Members 78pbass Posted October 22, 2009 Members Share Posted October 22, 2009 I didn't want to take away from the thread that is charging on, but it did inspire a thought in me. With the statistic that JayZ has overtaken Elvis's volume of #1's, should we approach record sales a little differently? I want to discuss record sales volume in regards to population. 1965 US population: 194,303,000 : World 3,335,000,000 : US %age 5.83% 1975 US population: 215,973,000 : World 4,068,000,000 : US %age 5.31%1985 US population: 237,924,000 : World 4,831,000,000 : US %age 4.92%1995 US population: 266,278,000 : World 5,674,000,000 : US %age 4.69%2005 US population: 296,410,400 : World 6,454,000,000 : US %age 4.59%sources: (US: http://www.nationmaster.com/) (world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population) Okay, our population in 1965 was 65% of todays. Should we look at record sales more of a percentage of population? In other words, A 1965 hit record for an artist has a factor of 1.45 to todays, thus each sale should have greater weight? or should we normalize it in dollars, adjusted for inflation? What are your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Thrustin Posted October 22, 2009 Members Share Posted October 22, 2009 Good thinking. It might be hard to have childish argument over this. We should try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slapthefunkyfour Posted October 22, 2009 Members Share Posted October 22, 2009 Uh huh. Nuh uh. Uh Huh. nuh uh. uh huh nuh uh uh huh nuh uh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Thrustin Posted October 22, 2009 Members Share Posted October 22, 2009 Slaps-a-four is wrong on all counts. I think he's being racist and is just clinging to god and guns. He's a Marxist and wears an aluminum helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.