Is there any website that has measured album sales for all Smashing Pumpkins albums? I know they dont mean everything, but it would still be fairly interesting info.

In particular, I'm curious as to how well Adore sold.

last I heard they were like this
gish 1 million
sd 4 million
pisces 1 million
mcis 8 million
adore 1 million
machina 500,000
tafh 1 million

correct me if i'm wrong.

Gish US Sales 1.1 million
Siamese Dream US Sales 4.6 million
Pisces Iscariot US Sales 1.3 million
MCIS US 9.4 million
TAFH 300,000
Adore US Sales 1.1 million
Machina US Sales 582,000
Greatest Hits US Sales 729,000

Obviously world figures would be substantially greater, what I want to know is how much money they would have made from album sales against concert ticket sales.

Gish US Sales 1.1 million
Siamese Dream US Sales 4.6 million
Pisces Iscariot US Sales 1.3 million
MCIS US 9.4 million
TAFH 300,000
Adore US Sales 1.1 million
Machina US Sales 582,000
Greatest Hits US Sales 729,000

Obviously world figures would be substantially greater, what I want to know is how much money they would have made from album sales against concert ticket sales.
Wow never realized that Machina barely even went gold.

Obviously world figures would be substantially greater, what I want to know is how much money they would have made from album sales against concert ticket sales.


who do you mean by "they"? the label or the band? i assume you mean the band...and the band gets $ 1 for every sold album if they made a really good deal. probably less. concert ticket sales are practically always higher than album sales. the money cake in the music industry gets divided into so many little pieces, it's ridiculous. the only way to get rich is to earn at as many stages in the process as possible. at least billy earns for composing, writing lyrics and performance.

Wow never realized that Machina barely even went gold.

i think the GH sales are pretty disappointing

Yeah I was talking about what the band got for it, and less than a dollar you've got to be kiding? Is that $1 for each member or to be divided into quarters, fuck thats terrible. I bought MCIS for $40AU when it came out, take away the stores earnings thats still a lot going to the record company.

the mcis figures need dividing by two because all the RIAA sales figures count a double album as two sales

Yeah I was talking about what the band got for it, and less than a dollar you've got to be kiding? Is that $1 for each member or to be divided into quarters, fuck thats terrible. I bought MCIS for $40AU when it came out, take away the stores earnings thats still a lot going to the record company.

i don't quite remember how the deals usually are, but take a look at this:
Cost centre / Percentage
Labels 26 %
Distribution 23 %
Retail 20 %
Taxes (Germany) 14 %
Artist 7 %
GEMA (association
for artists and copyrights) 6 %
Production 4 %

This is for the german market, which is very similar to the american . So 7 % isn't really a lot, but a little more than $ 1. as i said it all depends on how much you are involved in composing and stuff. Billy Corgan as composer & singer gets more than, say, britney spears, who only earns for performance

i don't quite remember how the deals usually are, but take a look at this:
Cost centre / Percentage
Labels 26 %
Distribution 23 %
Retail 20 %
Taxes (Germany) 14 %
Artist 7 %
GEMA (association
for artists and copyrights) 6 %
Production 4 %

This is for the german market, which is very similar to the american . So 7 % isn't really a lot, but a little more than $ 1. as i said it all depends on how much you are involved in composing and stuff. Billy Corgan as composer & singer gets more than, say, britney spears, who only earns for performance

7% on a 14 dollar album is only 98 cents. Most albums in new stores cost about 14 dollars so if its under that they will get a little over a dollar, but at places that cost a ton for the CD, like 18 dollars, they will get quite a bit less than a dollar.

So they'll get less money when the CD costs more, but more money when the CD costs less?

SAIH has it right as shown here. (http://www.answers.com/topic/the-smashing-pumpkins)

You frequently see the blurb "sold over 40 million albums worldwide" which means they sold more than double the US sales throughout the rest of the world.

it probably doesn't matter how much you bought the CD for at retail price. Retailers mark the price up, likely 20% or more. I would assume that the band and label and production, etc. get their cut from the cost charged to the stores and warehouses.

last I heard they were like this
gish 1 million
sd 4 million
pisces 1 million
mcis 8 million
adore 1 million
machina 500,000
tafh 1 million

correct me if i'm wrong.

You forgot one...

The Future Embrace - 87

You forgot one...

The Future Embrace - 87

your joke made me look it up.....69,000 :eek: pretty bad.

you can argue that the poor marketing was at fault, or the poor reaction to the walking shade single, or perhaps everyone downloaded it and hated it, so they never bought it. i'm sure its all of the above, since the general population appears to be as disappointed as netphoria, despite mixed album reviews.

too be honest, i knew it would the be the lowest, but I thought more people would buy it based on the promising 4-track promo and a100 being leaked....and then become disappointed after hearing the whole thing....as opposed to not even buying it in the first place. :think:

So they'll get less money when the CD costs more, but more money when the CD costs less?

