Should the Estate/Sony slowly withdraw all the Michael Jackson Greatest Hits albums from the market?

[HIStory]

I personally think all the Greatest Hits albums out there hurt the sales of individual studio albums big time. Perhaps this is one reason for why Bad25 didn't sell as well as expected. In fact, according to Billboard Number Ones sold better this year. No wonder. Why should anyone buy Thriller, Bad, Dangerous etc. when they can buy for example Essential Michael Jackson on Amazon for 9.99 and that includes 7(!) of the 9 songs of Thriller, 8 of the 11 songs of Bad, 7 of the 14 songs of Dangerous and much more?

I personally want the the sales of individual MJ studio albums to grow, especially Thriller to keep its Nr 1 status, so I personally don't like that sales of studio albums are hurt by GH albums.

 

[Robbsaber01]

I agree. I own Essential Michael Jackson but that was a gift.. I have not purchased each individual album unfortunately but its something on the to do list Maybe its the casual/non fans that are purchasing greatest hits? If I am not a fan and I want to hear the artists best songs I am going to buy the Greatest hit CD's instead of going through several albums.

 

[HIStory]

Maybe its the casual/non fans that are purchasing greatest hits?

Definitely. I think for most artists that is the case, but it can be be better managed IMO than it is in the case of Michael. The Greatest Hits albums for Michael have gone way out of hand.

HIStory Vol. 1 already included GH disc, but that was just the beginning.

In 2003 came Number Ones. It went Nr 1 in several countries and since sold 4.7 million only in the US (despite of being released at a difficult time for Michael). It's still a good seller. Like I said it sold better this year in the US than Bad25.

One year later it was The Ultimate Collection. OK, that's not really what casual fans will buy because it's rather expensive. Though a great gift for hard core fans - very nicely done package, great selection of songs, including never before heard demos and unreleased song. So it's a bit more than a GH album and since it's expensive I don't think it particularly hurts the sales of individual studio albums - because this one will be mainly bought by hard core fans, who will buy the studio albums too, anyway.

Then half a year later The Essential Michael Jackson. Like I said it includes 7(!) songs of the 9 from Thriller. 8 songs of the 11 songs of Bad. 7 songs of the 14 of Dangerous. 4 songs from OTW. And you can buy it cheap. It sold 2 million copies only in the US. In 2008 came King of Pop. In 2009 This Is It, which sold another 2 million copies in the US.

Yes, individually most of these albums were successful, but IMO on the long term they hurt the sales of the individual studio albums very much, something that I don't like. I want Thriller to continue to sell. It does sell, but it would sell a lot better if the market would not be full of all these GHs, some of which (like Essential) include 80% of the songs of Thriller...

Also as there are so many GH albums out there, there isn't one on that the sales can be focused on. Like for example you have the Greatest Hits album of Bob Marley called "Legend". And everyone who wants Marley's GHs buys that one, so that sold like 14 million in the US and 25 million globally. But for Michael the sales of GH go in four-five different directions. Although when you count together the sales of all these GHs it's up there with "Legend" or with the Beatles '1' album. Wouldn't it look better if he had only one GH album on the market with 12-14 million certified sales in the US and 25-30 million worldwide? And that should be a bit "watered down" GH, not contain everything, so that people would still want to buy Thriller, Bad, Dangerous etc...

 

[dam2040]

People buy the GH because it's exactly that. It's the songs they know and will want to listen to, without becoming a big fan having all of his CD's. People buying MJ's GH CD's are brilliant because they'll be pushing Michael into the future generations.

 

[Billie Jean 78]

People buy the GH because it's exactly that. It's the songs they know and will want to listen to, without becoming a big fan having all of his CD's. People buying MJ's GH CD's are brilliant because they'll be pushing Michael into the future generations.

True, but it still doesn't justify the number of GH on the market. Michael would be passed into the future generations with one solid GH only. I for example only know of one GH of the Queen and when I for example wanted to buy a GH of Roy Orbison I didn't find one which would include all his more famous songs, his greatest hits ended up on several GH and I ended up not buying any because I didn't consider myself to be a fan who wanted to own more then one album.

But I did buy the Queen's GH!

 

[marebear]

I think they should keep Number Ones because that is a good seller. I don't think there should be anymore.

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

I don't see anything wrong about the GH albums, what I see wrong is the amount of albums of that kind. With The Number Ones was more than enough, I didn't get why Sony kept doing more compilations.

 

[souldreamer7]

I agree personally,but Sony is a business and the estate is too in this aspect.. so they will always do something that guarantees money and legacy first.

 

[Bubs]

People buy the GH because it's exactly that. It's the songs they know and will want to listen to, without becoming a big fan having all of his CD's. People buying MJ's GH CD's are brilliant because they'll be pushing Michael into the future generations.

