell new ones.
The first six months of the year saw sales of 76.6 million catalog records — industry-speak for albums released more than 18 months ago — compared to 73.9 million current albums. ”That’s a combination of two things: not having the big blockbuster new releases in the first half, and having very, very strong catalog,” says Nielsen analyst David Bakula, who points out that these numbers resulted even though Adele’s 21 – still considered current — has sold a million more copies in 2012 than it had at this point in 2011.
The top-selling catalog records of the year so far include Guns N’ Roses’ Greatest Hits and four records by Whitney Houston, whose canon got a boost after her death in February. Bakula says the biggest reason catalog has been so strong is that record labels and retailers continue to drop the price of older albums, often to as low as $5.99 or $7.99. Those prices, sometimes half of what they once were, are bringing in new customers. “I really, truly do believe that there probably is a consumer that is buying music here that wasn’t buying music in the past,” he says.
Mike Batt, owner of Seattle’s Silver Platters chain, says the steady flow of catalog sales has helped make 2012 a better year than 2011. “I think a lot of [music retailers] would say they feel better this year about things than they did last year,” he says.
Though album sales dropped 3.2 percent in the first half of the year as compared to the first half of 2011 — with 150.5 million albums sold — digital album sales (current and catalog combined) grew 13.8 percent and physical albums stayed basically flat, shedding just 0.6 percent. The slide in sales is attributable to a slump in purchases of new albums, which are also more expensive. Catalog CDs and most digital albums stay close to the $7.99-$10.99 range, while new CDs are mostly in the $13-$18 range.
So is the message here that consumers would be willing to buy more new CDs if the price dropped? Dave Dederer, co-founder of the Presidents of the United States of America and a digital-music entrepreneur now working for Hewlett-Packard, doesn’t think so. He feels listeners willing to pay $7.99 for new records–as opposed to stealing them online and paying nothing, which is by far the most popular way of acquiring music–are equally willing to pay $14.
One major-label executive, who asked not to be named, says labels have long experimented with variable pricing, depending on the release. “There’s no standard pricing, if you will,” the exec says. “It really depends on the dynamic of the project and the consumer profile, and how we can best fit the consumer profile.”
Jason Hughes, owner of Ballard’s Sonic Boom, says $12.99 should be the ceiling for new records, but dropping them any lower is a slippery slope. “As you lower the price of the CD, you’re lowering the value of someone’s art,” Hughes says. “At what point do you say ‘We’re going to sell them for $9.99 and [artists are] not going to be able to make a living off their music, or they’re going to have to tour 11 and a half months a year’?”
http://atlantablacks...s-for-1st-time/
In the two decades since Nielsen Soundscan started to keep track of U.S. album sales in 1991, the company has seen the industry fold in half, digital sales catch up to physical, and vinyl mount a resurgence. But until last week, they’d never seen old records outsell new ones.
The first six months of the year saw sales of 76.6 million catalog records — industry-speak for albums released more than 18 months ago — compared to 73.9 million current albums. ”That’s a combination of two things: not having the big blockbuster new releases in the first half, and having very, very strong catalog,” says Nielsen analyst David Bakula, who points out that these numbers resulted even though Adele’s 21 – still considered current — has sold a million more copies in 2012 than it had at this point in 2011.
The top-selling catalog records of the year so far include Guns N’ Roses’ Greatest Hits and four records by Whitney Houston, whose canon got a boost after her death in February. Bakula says the biggest reason catalog has been so strong is that record labels and retailers continue to drop the price of older albums, often to as low as $5.99 or $7.99. Those prices, sometimes half of what they once were, are bringing in new customers. “I really, truly do believe that there probably is a consumer that is buying music here that wasn’t buying music in the past,” he says.
Mike Batt, owner of Seattle’s Silver Platters chain, says the steady flow of catalog sales has helped make 2012 a better year than 2011. “I think a lot of [music retailers] would say they feel better this year about things than they did last year,” he says.
Though album sales dropped 3.2 percent in the first half of the year as compared to the first half of 2011 — with 150.5 million albums sold — digital album sales (current and catalog combined) grew 13.8 percent and physical albums stayed basically flat, shedding just 0.6 percent. The slide in sales is attributable to a slump in purchases of new albums, which are also more expensive. Catalog CDs and most digital albums stay close to the $7.99-$10.99 range, while new CDs are mostly in the $13-$18 range.
So is the message here that consumers would be willing to buy more new CDs if the price dropped? Dave Dederer, co-founder of the Presidents of the United States of America and a digital-music entrepreneur now working for Hewlett-Packard, doesn’t think so. He feels listeners willing to pay $7.99 for new records–as opposed to stealing them online and paying nothing, which is by far the most popular way of acquiring music–are equally willing to pay $14.
