What Is Going On!!???

[mal]

I think a beatles fan or a stones fan would strongly disagree. Also its not just about video many "videos" are a single picture with the song playing b/c the user likes the song so much.
Absolutely its not scientific but the closeness in numbers to greats like the stones is mind boggling. I mean U2 has been around for what 15 years? vs a girl who played for three and six months? 40k vs 24k for that time span is wayyyy out of proportion.

Records sold have a lot do with promotion and availability. I cant go to the local record store and buy the new cd. however u2 has it available world wide.
my point? same as above..wake up labels your missing out on lots of $.....

[lamedog]

For quick comparison for those who can't be bothered.

Source: video.google.com

[Sorry about the whitespace - I just added a table and it goes like this - can't be bothered sorting it out.]
<table>
<tr><td >"Linkin Park": </td><td>148,469</td></tr>
<tr><td >"Disturbed": </td><td>24,364</td></tr>
<tr><td >"Billy Joel":</td><td>6,805</td></tr>
<tr><td >"Eric Clapton":</td><td>11,449</td></tr>
<tr><td ><b>"Alizee":</b></td><td><b>22,250</b></td></tr>
<tr><td >"Nirvana":</td><td>38,645</td></tr>
<tr><td >"my chemical romance":</td><td>56,934</td></tr>
<tr><td >"u2":</td><td> 39,212</td></tr>
<tr><td >"jay z":</td><td> 24,460</td></tr>
<tr><td >"metallica":</td><td>72,587</td></tr>
<tr><td >"cat stevens":</td><td>2,799</td></tr>
<tr><td >"eagles": </td><td>27,068</td></tr>
<tr><td >"beatles":</td><td>77,053</td></tr>
<tr><td >"elvis":</td><td>60,799</td></tr>
<tr><td >"santana":</td><td>23,951</td></tr>
<tr><td >"beethoven":</td><td>15,588</td></tr>
<tr><td >"blink 182":</td><td>29,537</td></tr>
<tr><td >"green day":</td><td>42,252</td></tr>
<tr><td >"mika":</td><td>37,074</td></tr>
<tr><td >"Burt Bacharach":</td><td>656</td></tr>
<tr><td >"bruce springsteen":</td><td>7,961</td></tr>
<tr><td >"coldplay":</td><td>21,995</td></tr>
<tr><td >"crystal method":</td><td>1,682</td></tr>
<tr><td >"elton john":</td><td>13,838</td></tr>
<tr><td >"fall out boy":</td><td>41,503</td></tr>
<tr><td >"the fray":</td><td>12,034</td></tr>
<tr><td >"good charlotte":</td><td>16,664</td></tr>
<tr><td >"jack johnson":</td><td>7,637</td></tr>
<tr><td >"lost prophets":</td><td>3,012</td></tr>
</table>

*Linkin Park tops all I put in but this is mainly because of all the japanese/cartoon videos of D-ball-z and such like that are created.

Hopefully a good mix to compare with.

Make whatever conclusions you wish. Popular music does not always mean it is good music and good music depends on your taste and perception. My 2cents

[GianGian]

Originally Posted by mal

I think a beatles fan or a stones fan would strongly disagree. Also its not just about video many "videos" are a single picture with the song playing b/c the user likes the song so much.
Absolutely its not scientific but the closeness in numbers to greats like the stones is mind boggling. I mean U2 has been around for what 15 years? vs a girl who played for three and six months? 40k vs 24k for that time span is wayyyy out of proportion.

Records sold have a lot do with promotion and availability. I cant go to the local record store and buy the new cd. however u2 has it available world wide.
my point? same as above..wake up labels your missing out on lots of $.....

U2 has been around for 25+ years. Anyway, I believe you have a point, but I think that there are a lot of factors. I mean, there are so much videos because Alizee is way better looking than most female singers from the USA or UK or whatever. And possibly a lot of people who watch these videos wouldn't buy her records. But also, due to the huge popularity she has on the internet, maybe the records sale would be satisfying. Another problem would be the language, I don't know for sure, but if you look at all the other bands and such on the most viewed list, they all sing in English.
I am not meaning to say that you don't have a point, I am just saying that looking at how much videos of Alizée Google founds is far from being conclusive or make labels promote her better.

[mal]

Is every one reading the posts before posting? Yes her looks has been mentioned. Yes it is acknowledged that this is by no means scientific nor conclusive....


omg she beats out the fn EAgles!!! wow thats a trip.

also i think you might have used google usa. google worldwide for alizee is 24,279 approx.

Its interesting as hell. I always thought of her as a very popular euro artist who was popular. but this is way out there. this is beyond my expectation. eagles, u2 beatles have been around for decades she hasnt been here even for one decade.
The point again is not this is a method to determine anything other than labels should be promoting her more. rca picked up on this and signed her. surely it was from net info. i mean she was gone for 3 years why would a major label take a risk. anyway peace.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by mal

I cant go to the local record store and buy the new cd. however u2 has it available world wide.
my point? same as above..wake up labels your missing out on lots of $.....

That's what the internet is for. Also, it takes time and money to have a CD available in every record store in every region. Stores will not sell items that are only popular for a specific region....only mainstream/popular music, and Alizee chose France as her target market...and to some extend, Mexico.

And record labels will not use the number of HITS on a search engine to dictate how popular an artist is. They do it by sales figures..and last i heard her album has sold alittle over 26k+ albums. ANd this is largely due to her loyal fanbase.

[mal]

its plenty proof/indicator that there is huge interest in her. Espire you speak for one person. how come hot girls like jessica alba 10k and jessica simpson 9k dont have such numbers. yes sure its cuz shes pretty plus she is an excellent musician. everyone keeps repeating above posts. yes we like to watch her. but not 24k worth in relation to other greats.
NOT nearly as many records??? Well recently maybe not but her last cds were rediculous and she has barely any promotion. do you have the numbers for record sales for jessica simpson? no.

simple point shes hugely popular for whatever reason. I didnt say it was solely music nor solely looks. even it is just looks that doesnt refute the fact of her huge popularity.

ok then punch in hot chicks and see what numbers you get. the same result

katerhine heigl 1k
alba 10k
MARILYN MONROE 4k!!!
(yea the "hot" argument just died here)
Angelina Jolie 14k
(again another blow to the "oh its only cuz shes hot" argument)
vida guerra 2k
eva mendez 1k
salma hayek 1k

maybe its cuz shes so sexy

chloe vevrier 204
bree olsen 70
linsey dawn mckenzie 120


Angelina Jolie is the most googled yet her videos show no where near the force.
http://www.popcrunch.com/hello-world/

The more I do these comparisons the more i shocked at her popularity. I woudlve thought jessica alba held candle.

so the its only looks argument is clearly not it. but even if its a factor I never said it was.

the remaining fact is her popularity is far underestimated

[clique]

99% of the Internet userbase consists of horny males. A big majority of the people that watches Alizée's videos on Youtube and similiar sites probably have no interest of her music whatsoever. That's pretty obvious just reading the comments.

(BTW, comparing her to Marilyn Monroe and other artists/groups that were active a long time ago makes no sense. Of course there will be much less video material of them, since they were active like 20-40 years ago)

Edit: And wouldn't it be better to measure her popularity in actual record she sells? As we all know, she's not doing very well in that regard at the moment. I'm not trying to bash Alizée or anything, I'm just trying to point out how stupid this reasoning is.