I agree. I personally want to buy Queen's best songs in 1 album, so their GH is probably the best solution for me.
I assume there are music listeners that want to listen Michael's best songs, but don't want to spend money to buy all of his albums, so GH would be solution for them. As long as his music will be played and listened, I'm happy.

 

[Annita]

I think they should keep Number Ones because that is a good seller. I don't think there should be anymore.

Not only Number Ones is a good seller. It is mainly in the USA and UK the first GH-album of MJ, but in other countries like Germany, Japan? "King of Pop" is the album that sells much better and I think personally the album is much better as a collection of the spectrum of MJ. But it is right with more albums the sells can`t focus on only one GH-album.

 

[helena22]

I personally think all the Greatest Hits albums out there hurt the sales of individual studio albums big time. Perhaps this is one reason for why Bad25 didn't sell as well as expected. In fact, according to Billboard Number Ones sold better this year. No wonder. Why should anyone buy Thriller, Bad, Dangerous etc. when they can buy for example Essential Michael Jackson on Amazon for 9.99 and that includes 7(!) of the 9 songs of Thriller, 8 of the 11 songs of Bad, 7 of the 14 songs of Dangerous and much more?

I personally want the the sales of individual MJ studio albums to grow, especially Thriller to keep its Nr 1 status, so I personally don't like that sales of studio albums are hurt by GH albums.

Wow! It's like, you read my mind! I agree wholeheartedly.
They would do well to stop releasing all these best-of albums, UNLESS they come up with some creative concept or theme to put together a meaningful package, which would be very hard to pull off.
Greatest hits albums can come handy when you're beginning to listen to a certain artist and becoming an MJ fan is no different in that regard, IMO. But we already have soooo (can I say, toooo) many of 'em, we don't need another one. Potential fans out there, esp. from younger generations, they can choose from all the previous greatest hits packages. Whether they go to the next level and start purchasing individual studio albums, well, it's totally up to every single one of them, of course. But the label and the estate should do a lot more to reach for them and draw their attention.

 

[8701girl]

The thing is all the song that are on the mj greatest hits albums are on his solo albums anyway so really i guess there really isnt a point to having them out anymore. At the same time though they do sell pretty good so its 50/50 on this

 

[HIStory]

I agree personally,but Sony is a business and the estate is too in this aspect.. so they will always do something that guarantees money and legacy first.

I personally think money and legacy are on the opposite ends in this. Of course, Sony wants to make money on the short term and they did with these GH albums. On the other hand I do believe they hurt Michael's legacy on the long term. They cheapen his music. What I mean is when you can buy 80% of Thriller, 70% of Bad, 60% of Dangerous and 40% of OTW on one album and that for 9.99, then it will hurt the individual sales of those albums. Michael's most famous record in pop history is Thriller being the best selling album of all times. And IMO for the image it would be nice to keep it so. But if GH albums hurt its sales then that may become a problem after a while.

I also understand the point that GH albums a good introduction to an artist's work. There are artists from whom I'd also buy GHs rather than all their albums. So I'm not totally against GH albums. But there are too many out there for Michael. Only one should remain on the market - and a bit more "watered down" than some of the current ones. I mean do NOT put 60-70-80% of any studio album on it please!

Focus the sales of all those GH albums into one album. Image in show business is important. An album has more appeal if it can be promoted as a big seller, because people will think: "hm, this is a very popular, very famous album, it has to be in my collection too" - and if an album is a big seller that in itself generates further sales. So even if there's a GH album of Michael out there at least let it be only one and so you can point to it as having sold ~30 million WW, rather than 4-5 different albums sold 7-8 million. Which is still great, but how impressive does it sound when they say the Beatles' "1" album sold 31 million copies? And that generates further hype and sales. And when you put together the sales of all those GHs albums of Michael they are close to that number, but since all those sales go into four-five different albums they do not come across as that impressive.

 

[Tony R]

MJ is different to other artists (in many, many ways!), but specifically in this instance as he released so many songs as singles. He is the only artist where you can show an non fan an album such as Thriller or Bad and they still recognise 90% or more of the tracks. Most artists you will recognise 2 to 3 songs at best.

So, in regards to the OP, you're correct - why would anyone buy Bad25 if they already have a GH that will have most of these tracks.

 

[Ashtanga]

:shifty:

 

[mjjmsc]

individual albums like Thriller, Bad, Dangerous, etc are for fans, the Greatest Hits albums are for the general public that enjoy to hear good music like Michael's...I preffer the individual albums because you get a certain vibe from each of them, Michael selected the songs that work togheter and he constructed a sound and feeling for each session...

 

[thrillerchild]

I personally love GH albums because without them we wouldn't have official releases of the following songs and not through illegal downloading!!

