I hate all the phoniness around smoking weed. Especially today. Just about every person under under 60 has at least tried it, so I fail to see what the the hysteria was/is all about. Good GOD--it's not like you're banging heroin.
I hate all the phoniness around smoking weed. Especially today. Just about every person under under 60 has at least tried it, so I fail to see what the the hysteria was/is all about. Good GOD--it's not like you're banging heroin.
Cherry Vanilla wound up being The Velvelettes of punk: I guess Blondie was the Supremes of punk, and Patti Smith was the Martha & Vandellas of NY punk..
JohnnyThunders & The Heartbreakers were the Jr.Walker & the All Stars of punk, and Jayne County was the Shorty Long of punk..
While it is a useful tool what exactly does an RIAA certification tell you?
Take the 1m mark for example - in some cases after the certification is claimed returns will be made so the record has not even sold 1m but the award is not rescinded.
But once it reaches 1m there is no way of knowing how many more it sells, the next award level is 2m - it could just have crept past the 1m or sold 1.9m!
I personally tend to believe the figures JR Taraborrelli quoted in the 80s many also do but then just as many don't.
Then there is the weird situation when Motown claimed certifications in 1997 for a handful of singles I'm Gonna Make You Love Me, Baby Love, Stop! In The Name Of Love and Someday We'll Be Together.
Even though the records were released before the certification levels dropped they only had to reach the new level.
If for example Baby Love sold the the 2/3m which many claimed why when they had gone to the trouble of claiming a "posthumpus" award would they only claim Gold and not Platinum?
Ah well, the Supremes' sales conundrum will continue and never be resolved.
All of that is correct Florence with the exception that the RIAA didn't/doesn't even measure sales ~ its measures shipments ~ half of which could be returned.
And there were examples around of big records companies with name artists shipping millions and seeing millions returned ~ but they didn't want their name artists failing. I'm pretty sure there were allegations of this being done by Sony and Arista with Michael Jackson and Whitney Houston on some of their less successful releases.
Firstly Paulo - you are very astute sir. There was a very nice trade in transhipping overseas of unsold/deleted stock, and most often the UK [[and Canada) was the destination.
Jobeterob - yes indeed, deleted and unsold in the US and then recycled as cut-outs or more likely simply scrapped. Vast numbers were scrapped, and the transhipping or indirect export market was able to soak up so much slack, the cheaper price of buying up the record with 'holes' being augmented further by a gain on taxation differences. Very complicated, but certainly not true US sales as you seem to be suggesting [[although forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you).
What might have been counted if Motown had've been interested were the RIAA award. So if Stoned Love had've shipped one million, then the RIAA auditors were invited in to see the sales dockets, the certification would have been granted and we all think one million copies were bought/sold in the States. This is not so, as Florence also mentioned above. What we know is that many awards were based on over-shipping in the sixties and seventies; supported further by freebies; devalued even more by the many returns and finally confused the hell out of artists and acts when royalties were so low. This applied from the Beatles to Pink Floyd as well as all the Motown gang of acts. It was made worse if they were stitched up with the contracts and they didn't have the mouthpieces they neeeded - whereas the white groups were more able to work around all that after a bit of time, and largely because they were represented by English lawyers too I suspect...
Anyway, all that aside, you seem to instinctively know that there was plenty of mis-statements and claims, so all I'm pointing out is the real truth is most of the singles were similar sellers according to the time of release and length/size of chart career. The airplay component is a distraction as that is only really important and relevant beneath the Top 40, higher up the sales drove the position. All the Top 40 stations wanted to play a Top 40 hit as it was in their interests to and because it was expected - their reason to be if you like. If a few got picky about 'Stoned' being in the title then plenty of R&B genre stations took up the slack, I'm sure.
Stoned Love was probably due an RIAA award at the time, but would - and probably has - fail in a count these days because of all the returns etc, I've explained about. I just don't care much but I did baulk at the 3m idea!