One major-label executive, who asked not to be named, says labels have long experimented with variable pricing, depending on the release. “There’s no standard pricing, if you will,” the exec says. “It really depends on the dynamic of the project and the consumer profile, and how we can best fit the consumer profile.”
Jason Hughes, owner of Ballard’s Sonic Boom, says $12.99 should be the ceiling for new records, but dropping them any lower is a slippery slope. “As you lower the price of the CD, you’re lowering the value of someone’s art,” Hughes says. “At what point do you say ‘We’re going to sell them for $9.99 and [artists are] not going to be able to make a living off their music, or they’re going to have to tour 11 and a half months a year’?”
http://atlantablacks...s-for-1st-time/
#13
-
- 167 posts
Member
Posted 15 July 2012 - 08:21 PM
I read this article and understand all the explanations given for why older records might be selling better than new releases.
But, is there any chance that this could merely be a turning-point in the attitude of the music consumer, finally getting fed up with the declining quality of music? I know I'm gonna sound like the old guy, buuuut... it's just so obvious how we are being spoon-fed eye candy without the musical talent to back it up. I think many of the "artists" of today, even the supposed superstars, are the perfect musical symbols of the Paris Hilton/Kim Kardashian era... famous for being famous, all style and no substance, rewarded for outlandishness and attitude.
Has the music-buying public finally had enough? Probably not, maybe just wishful thinking on my part...
But, is there any chance that this could merely be a turning-point in the attitude of the music consumer, finally getting fed up with the declining quality of music? I know I'm gonna sound like the old guy, buuuut... it's just so obvious how we are being spoon-fed eye candy without the musical talent to back it up. I think many of the "artists" of today, even the supposed superstars, are the perfect musical symbols of the Paris Hilton/Kim Kardashian era... famous for being famous, all style and no substance, rewarded for outlandishness and attitude.
Has the music-buying public finally had enough? Probably not, maybe just wishful thinking on my part...
#14
-
- 749 posts
Senior Member
Posted 16 July 2012 - 01:51 AM
ILookToHou, on 15 July 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:
I read this article and understand all the explanations given for why older records might be selling better than new releases.
But, is there any chance that this could merely be a turning-point in the attitude of the music consumer, finally getting fed up with the declining quality of music? I know I'm gonna sound like the old guy, buuuut... it's just so obvious how we are being spoon-fed eye candy without the musical talent to back it up. I think many of the "artists" of today, even the supposed superstars, are the perfect musical symbols of the Paris Hilton/Kim Kardashian era... famous for being famous, all style and no substance, rewarded for outlandishness and attitude.
Has the music-buying public finally had enough? Probably not, maybe just wishful thinking on my part...
But, is there any chance that this could merely be a turning-point in the attitude of the music consumer, finally getting fed up with the declining quality of music? I know I'm gonna sound like the old guy, buuuut... it's just so obvious how we are being spoon-fed eye candy without the musical talent to back it up. I think many of the "artists" of today, even the supposed superstars, are the perfect musical symbols of the Paris Hilton/Kim Kardashian era... famous for being famous, all style and no substance, rewarded for outlandishness and attitude.
Has the music-buying public finally had enough? Probably not, maybe just wishful thinking on my part...
Well. I've certainly had enough. I won't spend a dime on these c-rappers and other low-talent "artists" that are being pushed today. I buy classical, opera, jazz and catalog stuff. I also buy the odd experimental stuff, and if there is something new that is good, I just download the single, because I haven't seen whole albums that are worth buying. I run and I love new interesting stuff to listen to when running, stuff with a beat, but this new stuff just hurts my ears: bad voices, autotune, and repetitive songs. I'd rather listen to Whitney, Dionne, Diana, MJ, Stevie, Freddy, Mick, Elton, Elvis and their contemporaries any day.
I'll tell you, whichever record company learns that buyers want to hear real voices, and not auto tune, is going to make a bundle.
#15
-
- 7,557 posts
GO TIGERS!
Posted 17 July 2012 - 02:09 PM
remamamama, on 29 June 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:
clemsonfight, on 28 June 2012 - 09:44 PM, said:
I think that IF any new material is released, we won't hear about it until Sparkle has left theaters. The Sparkle soundtrack does feature new Whitney Houston, even if it's only two tracks... and the logic is probably that a "new" album would compete directly with the Sparkle soundtrack.
Whitney will have a new release on September 25 (according to a source from CW).
Is there anything official? Cause all I remember is all the sources saying that ILTY was gonna be called "Undefeated" and was gonna come out in 2007 and then 2008, and so many different fake song titles.... haha
"The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will."
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