Quite obviously, it was morning and I wasn't thinking straight, therefore writing my post backwards.

How much did MSOTS sell?

can i know where you find the numbers ? i'd like to be able to check a couple things.

can i know where you find the numbers ? i'd like to be able to check a couple things.

my post above has the link for SP sales info. for the rest, use :google:

How much did MSOTS sell?

all i could find was this, which says 250,000 as of april 2003. http://www.zwanmusic.org/newsarchive/197.html

ok, i thought there was some secret site. searching for "album sales" sure doesn't get me anywhere.

ok, i thought there was some secret site. searching for "album sales" sure doesn't get me anywhere.

RIAA.com will tell you, but only gold and platinum, and zwan doesn't come up so they must have sold less than 500,000.

You forgot one...

The Future Embrace - 87



:rofl:

as i said it all depends on how much you are involved in composing and stuff. Billy Corgan as composer & singer gets more than, say, britney spears, who only earns for performance

Yeah, Billy definitely got (probably considerably) more than the others from record sales as the songwriter - the fact that he was the singer doesn't come into it. He mentioned in his blog that he got a $1m advance from Virgin for SD; pretty sure the others got a lot less than this!

I would assume revenue generated from touring would be divided more equitably.

Yeah, Billy definitely got (probably considerably) more than the others from record sales as the songwriter - the fact that he was the singer doesn't come into it. He mentioned in his blog that he got a $1m advance from Virgin for SD; pretty sure the others got a lot less than this!

An advance is a loan the band uses to record the album and to support themselves during recording. They have to pay it back, and it comes out of their royalty cut. They don't earn any royalties until the advance and other costs are recouped by the label

I'm curious as to how well D'arcy's living right now that she's doing absolutely nothing (not counting drugs).

I'm curious as to how well D'arcy's living right now that she's doing absolutely nothing (not counting drugs).

So because she's not in the band she's 'doing absolutely nothing'?

I'm assuming she's doing nothing because I don't see what she needs to be doing. I'm sure she's well enough off and has investments and stuff not to need to work at the local ihop.

You forgot one...

The Future Embrace - 87


Your avatar is awesome :D

An advance is a loan the band uses to record the album and to support themselves during recording. They have to pay it back, and it comes out of their royalty cut. They don't earn any royalties until the advance and other costs are recouped by the label

Makes sense. So the $1m that Billy mentioned as getting from Virgin in 92 - in anticipation of SD selling 1 million units - would be due to him being primary songwriter, yes? The advance given to the other band members would be much less.

your joke made me look it up.....69,000 :eek: pretty bad.

too be honest, i knew it would the be the lowest, but I thought more people would buy it based on the promising 4-track promo and a100 being leaked....and then become disappointed after hearing the whole thing....as opposed to not even buying it in the first place. :think:

The more Billy talked about the album, the more my enthusiasm waned. The songs then got leaked, confirming my initial impressions. As a result I didn't buy it...apparently, many Pumpkins fans felt similarly.

I don't think the trend in declining sales will nessararly continue with the new album though - platinum (in the US) should be an obtainable target.

I'm assuming she's doing nothing because I don't see what she needs to be doing. I'm sure she's well enough off and has investments and stuff not to need to work at the local ihop.

Last I heard she had a ranch and was raising horses. If that's 'doing nothing'

I'm curious as to how well D'arcy's living right now that she's doing absolutely nothing (not counting drugs).

i thought she owns a horse farm and some antique shops

twilightfadez to thread

Makes sense. So the $1m that Billy mentioned as getting from Virgin in 92 - in anticipation of SD selling 1 million units - would be due to him being primary songwriter, yes? The advance given to the other band members would be much less.

What? No, the advance is a loan given to the band so they can record the album, and as a kind of upfront payment. If Billy said 'I got a $1m advance' he means the band got that advance. The bigger the advance the more money the band can spend on producers, engineers, equipment, studio time etc.. It also means the label is confident the album will sell well, and that they'll recoup their advance. The band still has to pay that $1m back before they make any royalties, so it's not split individually or anything. They'd probably have split a small amount of it between themselves for food and living expenses, and maybe a bit of gear, but that would be a personal decision.

The songwriter thing comes into the royalties - basically when you buy an album different people get a slice of the pie: the store, sales tax, distribution, manufacturing, mechanical royalties, and the artist royalties. The songwriter basically gets the mechanical royalty, and the artist royalties are taken by the label until the advance has been recouped - then the band starts to receive the artist royalties, and they split it between themselves however they want. Obviously Billy would have taken more of that than the rest of them

If you want to read up on it, here's two different takes on the whole thing
<a href="http://www.leeandthompson.com/MusicGuide/Chapter2_Part3_1.html">Lee & Thompson Solicitors - Music Guide</a>
<a href="http://www.arancidamoeba.com/mrr/problemwithmusic.html">Steve Albini - The Problem With Music (Some Of Your Friends Are Probably Already This Fucked)</a>