Hey Strange- you are confusing them with the facts. LMAO. The only thing they are interested in is how this record out sold some records that were released by Diana Ross and the Supremes. Thats really what this thread is about. This record had to have sold 4 million copies, it has to be the biggest selling Supreme song. It has to, it just has to.....
Although I rarely post it is fascinating that this conversation about record sales never really goes away. I also suspect we'll never know, and with the various explanations in this thread that I find interesting, only shows that the definitive number is relative at best. I wonder if all the Motown announcements back in the day about "million sellers" distorted things, not only for the artists, but for the general public at large.
Well yes, the US and UK details appear fine enough, but I can confirm that 'Stoned Love' never made the French charts, and to be honest I don't think the group [[with or without Diana) ever made the Top Ten there...I would be very surprised if they ever sold more than 20% of what they sold in the US and UK combined in the rest of the world.
A lot of hard work went into that site and I guess that it is just unlucky that you happened to quote a whopping great error as I am loathe to criticise all that endeavor when it is based on facts [[unlike that other link you provided with someone's idea of the sales of everything by anyone ever!).
Three really good posts from Skool, Motown Lover and Strange.
Interesting about a lot of the shipments ending up in Canada.............because I used to get a lot of Motown records with holes in them at 10 or 15 records for $1.00. And I knew Motown a lot better than most people up here, so I'd be thrilled.
I agree with Strange's comment about "true" US sales; the figures I quoted out of the Hitsville book seem awfully high to me; generally, anything out of the record companies mouth is inflated.
There was only one comment I disagree with and it was Skool's comment about "they" want Stoned Love's sales to be above those of other Diana Ross and The Supremes records...............LOL! I think there is only one, perhaps two, people that WANT or NEED that in order for their day to carry on without stress; and we know who that is. But most of the rest of us.......it's just historically interesting. Right??
See!!!!!!!!!
Yes jobeterob, as you so rightly say, shipments is what the Recording Industry Association of America [[RIAA) - the watchdog of the record industry if you like, but having been set-up and created by its members then with a vested interest in doing their bidding too! – tries to measure. All I can say is we have to trust in their intentions and auditors who actually visit the record companies to scrutinise the sales dockets/papers or whatever to confirm or deny a certification request.
The request bit is equally important as there can be no award considered unless the company/label invite the RIAA auditors along to check the veracity of what they’re claiming has been shipped. It isn’t a bad system, but especially in the late sixties and into the seventies there were plenty of ways and means to circumnavigate the rules, and one was to ship large early, call in the auditors, then when they’d gone the returns would flood in and make a mockery of the award.
So a time-delay rule was introduced before a record could be certified after release but, as you point out, the biggest acts can just ignore that too as they have the clout to force dealers and wholesalers to take what will be a mega-seller anyway. You have to play ball, so the old industry joke ‘shipped gold, returned platinum’ still applies only it went to ‘shipped platinum, returned multi-platinum’. Lol.
So Florence, you do make a good point again about the ‘failings’ of the RIAA system in so many ways, but they can all be taken into account if you look at the thousands of awards over 50-plus years as a whole. It will never be scientific but there are patterns and they tell a story that highlights pretty well when a freak [[i.e. inaccurate) result or claim is made such as that 3m for Stoned Love. It can’t be right!
You also have to assume that every label is ‘at it’ to some degree or another. Hell, this is the US of A, and the American way is to compete! Therefore if one award was a ‘cheap’ one, so potentially is another within the same time period and apparent performance. That is measured – again, not scientifically by any means – by looking at the overall trend of the various charts [[Billboard, Cash Box and Record World being the big three must haves) for a hit and making a judgement.
It’s a game, a hobby, a waste of time for sure, but a fairminded approach can result in fairly good estimates of what most records within given ranges sold. Back these up with known awards, media sales reports [[always taking care that they fit the expected pattern/model) and maybe for those with a buddy in the industry, or who knows a songwriter, even some actual royalty or publisher sales info might become available.
