150 Best Selling Artists in the World!

There are 20 comments on the Dec 6, 2008, talk.livedaily.com story titled 150 Best Selling Artists in the World! . In it, talk.livedaily.com reports that:

This is a list of the top 150 worldwide best-selling music artists of all time. The measure is the total number of singles and albums sold world-widep, this info comes from the IFIP at the end of 2007. Michael Jackson is #2 with 350 million sold.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at talk.livedaily.com.

Fredricko

Everett, WA

#9550 Dec 3, 2012
Mjacko wrote:
mj is not on any billboard charts now. He's dead.
He's dead and gone no more heeee heeee heeee heeee.
RICK

Midlothian, IL

#9551 Dec 3, 2012
So here is,in my opinion,are what the RIAA needs to do in order to regain the respect of the musical world and people like myself.No 1;accurately count record sales in between certification levels,which accounts for 60 MILLION UNCOUNTED ELVIS SALES.No.2;count the sales of records uncertified,in Elvis' case,220 plus albums and 55 MILLION UNCOUNTED SALES,and singles and EP'S ADDITIONAL MILLIONS ALSO.No 3.;drop that stupid 100 minute rule for double albums,2 album sets SHOULD BE COUNTED AS 2,BECAUSE DOUBLE ALBUMS IN THE DAYS OF VINYL WERE ALSO TWICE THE PRICE,OR VERY CLOSE TO IT.NO.4;count the sales of records sold under 3 dollars,popular in the 70's with budget albums.No 5.count estmated sales if a credible argument can be made for them,like the missing 12 months of Elvis sales after his death,in which RCA'S record pressing plants operated 24 HOURS A DAY,7 DAYS A WEEK FOR ALMOST THE ENTIRE YEAR,WHERE 200 MILLION ELVIS RECORDS WERE ESTIMATED TO HAVE BEEN SOLD JUST IN THE U.S..They're a music organization for pete's sake,and should understand that ACCURACY should be a HIGH PRIORITY,peace out.
King Elvis

Marrickville, Australia

#9552 Dec 3, 2012
No one asked ...
Patrick

Bronx, NY

#9553 Dec 5, 2012
mj tkop wrote:
michael jackson should be on number one because based on the many sources that i've seen 'bout michael jackson, michael jackson is the most famous person and artist on earth
If elvis was already globally known , and mj fans and the world knew that he married elvis daughter doesn't that mean elvis is the most famous ?
Patrick

Bronx, NY

#9554 Dec 5, 2012
RICK wrote:
So here is,in my opinion,are what the RIAA needs to do in order to regain the respect of the musical world and people like myself.No 1;accurately count record sales in between certification levels,which accounts for 60 MILLION UNCOUNTED ELVIS SALES.No.2;count the sales of records uncertified,in Elvis' case,220 plus albums and 55 MILLION UNCOUNTED SALES,and singles and EP'S ADDITIONAL MILLIONS ALSO.No 3.;drop that stupid 100 minute rule for double albums,2 album sets SHOULD BE COUNTED AS 2,BECAUSE DOUBLE ALBUMS IN THE DAYS OF VINYL WERE ALSO TWICE THE PRICE,OR VERY CLOSE TO IT.NO.4;count the sales of records sold under 3 dollars,popular in the 70's with budget albums.No 5.count estmated sales if a credible argument can be made for them,like the missing 12 months of Elvis sales after his death,in which RCA'S record pressing plants operated 24 HOURS A DAY,7 DAYS A WEEK FOR ALMOST THE ENTIRE YEAR,WHERE 200 MILLION ELVIS RECORDS WERE ESTIMATED TO HAVE BEEN SOLD JUST IN THE U.S..They're a music organization for pete's sake,and should understand that ACCURACY should be a HIGH PRIORITY,peace out.
Can we start a petition ?
chris

United States

#9555 Dec 5, 2012
In my oppinion, Elvis sales should have been accounted for from the very beginning. Their has to be a way to find out what the numbers were before the RIAA. How did they figure out which records were gold or platinum? Or did that also start with the RIAA? If so, then what they could do, is look at the royalties that were paid to Elvis, & calculate it from that.
Dennis Hauser

United States

#9556 Dec 5, 2012
chris wrote:
In my oppinion, Elvis sales should have been accounted for from the very beginning. Their has to be a way to find out what the numbers were before the RIAA. How did they figure out which records were gold or platinum? Or did that also start with the RIAA? If so, then what they could do, is look at the royalties that were paid to Elvis, & calculate it from that.
Now we're getting somewhere!!
Chester

Everett, WA

#9557 Dec 5, 2012
Patrick wrote:
<quoted text>
Can we start a petition ?
What difference does it make The King is dead. Just let him rest in Peace and those that loved him can get some peace without battling over royalties or record sales or whatever they feel Elvis did or didn't get. What matters the most is the memories he left behind how much records he sold or how much money he made makes no difference it's the music that matters.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#9558 Dec 5, 2012
chris wrote:
In my oppinion, Elvis sales should have been accounted for from the very beginning. Their has to be a way to find out what the numbers were before the RIAA. How did they figure out which records were gold or platinum? Or did that also start with the RIAA? If so, then what they could do, is look at the royalties that were paid to Elvis, & calculate it from that.
Everybody knows that Col Parker hid Elvis's true sales.

He did it to pocket the money for himself and from royalties.

Elvis didn't keep track of them because he wasn't a business person.