One More Chance
Sunset Driver
Scared of the Moon
We Are The World (Demo)
Cheater
Monkey Business
Fall Again
Beautiful Girl
We've Had Enough
Someone In The Dark
Carousel
For All Time

And a few others that escape my mind.

 

[Bubs]

and Can't Get Outta The Rain
On The Line, one of my favourite songs

 

[HIStory]

I personally love GH albums because without them we wouldn't have official releases of the following songs and not through illegal downloading!!

One More Chance
Sunset Driver
Scared of the Moon
We Are The World (Demo)
Cheater
Monkey Business
Fall Again
Beautiful Girl
We've Had Enough
Someone In The Dark
Carousel
For All Time

And a few others that escape my mind.

They could have been released on a seperate album specially for fans. Much like the Jackson 5's Come and Get It: The Rare Pearls.

 

[thrillerchild]

They could have been released on a seperate album specially for fans. Much like the Jackson 5's Come and Get It: The Rare Pearls.

That is a good point but I think for the Estate that would not make much business sense (but I do acknowledge that with the debt almost/completely cleared this may or may not now be the case)

 

[HIStory]

That is a good point but I think for the Estate that would not make much business sense (but I do acknowledge that with the debt almost/completely cleared this may or may not now be the case)

So many GH albums on the market don't make much business sense either IMO.

 

[MjsLovelyOne88]

Well, I personally have bought GH albums AND individual albums as well. I keep the individual albums as a "collectors item" and download them on my computer, if anybody from my family who's not a big fan wants to borrow my GH to listen or download one or few songs, I will gladly let them. So, no I don't think GH albums should be put out the market even if they did, I don't see non fans buying the individual albums because they're exactly that, non fans..and instead occasional listeners so I don't think they'll be drawn to buy an album they don't fully like or know about if they don't have the GH option IMO..

 

[souldreamer7]

I personally think all the Greatest Hits albums out there hurt the sales of individual studio albums big time. Perhaps this is one reason for why Bad25 didn't sell as well as expected. In fact, according to Billboard Number Ones sold better this year. No wonder. Why should anyone buy Thriller, Bad, Dangerous etc. when they can buy for example Essential Michael Jackson on Amazon for 9.99 and that includes 7(!) of the 9 songs of Thriller, 8 of the 11 songs of Bad, 7 of the 14 songs of Dangerous and much more?

I personally want the the sales of individual MJ studio albums to grow, especially Thriller to keep its Nr 1 status, so I personally don't like that sales of studio albums are hurt by GH albums.

I agree personally,but Sony is a business and the estate is too in this aspect.. so they will always do something that guarantees money and legacy first.

I personally think money and legacy are on the opposite ends in this. Of course, Sony wants to make money on the short term and they did with these GH albums. On the other hand I do believe they hurt Michael's legacy on the long term. They cheapen his music. What I mean is when you can buy 80% of Thriller, 70% of Bad, 60% of Dangerous and 40% of OTW on one album and that for 9.99, then it will hurt the individual sales of those albums. Michael's most famous record in pop history is Thriller being the best selling album of all times. And IMO for the image it would be nice to keep it so. But if GH albums hurt its sales then that may become a problem after a while.

I also understand the point that GH albums a good introduction to an artist's work. There are artists from whom I'd also buy GHs rather than all their albums. So I'm not totally against GH albums. But there are too many out there for Michael. Only one should remain on the market - and a bit more "watered down" than some of the current ones. I mean do NOT put 60-70-80% of any studio album on it please!

Focus the sales of all those GH albums into one album. Image in show business is important. An album has more appeal if it can be promoted as a big seller, because people will think: "hm, this is a very popular, very famous album, it has to be in my collection too" - and if an album is a big seller that in itself generates further sales. So even if there's a GH album of Michael out there at least let it be only one and so you can point to it as having sold ~30 million WW, rather than 4-5 different albums sold 7-8 million. Which is still great, but how impressive does it sound when they say the Beatles' "1" album sold 31 million copies? And that generates further hype and sales. And when you put together the sales of all those GHs albums of Michael they are close to that number, but since all those sales go into four-five different albums they do not come across as that impressive.