So I would say it is defeatist to simply say “but once it reaches 1m there is no way of knowing how many more it sells, the next award level is 2m - it could just have crept past the 1m or sold 1.9m!”; that is true about everything pretty much! What you can do is say, ok, this single is platinum and is therefore confirmed as shipping between 1,000,000 and 1,999,999 because it didn’t hit double platinum when the auditors came visit. The solution? Easy, apply the good old happy medium to each award level and in this case allow for 1.5m. Some mathematicians would go further and argue that statistically that isn’t correct and the median level is lower still, that’s fine if they really want to bash their brains out on it. But like I say, it is a bit of fun and when considering big acts like the Supremes or Diana, who are gonna be in the tens of millions of sales in the end anyway, the odd error here and there of even a couple hundred thousand will iron itself out, especially considering the number of releases involved.
There, it’s official, I’m an anorak!
Lol skooldem! I like your sense of humour man.
Damn fine record; damn fine group; common sense on stats never gonna be found on fan forums though, eh?
Well motownlover1964, the music is the main vibe with me, but I like messing with numbers and figures and so I got inquisitive I guess and like I said above, we might never know down to the final zero what any record sold but we can put them in the right ballpark – if we’re interested.
If not, that’s fine too. Only adding what I can to the theme of the thread and glad some also join in and get to think about it for a laugh. There is no doubt that the Motown announcements over the years were ‘distorted’, as you put it. It was always about hype, promotion and so on. The Beatles and Elvis had their fair share too you’ll be glad to know…sell the sizzle!
Motown was the leading record company in 45 sales in the industry in the 60's. Motown also was bootlegged bad in Central & South America. If they would have had legitimate sales in those countries I bet it would surpass Europe.
Well for my part I try my best jobeterob - neat use of the name btw. It's just a hobby and historically interesting in a small way I guess; people can make a living out of publishing books that just regurgitate dumb facts and figures that mean little and have even less connection with reality! Talking of which, any more figures from that Hitsville book that strike you as odd???
The 'holey' records is mostly a US phenom, you won't find the practice of huge over-shipping and returns/scraps/cut-outs in other countries as the marketing environment and size of the country mitigated against it. But to ensure a hit in those days that was fully supplied if it broke nationally then the presses had to roll and the One Stops and Racks had to have the product. If it clicked, happy days; if it didn't, the losses weren't insurmountable providing you had a good strike rate.
We can all agree that Motown were maybe unique in that area!
Motony - I recall having discussions about bootlegs and as it is an illegal practice there is hardly gonna be anyone lining up to claim he shifted a few thousand of this or that - and again it affects all the big stars.
Then you got counterfeits and piracy - Asia nowadays for the latter and Eastern Europe in the commie times for the former. No-one knows; I don't care to know as it might involve broken legs...lol.
Let's stick to the professional fibbers who are at least operating within the law, eh?! Leave the Al Capone's to their rackets.
No one's paying me no mind...
Florence, overlooked your Taraborrelli remarks and seeing as you have some neat links I wonder if you have that 80s info as it sounds interesting too?
As for the 1997 and 1999 certifications by the RIAA after Universal went digging through the old Motown papers, you see again how scratching about beneath the surface there is plenty of pointers as to what was selling what, even if, as you say, it surfaces many years after the times.
The Beatles, Stones, Streisand, Presley, Elton John, Neil Diamond labels all went and retrospectively went back to the sales paperwork and got the RIAA auditors to give their certification blessings. As I said earlier, we have to trust the independence of these guys and the findings give a very good snapshot of the what were the biggest sellers of the day. What’s more, the use of the updated post-1988 certification levels of 500k for gold and 1m for platinum and so on, well that tells us plenty about the true value of the original gold awards. We get to see that many must’ve returned beneath the original gold for 1m as they didn’t get upgraded…the artists and labels still liked the kudos and publicity of the platinum but obviously they couldn’t always get it!
‘Baby Love’ didn’t ship one million copies net. End of story. The RIAA say it didn’t, and short of a statement from Universal/Motown saying why, we have to assume that is the reality. That isn’t to say one million copies didn’t get shipped out; it doesn’t even confirm a million copies weren’t bought by Joe Public. What it tells us is an audit inspection around September 1997 they could only settle on a confirmed shipment figure between 500,000 and 999,999, and that is probably 950k-plus for sure. Same for ‘Stop In the Name of Love’, but for whatever reason the rest of the singles until the later ones you mention were not put forward for certification.