He recorded the music, made the films and played the concerts.

Col Parker found ways of ripping Elvis off.

How can it be truly calculated when Parker took from the pot?

He wasn't going to disclose what Elvis really sold worldwide.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#9559 Dec 5, 2012
Chester wrote:
<quoted text>What difference does it make The King is dead. Just let him rest in Peace and those that loved him can get some peace without battling over royalties or record sales or whatever they feel Elvis did or didn't get. What matters the most is the memories he left behind how much records he sold or how much money he made makes no difference it's the music that matters.
Yet, you would be furious if they were doing that to The Beatles.

It does matter but Elvis had so many lost sales over the years.

Million selling albums that were sold only through TV spots in 1977.

They weren't counted as a regular billboard release.

Parker knew exactly what he was doing.
chris

United States

#9560 Dec 5, 2012
Is Coloniel Parker the only one who knew what the sales numbers were? There has to accounting records somewhere, maybe the record companies or publishing companies still have some of them.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#9561 Dec 5, 2012
chris wrote:
Is Coloniel Parker the only one who knew what the sales numbers were? There has to accounting records somewhere, maybe the record companies or publishing companies still have some of them.
Accounting records were kept by RCA by someone working for Parker...

There were hundreds of different Elvis releases worldwide.

It is kind of difficult to keep track of every single release.

It goes back to the fifties.

Brain Epstein did a better job on The Beatles.

It was because he was honest and did not try to rip them off.
chris

United States

#9562 Dec 5, 2012
I guess the Beatles were lucky to have an honest manager. Parker didn't have to be greedy, & he still would've made millions from being Elvis's manager. I hope the family gave him the boot after Elvis died.
Chester

Seattle, WA

#9563 Dec 6, 2012
octo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet, you would be furious if they were doing that to The Beatles.
It does matter but Elvis had so many lost sales over the years.
Million selling albums that were sold only through TV spots in 1977.
They weren't counted as a regular billboard release.
Parker knew exactly what he was doing.
Brian Epstein would of never ripped the Beatles off but I believe Allan Klien did.They tried to manage themselves but they weren't business men that's when Apple feel apart. They had plenty of leaches sucking money from them just like Colonel side show Parker did to Elvis.
Chester

Seattle, WA

#9564 Dec 6, 2012
chris wrote:
I guess the Beatles were lucky to have an honest manager. Parker didn't have to be greedy, & he still would've made millions from being Elvis's manager. I hope the family gave him the boot after Elvis died.
Karma probably caught up with Colonel side show Parker and kicked his greedy butt. I believe he died before his time from bad health. Money doesn't mean JACK if your health is failing and it kills you.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#9565 Dec 6, 2012
Chester wrote:
<quoted text>Brian Epstein would of never ripped the Beatles off but I believe Allan Klien did.They tried to manage themselves but they weren't business men that's when Apple feel apart. They had plenty of leaches sucking money from them just like Colonel side show Parker did to Elvis.
Apple was The Beatles trying to have a creative recording studio.

And it was also a hippie hang out where people stole from them.

Brain Epstein had died and The Beatles tried to carry on without him.

But in many ways, Parker was worse cause he hurt Elvis's creativity.

Still, it is amazing how well Elvis did with Parker's roadblocks.

Elvis certainly did a wonderful job with what he was given.

He should've fired the fat bastard when he had the chance.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#9566 Dec 6, 2012
Chester wrote:
<quoted text>Karma probably caught up with Colonel side show Parker and kicked his greedy butt. I believe he died before his time from bad health. Money doesn't mean JACK if your health is failing and it kills you.
Parker was 89 years old or something when he passed.

(really not certain but the fat bastard is not worth looking up)

I dislike Col Parker so much that I try not to focus on him too much.

Whatever Elvis did, it was all because of Elvis's huge talent.

Parker only helped in the beginning.

After that, he was pretty much useless.
King Elvis

Marrickville, Australia

#9567 Dec 6, 2012
octo wrote:
<quoted text>
Parker only helped in the beginning.
After that, he was pretty much useless.
Yes, but what a beginning.

Without Parker, Elvis would not have broken so big, so fast, nor so widely.

For that, The Colonel must be given credit.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#9568 Dec 6, 2012
King Elvis wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but what a beginning.
Without Parker, Elvis would not have broken so big, so fast, nor so widely.
For that, The Colonel must be given credit.
I agree but Elvis should've fired him during the British Invasion.

After a movie like 'Kissin' Cousins' the Colonel should've been gone.
King Elvis

Marrickville, Australia

#9569 Dec 6, 2012
octo wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree but Elvis should've fired him during the British Invasion.
After a movie like 'Kissin' Cousins' the Colonel should've been gone.
Earlier than that.

First day out of the Army.

Signing Elvis up for GI Blues was the beginning of the end.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Beatles Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Chris Crofton, Advice King: The Merits of Colle... 1 hr Octopus 53
News Longtime Allendale music aficionado eager to ad... Apr 20 Sterkfontein Swar... 1
News Get over this wife-beating poseur Apr 19 Ex Beatle Fan 4
Stevie Riks is a genius! (Jun '11) Apr 12 Leiane 40
For your eyes only Apr 6 Little monster 19
Poll Are the Rolling Stones Overrated? (Jun '08) Apr 5 JohnnyBlade 22
News Who Is The Greatest Rock N Roll Band? [POLL] (Dec '12) Mar 30 Octopus 10
More from around the web