Hello respect77 :waving:
I am understanding what you are saying. For me.. My replying post is my thought(s) on the topic title "Should the Estate/Sony slowly withdraw all the Michael Jackson Greatest Hits albums from the market?" as well as your thought posted with it. I stated that I agree with you personally, although I believe that in this certain aspect that Sony & The Michael Jackson Estate will look at this from a business & a solid lasting MJ Legacy longevity stance. (marketing & money making) They are responsible for keeping MJ's Music/Art Good name alive, so with that I believe that they would look at it from both perspectives money/marketing and legacy, in order to keep the money rolling in and out (flowing) and to keep his music & art..good name Legacy ongoing..for the present time & foreseeable future. So as much as I agree with you on a personal level about wanting more sales on MJ's studio albums, it seems to me that both parties would keep intact (Atleast For Now) the Greatest Hits albums. It does draw in new fans and the general public. It is a safe bet so to speak as a whole,because they both know the thousands of fans world-wide buy every and more studio album plus all the special editions including all other products such as DVDs Games Posters T-Shirts etc. In return They are sending out MJ's music art audio/vision etc. to just about everyone now and the future while making money and keeping it flowing - for perhaps new projects etc.
As I posted - I understand what you are saying although I do agree with you personally about more marketing Only for studio albums Not the Greatest Hits albums, I do not agree that the thread topic is at opposite ends. I believe it is an equal portion of both proposed together and served to the world at large. Atleast from the past to present, near future I see it this way,untill things may or may not become more flexible, we will see. If you believe that you could get Sony & The MJ Estate to follow your theory or if perhaps they follow mine. I say more power to you.

With Love,respect77
souldreamer7

 

[144000]

Not a good idea. The music is timeless. Today, i heard on a sports radio show, a bumper moment, and the hosts came in with Billie Jean...and they went wild. I thought that couldn't get me to break out the song, and be glad i still have it, but i wanted to. Every year, here in Los Angeles, there are 'booty' parties, featuring the eighties. Michael Jackson is always featured. all greatest hits. it's easy to lose site if you are a diehard fan, but believe it..the sound of MJ never dies. And, the majority of people are afraid of new stuff from unknown bands(there's room for some new x factor artists). Most nightclubs thrive on cover tunes, and Karaoke. Michael is doing just fine.

Also, this site is still up for a reason, for years. People are debating over even the 'Michael' album. If Michael has enough power to have people debating over such a controversial album, then, his own studio stuff is doing just fine. Constant threads about Invincible...there are plenty of eclectic minded people who want to go the road less traveled route and prove they are more knowlegeable than others..so, that's when they dig out his 'lesser known' studio stuff. There's plenty of room for it all.

The day Michael becomes a subject of indifference.....

well....

You're not going to see that day.

I could understand worrying about one aspect of Michael's music, if Billie Jean didn't always seem so new and powerful...but it is.

If MJ didn't have the x factor...then, yes..i'd be worried. But i see wayy too many people prove that he just never ever ever loses that x factor. Any other music played on radio doesn't get the rash of quality positive comments Michael's music gets. Yes..especially Billie Jean and Thriller. On any compilation. But Michael is art. They get up and dance to it. That's ok with me.

i looked on Amazon, and there was one of his greatest hits albums, and then a whole rash of tribute bands trying to copy it, and sell their own versions.

Yes..that means Kaching for the estate.

I do root for that.

To me..and to a lot of casual people, apparently, MJ doesn't sound old...no matter how many years ago.

Jackson 5 is still kicking it, too.

And Michael's 'old' hits are big on peoples' personal Pandora list, too, i notice. So, the more ways MJ's classics are made available, the better.

I think Michael is the one artist where being a 'cold' businessperson is not a bad thing. Simply because of him. And his x factor. Nothing can dampen it. Michael was alright with the idea. He loaded up on catalogues of 'old' hits. Business was art to him.

I do like the 'business' factor. It ain't hurtin Invincible.

And, by the way, Hallelujah for ITunes. I bought You Are Not Alone, a couple of days ago..and it's never been so easy for me to find as it is, now. It was available on so many different compilations..Michael's estate is only thriving from this.
When the record stores were in business, it was harder to find..but Itunes is a blessing for Michael's estate.

If this was Steve Jobs' worst idea..i would have loved to see his best one. He said it was one of his worst ones.

 

[HIStory]

^ You completely missed the point.

 

[144000]

Well...if it's about just saying that to me...
not unexpected.

but..i'm acting casual..and i just like the sound of Michael Jackson.
None of us know how the casual record buyer thinks, anyway.
I'm not trying to think about it.
I just like Billie Jean, and i don't care how if come about buying it.
i'm just going out on a limb and saying, maybe the casual buyer isn't giving too much thought to it, either. If it sounds good, they'll just buy it.

I figure that the site asks for the basic idea to be put in the title. i looked at it, and i disagreed with the title.

i like his greatest hits. i don't think his legacy is threatened. I thought this was Michael mania. And i thought it was about opinions. And my opinion is..his legacy is not threatened. And while i may have thought, here or there, that Sony could do something intentionally or unintentionally to hurt it, in any way...they can't. That's my opinion. And the estate seems to be working fine. There was a time i was blasted, because people thought i was mistakingly against the estate.

All i'm going by is what i hear out in society. I hear his music. In places i have no trouble mentioning, and in places i'd rather not mention. But the money pours into the estate.