Apart from conspiracy theories the results are in as far as I can see to recognise the truth that selling a million copies in the sixties was a tough ask. And so it should be!
The claims of 2/3 million were from nowhere but the marketing and publicity departments, and who knows how they counted! Both sides of the single is legit if you don’t get specific I guess and just say the ‘single sold 2/3 million’.
There is no conundrum, just slick sales spiel!
The sales figures I recited above for Street Songs, Endless Love, Ben and Stoned Love were from the booklet that goes with the box set - Hitsville USA 1972 - 1992.
But I believe all those people are gone from Universal; hasn't it all been taken over by Hip O and the current guys?
Motown wasn't a member of the RIAA back in the 60s [[and most of the 70s I believe) otherwise we might have had some solid certifications.
I don't know exactly how the RIAA verify a claim but I always thought the company submitted the paperwork with "proof". Maybe someone could explain?
I don't know that the RIAA is saying Baby Love didn't sell 1m but rather that they have seen only data to support 500k.
Wasn't Motown's accounting imcomplete and a bit of a shambles and much of it mislaid or lost in later years so that Universal could only claim what hard data they had? The fact that they only submitted claims for 4 singles might point to this.
I couldn't make any certain claims as to how many, if any, Supremes' singles sold 1m but I would be surprised if neither You Can't Hurry Love nor Love Child passed the figure.
If you were basing your assumptions on the 1997 certifications it would mean that neither would have sold 500k. There's no way of proving they did, of course, but it would beggar belief.
Unless a lot of false claims were made and downright lies were told there must be at least a dozen Supremes' singles which passed 500k based on the chart performances. Love Child for example was on the Cashbox Chart for nearly 4 months with 3 weeks at #1 and a couple at #2 during the biggest selling period of the year. It wouldn't make sense it didn't even do 500k.
Anyway, I'll get JRT's book out and post what figurres he gives. Many agree with these, then again just as many don't!
Sorry Jobeterob, was giving it too much spiel myself and overlooked your post detailing the other sales ‘revelations’. For what it’s worth, one-by-one, I’d say the ‘Stoned Love’ figures in the Hitsville Motown booklet are still too high however we reason it – domestic gross; domestic net or even world gross/net. As I pointed out to Florence concerning the inaccurate French No. 1 claim, the reality is that the Supremes [[and Motown generally) were never big sellers in their heyday outside of the US/UK. The odd exception, but those two would almost always represent 80% or more of the sales/shipments.
And here we are getting a bit closer to the expected range of numbers for the visible success of ‘Floy Joy’ and others hitting mid-teens in the various US charts. But still too high for a US domestic total I’d say if we again look at what it took to go gold. It is another of the industry’s ways and means of being ‘economical with the truth’, mention a figure and don’t qualify it! After all, not many really care less or give it a moment’s thought…but a global half-million is very realistic.
I’ve had some fun looking at this one and I’ll put my extra thick anorak on later and explain what I reckon happened with seemingly ‘Endless Love’…!
I like this total as a gross figure Stateside, or a global number. The period 72-79 was a good one for singles it seems especially as there was so much competition that freebies and over-shipping were expected by all One Stops and Rackjobbers as a matter of course. ‘Well, if you want me to handle this single I’d need a bit more incentive…’ nudge, wink!
What I said above about ‘Ben’ applies in spades here. The two million is obviously too much for a domestic sale unless again the level of free records was three-for-ten, which it could easily be at times in the murky world of the record industry. Once more I’d wonder why Universal/Motown didn’t go for double platinum if it really qualified? And the same for the earlier platinum for ‘Ben’ as it is well known Michael liked to get his due when it came to awards…
I don’t think there can be any doubt about that statement for ‘Love Machine’ jobeterob. It only had ‘Tears Of A Clown’ to beat when single sales were not so hot in summer 70 as against early 76.
