Reply to "Canadian Gold Certifcation for AMND"

All_souls_night, I can appreciate what you've offered here, but doesn't Verve and Universal Music Distribution now do what Warner's did for Loreena before, in some capacity at least? They are mentioned on my copy of AMND, so guess I supposed Loreena had signed on for some similar kind of worldwide distribution deal such as she once had with Warners. To my recollection, that former 'deal' also included The Visit, not just tmam and tbos, and later, I think Warner's had to get involved in helping to distribute LiPaT as well, when the number of requests for it became too large for Quinlan Road to handle entirely on its own. At least, I do remember reading about that in an old magazine interview years ago.

Not that it matters too much, I guess...I only had to wonder why Loreena had chosen to place her 'should music be free' topic on the forums here unless she may have felt curious or possibly not so happy about fewer people actually purchasing her own works legitimately rather than merely cheating and listening to and/or trading them 'for free' off YouTube, p2p sites, etc. I never did believe fewer people were hearing or enjoying her music, only that fewer appeared to be purchasing it in order to listen to it. Was I wrong, in my supposition there? Rhetorical question, obviously.

I cannot imagine that Loreena is all that disinterested in the number of her CD/download sales and only cares to make enough from those sales to pay for her travels, the making of her music, and enough to pay her staff--does that sound logical, for someone who is reputed to be such an outstanding all-around businesswoman?

Please--I'm not trying to 'start anything' here; I'm aware that Loreena retains total control over everything she produces and puts out there, full control over her tours, the musicians she hires, etc, and that holding such control often might necessitate sacrificing some sales. It's good that she retains her control; otherwise, I fear we'd be getting some version of her music which tries to cater more to the 'lowest common denomenator' and we all know she certainly does not wish to do that!

Odd--I began this topic trying to find out if others out there had any answers to those 'certification numbers' questions that I asked. I'd still love to hear from anybody who actually knows, or who at least has some idea about why those numbers did change. It's fine with me to go off-course from that a bit, but I'm still wondering about what I originally asked. No problems, though; know that I'm only a 'curious Celtickat', after all. Wink

Jeanne
×
×
×
×