BG we await your beatles sales data, or did you just happen to see it in a newspaper somewhere?

Shayne Ward has only released 1 tune to date, which wasnt a cover. The bands that do release cover after cover today are in my opinon a waste of space so there is no need for that argument.

The Beatles are not the be all and end all as you seem to think. Times change and new bands start to make an appearance, its not a bad thing, just let it happen. Dont panic and breathe

7 months - 6m albums? Wow!!! I think you will find that "1" sold 3.6m in one WEEK, 12m in three weeks and in 20m in 3 months!! Blunty will never be able to match the big boys then!

Its not hazy, and if you find that amusing, they i am not surprised that your taste in music is a dull as James Blunt!! Call EMI/Apple Corps for the Beatles annual back catalogue sales. I remember reading relatively recently it was never lower than 15m per annum according to them. That sounds about right considering "lesser" (albeit great) artists like Jimi Hendrix's catalogue sells 3m per annum.

I am not saying James Blunts album sales have been unimpressive (clearly not beatlemania), but his album certainly is unimpressive! I also know the difference between great music, and middle of the road blandness!

Look it up yourself then. The Beatles annual sales are hugely impressive for a band that hasn't released anything for 3 years. Their back catalogue sells like hotcakes, which is why the songwriting rights is worth $1bn dollars.

Going back to 2000, the Beatles sold 18m albums in America alone that year, "only" 5m of those sales were from the sales of the newly released "1" album. So basing it on that alone, suggests that the Beatles more than likely shift globally 20m units annually.

I don't JUST like the Beatles anyway, i like a vast array of acts, from ALL era's. The Beatles just happen to have the most diverse back catalogue, and easily the best studio albums of the lot. Nothing today can touch it.

As for Shayne Ward....i read that that "eat my goal" song or whatever its called was a song Westlife REJECTED!! OOoooo what a classic!

We have already had this debate, its James Blunts first album and he has been around a few months. The Beatles have a bit of a head start on him.

Most artists have big first albums, then disappear. James Blunts follow up will probably sell no where near as well as "Back to Bedlam", although that is clearly speculation....but i know a lot of "Back to Bedlam" owners who were far from impressed with his debut album.....

Singer/Songwriters like him come and go, the Beatles will always be musics best achievement.

Now you are just getting pitiful. Whatever happened to that ring of confidence, BeeeGee?? I'm expecting you to accuse me of being gay again (Take care: Robbie made some money out of just such an intruth, not that I suspect you have anything worth taking as compensation). You really are a bit of a no-hoper, aren't you? I re-iterate, let's see some hard evidence for the sales you claim have been made by The Beatles in 2005. I'm not interested in waffling statements like 'I remember reading relatively recently' and 'That sounds about right 'or resorting to sales made many years ago, you claimed that The Beatles have outsold Blunt over the last 7 months (even though he has one album for sale and the fab four have many more). Now you are resorting to comments on the music Get a grip, BeeGee. Here's my link:

http://www.geocities.com/inthitlists/2005-albums.htm

Oh, and here's another one, showing you he's currently selling almost 300,000 albums a WEEK worldwide. Remember, this is in the very quiet weeks after Xmas as well:

http://www.geocities.com/inthitlists/albums.htm

Yeah Westlife rejected it, its not a cover is it, they wont ever do it. Still check out the sales of it, phenomonal!

BG why dont you whack on a Fab Four album, make yourself a drink and go and have a sit down. When you are ready to talk some sense make your way back to your computer and lets continue then.

Half an hour ago you was telling me that sale dont matter when it comes to good music, yet for the past 20 mins you have been telling us that the Beatles are the band as they sell albums like hot cakes. Make up your mind will you?

Beatles were a good band from back in the day - one of a few. The bands and artists of today are better than any other band you can name from days gone by.

Hahaha, that would be dreadful wouldn't it? Resorting to comments about the music in a thread thats about if music TODAY is better than it was!!!

Congratulations on James Blunt for releasing such a bland album and it managing to sell less than a Pop Idol winner in Kelly Clarkson! I have NEVER judged the Beatles purely on sales, but if I was to, the Beatles are untouchable. You are the one floundering and using an argument of sales of an active artist over a band that hasn't had all band members in the studio together since the "summer of '69"!

Oh, and I can't remember calling you gay, but its nice to see that you remember it so vividly!! haha, ouch, you really can't take light hearted abuse well, which is why you are getting so uptight and pedantic about this thread! ALL i am saying is that music in the 60s was better than music today! The Beatles music IS better than James Blunts, FACT!

Opinion cannot be classed as fact. You think the above opinion is correct, others wouldnt.

Posted by BeatleGod on 03-01-2006, 15:42 in this thread:

http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...4&page=4&pp=25

You are a woman though, so you've had one of those new civil partnerships then? Or is MRS SGE your mum? I refuse to believe you are a male, as real men don't buy James Blunt.....ahh, think i got my answer!