And there, as you say, the required qualification is apparent when they say ‘domestically’. It went platinum in July 1981 and was a mega-hit album in the Soul charts, so at the time of its active chart life it probably went over two million [[or close) but as no multi-platinum awards existed until 1984 it had nowhere to go for upgrades. Being an album it would’ve been great on catalogue and revived when CD came around, so after twenty years three million looks fair enough. Albums are simply a no-win to guesstimate without RIAA upgrades.
That is correct Florence, and well known in industry and other [[here!) circles. The question has always been why? Clearly it did them no good to declare or else they'd have done it - they didn't need to be members as is often mistakenly thought to be the case.
The RIAA need to be approached that a single or album has achieved a certification level. They then [[at least prior to the digital age) sent the independent auditors a telex/fax/phone call to get their asses down to the relevant label's place of accounting or whatever and told them to report back. Based on whatever they saw, the rules in force at the time and [[hopefully) with no brown envelopes exchanging hands [[alledgedly), they'd tell the RIAA whether the particular record had indeed shipped what the label said. RIAA would then announce the award, or tell the company it had failed.
Indeed, it is conveniently claimed that their accounting was a bit of a shambles. That is one way of looking at it if you have a vested interest in continuing a myth, which after all is what the marketing department was all about in the first place so why destroy your own handywork? I've no doubt that there isn't sufficient paperwork left to certify everything retrospectively, but as usual we have more than enough evidence from the hundreds of other companies who did get involved in the scheme to figure out that what Universal could present the auditors with was complete enough. So yep, they have only seen enough data to support 500k, but not 1m. That is perfectly in tune with the times. Like I said the probability is 950k.
Of course neither you or I could make certain claims about the million sellers of the Supremes. It is however perfectly possible to reach some reasoned and logical conclusions which until the proverbial goalposts get moved again with more paperwork found, or something equally unlikely, is all we can do.
It would be a big surprise if any of their No. 1’s didn’t ship out one million copies at the time, so why no awards? You see therein is the clue that tells us again what jobeterob and I have been chewing over – returns. The auditors are charged – as the RIAA website clearly states – with assessing the validity of a certification based on net shipments. Not gross; no exports or cut-outs but net shipments. In 1964 there were just seven RIAA awards for this achievement Florence, and that included four from the Beatles. I’ll say it again, it was a tough order to make it to a gold disc, just like it should be and why the RIAA was founded in 1958 to stop all the crap claims that bedevilled the industry.
So blame Mr. Gordy and his advisors, but frankly it is apparent he knew the awards wouldn’t be forthcoming and so kept the prying eyes at bay. Maybe you think the Beach Boys were also shafted? Plenty of big charting singles but only one – at the time – able to get past one million, while all the while their albums made it. I’d recommend everyone who is really interested in all this stuff to get hold of a copy of ‘The Billboard Book of Gold & Platinum Records’ which was published in 1990 with all the then awards listed. The explanations and rule changes alone should open a few eyes – should if you’re looking without rose-tinted glasses that is!
So yep, the odd lie was told to the trade and media publications and as always it gets perpetuated in biogs and books of hit lists etc. Nothing was really qualified when they said anything, it was left vague and so there could be little come back from stroppy artists or even songwriters wondering where their royalty checks were for these missing millions. They’d be told what was happening then if they raised it.
And that’s how it will stay – it isn’t in Motown’s interest to claim awards that contradict history, is it? I look forward to the JRT figures when you can.
Thanks for the replies.
I have the JRT figures at home; but what is interesting about them is that in his updated, complete, new biography of DR, he dropped all of the figures; they were all deleted.
And that has always made me suspicious of them; I read that as he found out the initial figures may be suspect, so he deleted them.
I think they said something like about 6 singles sold one or two million........You Can't Hurry Love, Ain't No Mountain High Enough, maybe Touch Me in the Morning, Where Did Our Love Go, Someday We'll be Together. But not Baby Love, Stop in the Name of Love and quite a few of the other #1's.