And here's a beaut you posted about Blunt himself (this one has been forwarded to his managemnt company, btw)


The guys a little scrawny weirdo, possibly homosexual. There are so many great albums out there, yet the majority of bored UK housewives prefer to buy that James Blunt dirge than something decent.

It seems like your memory of the posts you have made is as hazy as your claimed Beatles sales.

(drums fingers on desk).......I'm waiting for that evidence, BeeGee. Stop trying to weedle your way out of it, will you?

Green Day are a 90s band; they did become massive recently, but they've been well-known for a decade or so now.

"The guys a little scrawny weirdo, possibly homosexual."

Also posted by BeatleGod with reference to James Blunt. LOL, so if you are a bit scrawny then you are no doubt gay - brilliant grasp of life there!

OOOPS this has already been added above.

Nope, i am merely stating that the Beatles albums sell like hotcakes and their legacy will never be forgotten. I agree that sales are not the be all and end all when it comes to the quality of music....otherwise artists like Celine Dion wouldn't be so successful!!

There were plenty of acts around the Beatles time' and the early 70s, here are the pick of the bunch that put any acts around today to shame:

The Who, The Yes, Cream, Jefferson Airplane, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Kinks, Elvis Presley, Jimi Hendrix, Simon & Garfunkel, Yardbirds, Rolling Stones, David Bowie, Wings, Beach Boys, the Doors, the Animals, Bob Dylan and many more....

Now compare them to who?? Oasis? Coldplay?? James Blunt!!? ahahahahahahaha! As good as some bands like Radiohead and Greenday are, they ain't the Stones or Zep!

Errr, that WASN'T why i suggested he was a homosexual, i was just commenting on his appearance, which is that of a dirty vagrant. I think he could be a homosexual because he comes across as quite camp. Hey, its not definite, but its a possibility, and it doesn't actually matter anyway....so chill!

Oasis, Coldplay, Keane, Spice Girls, S Club 7, 50 Cent, Franz Ferdinand, The Killers, Kaiser Chiefs, Blue, East 17, Take That. I too can give you a long list of artists and bands, point being what?

LOL, if it doesnt matter with regard to his sexuality then why find the need to post the statement. Strange how we got here from the whole todays music is better than yesteryear debate.

Im still sticking to my opinion with regard to that debate though

Like I stated in the original thread, you are obnoxious and homophobic. If I was McCartney or Starr I would be most perturbed that someone like you was a fan. It doesn't reflect good on the band. Oh, and I think you'll find it DOES matter.

I know they have been around for a decade or so, as have Oasis who we are also talking about and the spice girls, we are not just using the bands who have come bout this year, im using bands from my era and im 23

HAHA. Classic, you are so sensitive awww bless! I am officially in stitches that you think that forwarding a post to James Blunts management company will do his PR or ego any good or if they will even bother reading it! It probably will do wonders to his ego though as we were discussing him!

I stick by the fact that his music is more for birds. Women mainly buy his music, blokes (clearly generally!) prefer better music with more depth and longevity.

As for getting 2005's 2nd half sales figures from EMI/Apple Beatles back catalogue, i'll let you do that, as it clearly bothers you more than it bothers me! I know the Beatles music is great and sells well. James Blunts album might sell alright, but its still a lame album! Now go buy some proper bloke music!!

Obnoxious....possibly, homophobic? errr you must be kidding! Just because I have mocked you in a thread from what last week, doesn't mean i am homophobic! You don't know me and vice versa, you are just revealing yourself a little bit too much.....pipe down a bit.

Oh, and what DOES matter?? How I reflect on a band as big as the Beatles??? Ooooh, be careful what you say, otherwise i will report you to Apple/EMI in a flood of tears and a hissy fit and get Macca and Yoko Ono on to you!!

My work here is done, you had this thread coming to you, BeeGee. I will sleep very well tonight. Oh, and with regard to his management not reading my message, I don't think you know enough about me or what I do to suggest such a thing . Try and get some sleep, my friend. But if you are really clever (doubtful) I would go back to the Blunt thread and get some editing done. You know it makes sense.

Thats the cream of the crop is it????

East 17, Spice Girls, S Club 7, Blue and Take That were dreadful pop!! I am talking about serious artists, and the others you mentioned are hardly in the same league of greatness as the likes of Hendrix or the Zep etc!!

KEANE?!!?!? HAHAHAHA, keep scraping that barrel.

This thread is perfect! I got to talk about the Beatles and mock James Blunt! I've been WAITING for it so thank you! You will sleep well tonight? yeh right....you are burning with anger and hatred, over what? a daft message board!

hahahahahahahha

And you hit me with Simon and Garfunkel lol.