In the 80's at the Hard Rock Cafe at Universal Studios in Orlando, I was looking at all the memorabelia on the walls & came across a framed RIAA Gold Record of the Motown Yesteryear Series Label 45 of "My Guy" by Mary Wells..this is the Yesteryear Series Not Motown#1056.Needless to say Mary Wells was quite upset because she did not get the gold record NOR the royalties for it. So if that reissue sold a million I wonder what the total would be for Motown#1056.
They showed a similar disc on ET when Mary was ill. It might have been a platinum one, as I recall. I wonder if the RIAA just grabbed any copy of the single when they finally made up the disc, as opposed to just that the Yesteryear edition sold a million.
Also, they showed a gold album for her GREATEST HITS album, but the label copy looked as if it was from the 70s or 80s. Did Mary ever get one of those?
yes, she did get a platinum framed copy of Greatest Hits in the late 80's[[she would have rather had the money, LOL).
I saw you mention that elsewhere the other week jobeterob. If the numbers get put up by you or Florence I'll be able to comment better, but based on what you're saying about two million totals, and what hopefully the open-minded here have understood about my previous explanations of the sales in the 60s and 70s and how the market was, then it already seems like they were dubious.
Love this stuff too much, must get a life. Lol.
Two explanations motony, either or both are the answer.
1) You or I can pay for an RIAA certification if we want and they'll provide it, but it has to have been certified to come from them and it never was [[so you probably know where this is going...).
2) There is a very good market for, shall we say, 'falsified' RIAA plaques. A bit like the dodgy antiques and art works there are ways to tell but you need to be an expert and have the plaque in your sweaty palms to tell for sure. Basically though, the like the dollar bills in your pocket have an identifying line you would have a unique hologram included on a genuine RIAA award. It is changed from time-to-time and again the experts would know the difference - like a hallmark - to identify the era of production.
You'll have seen a combination of the two I'd say. A bit like old pubs and restaurants have 'genuine' reproductions of old photos and memorabilia to woe/amust the patrons, Hard Rock franchises go the same way.
That again isn't to say 'My Guy' didn't top the million as #1056 - although as I've said before it would be touch-and-go in 1964 - and there would be no doubt it has as a track in its own right over the years. The subject matter, like 'My Girl' too, made it a nice steady seller for young lovers for many years of vinyl reissues. No, I'm not going there!
[QUOTE=Strange;80339]That is correct Florence, and well known in industry and other [[here!) circles. The question has always been why? Clearly it did them no good to declare or else they'd have done it - they didn't need to be members as is often mistakenly thought to be the case.
Fascinating stuff and great information.
So am I understanding you right that you believe only the four singles certified by the RIAA in 1997 reached the required level for certification?
I certainly wouldn't argue with total conviction on any singles which reached 1m [[except of course Someday) but - and I admit I cannot offer hard information - I simply cannot believe that some of the other singles did not even sell 500k. Unless the charts were completely screwed up Love Child must be near 1m let alone 500k.
On the face of it if what you say if true there are a lot of music commentators etc who have been mislaid by claims made and obviously don't know as much about the business as they claim to.
However, there is something funny about the certification claims made in 1997. I don't know why Universal would choose those particular singles for certification and not others [[unless documentation was missing which you seem not to think was the case) but why then would they not claim for singles by other artists?
On this basis none if Diana's solo singles before Upside Down sold as many as 500k.
Diana seemed to have a lot of highs and lows but it is beyond belief that her really big hits Ain't No Mountain High Enough, Touch Me In The Morning or Love Hangover didn't even reach the lower certification.
Mmmm… it is hard to sometimes explain reasonably complex points using the written word – for my feeble writing skills anyway – and so maybe from the tone of your reply I haven’t quite made myself clear. This bit was, I hope, straightforward enough?
The seventh word originally being ‘of’ and not ‘if’ might have thrown the sense somewhat and I apologise, but for clarity I’m with you that there were likely more million sellers – at the time - among the No. 1’s. But I reiterate ‘at the time’ Florence and refer back to what the RIAA auditors need to see – net shipments – and the very heavy returns culture that prevailed in the States, especially for singles. That is the clue here, or again perhaps I should say ‘key’ as to why so many awards are missing.
As I then went on to say in relation to ‘Baby Love’, but which equally applies to all the other releases whether belatedly awarded or not, the final totals beneath one million would not be worth reporting if the world and its brother thinks all the great hits of the sixties [[not just Motown ones don’t forget) were gold at the time and, as we have seen, felt to be far higher in many instances.
There is undoubtedly missing paperwork for many of the releases as I’ve said above [[at least sufficiently reliable for the auditors to accept), but it isn’t in anyone’s interests to rock the boat now either. What little has emerged is probably about all they had and, again, it fits in with the prevailing difficulty to make gold at all in the years 61-68.
So what Universal did was respond to the other labels who were continuously upgrading the certifications of their major acts. They had no historical background to all of this which possibly explains why they went ahead on the very simple premise of claiming what they could without any ‘baggage’ or inkling as to what they were actually revealing to those who watch these things. What they could get audited they did so; if they were told they needed to show more evidence they went away and found more if they could in 1999 and 2000. We can go with the idea that sales dockets went missing for all sorts of reasons, of course we can, but until we get more upgrades the reality has to be we accept the RIAA auditors did their job and for the records they certified they had a full amount of information.
It’s a shame there isn’t an intermediary award at 750k as that would really help make sense of it all for good, but apart from the special case of ‘My Girl’ the Temptations were all gold until early 1969 with a string of big hits. If one had been platinum it would tell us plenty more that we have almost certain million-sellers for the Supremes’ No. 1’s [[or if ‘Reach Out I’ll Be There’ was certified a belated million-seller), but they weren’t.
So there we are Florence. It looks as if the documentation is mostly ‘missing’ but where it wasn’t they went ahead and requested certifications in all honesty and completeness. As with JRT, something might have happened after the first batch of certs in 1997 to bring the project to a halt…but that’s as far as I’d go with conspiracy theories…
Ah so you do think that there is missing documentation and sales are higher than the four certifications suggest.
Basically we're back at square one - we haven't really a clue exactly how many records The Supremes sold!
I'll just continue to eagerly lap up any info. on The Supremes's sales which comes to light and take all of it with a pinch of salt.
I'll have my own idea of what feels right - and it may or not be!!!!!
He could very well down downplay sales in the books in order to get out of paying as much royalties, and he might not have given a damn about official certification, considering the money that had to be paid, and the hoops he would have had to jump through, when all he needed to do was make his own gold record and present it in some media outlet... like what happened when Jean, Mary, and Cindy were presented with gold records for "Nathan Jones" on the Merv Griffin show in January of 1972.
I think taking it with a pinch of salt is the best idea. Just enjoy the songs and be glad the Supremes and Motown in general sold enough and made music that created a die hard fan base to warrant re-issues, deluxe editions and the mining of the vaults. In the end, does it really matter [[unless you're the artist or songwriter) if Stoned Love sold 5million or 321,659 copies? No.
let's just say that if "Nathan Jones" warranted a Gold Record award from Motown on television,then "Stoned Love" was most likely platinum as it was a much,MUCH bigger hit than "Nathan" was..
And Smark..........the purpose of this thread, as stated by someone up above somewhere, was to ensure [[ I mean ENSURE) that some Supremes record outsold all the records Diana Ross was on!
Flo's analysis is good..........no one has a clue what got sold; and Smark is right..........it might be interesting and even vital to some, but it's a pinch of salt. I think it's very interesting, lots of fun and we are fortunate Flo and Strange showed up on SD. They are great.
What is a shame is the stories from an endless list of singers..........about the money gone, the crowds gone, the loans needed, the facebook pages flogging gigs anywhere and what I have found most disturbing is the pleas for money from family and friends for funerals and memorials. I still feel the artist was more responsible for that than Motown. But it's very sad when it comes to that.
I just can't sleep until we have an answer to these sales questions!:cool:
Penny