Sure-fire ways for Hayley to succeed in the USA

Erm, no. That's Hayley's private life and to compromise it for commercial gain is not a good idea. Look at the mess it's got many other well known (and some not so well known) people in, who have done just that.

I have sometimes thought that shortening her "stage name" to just Hayley, as you suggest, would be beneficial - I think "our" Hayley is currently by far the most well known singer with that name. But if she is proud of her family name and insists on continuing to use it in public, I say "good for Hayley".

I hope that Hayley never falls prey to the evil machinations of the great Music Industry money men. She has taken stands against them before and I hope she will continue to listen to their advice but finally, do only what she feels comfortable with.

Cheers, Dave

Steve, Steve, you and your number 46!

But it gave me the best chuckle I've had this side of midnight (here) so thanks!

Back on topic, your point 3. - I hate YouTube, most of the stuff on there is stolen from other people and places - which wouldn't be too bad if the people posting would bother to credit where they stole it from. As one of the people whose work they steal, this makes me livid. All we ask is for proper credit to be given.

Well said Dave, I totally agree with everything you say. We continually see what happens when two celebrities date and I'm sure Hayley will always be very careful to keep her private life to herself.

Best wishes

Grant

I check YouTube every day and there's almost always something new from Hayley -- sort of. Her Dark Waltz alone has spawned a gazillion videos made up of snippets from movies and animated series with new ones popping up every week. Her televised performances are almost all on there, usually in the HWI versions that you and others painstakingly put together. All of her CW and PBS work is there as well.

Like it or not, YouTube is here to stay and its users have got Hayley's number. However, the same is true of every other artist out there. The colossal audacity of YouTubers knows no bounds.

So why not just embrace it and make it work for Hayley? Many singers are recognising the power of this medium and are furnishing content directly. Lily Allen, for example, makes all her videos available online the moment they come out. She's had hundreds of thousands of views and is slowly but surely cracking the US market.

If Hayley's team proactively sets up new videos for viewing on YouTube she would soon be discovered by hordes of potential fans. It's a marketing strategy that has proven its worth and will probably come to be the method of choice for future acts. Sorry, there's no stopping this trend, but there are ways to capitalise on it as it starts to dominate the music scene, especially if they take action now.

At the very least HWI should set up its own channel there and start to take credit for the massive amounts of Hayley material it's supplied.

Hi Steve and all,

Somehow I missed this reponse - I am not yet familiar enough with the somewhat labrynthine forum structure here , though it is getting better now.

Dave - I can understand your frustration with sites such as You Tube - and similar concerns of proprietary rights to materials have also been raised on other groups I am on.. However, if the purpose of this forum is to promote Hayley Westenra, doesnt the presence of her material on You Tube really mean that you are succeeding?

Regarding Hayley and the US markets - I hope I am wrong about this but it would surprise me greatly if the total package of Hayley - as it is presently constituted - is going to have a lot of success here. A part of the problem in my opinion actually does have to do with Hayley and her personality. A whole lot of what she does in indeed on the personal level - and it is easy to see why Dave and others find that so ingratiating. The US market is however huge. It is 4 times the size of the markets in the UK, give or take, and Decca spent a lot of money establishing her name there. Doing something similar in the US would simply cost too much money. Having established a presence in the UK, she is free to go on there to perform in any kind of venue, and in any way she desires.

The bottom line is that some of the things about Hayley which so many people find so ingratiating - her somewhat shy and demure personality comes to mind - do not play well in America for an artist trying to get established. The problem is noise - the sheer size and activity of the US markets often mean that the prize goes to the artist best at creating the most buzz. I dont think that this kind of thing comes naturally to Hayley, bless her heart. I am sure this presents quite a catch-22 for her.

Jon

btw Steve - thanks for the accolades!

I also think you've hit it on the head Jon, and to be perfectly honest (and perhaps selfish), I would hate to see her change just to crack the American audience. I don't think she really needs to, she already has a great fanbase of passionate fans here and overseas, and seems to enjoy the intimacy she's able to achieve with her fans, which she might well lose if she were to become a big star here in the States.

Hi Jon,

If I may add something here as I prepare to retire for the (late!) night, I'd say that Pure was the odd one out as Hayley had an unbelieveable amount of promotion and media presence in the UK in 2003 - when she was still a "child star" from across the World. It stayed in the top 20 for 15 consecutive weeks between September and Christmas of which 8 were in the top 10 - but none higher than no. 7. This was a remarkable chart presence fuelled by several very high profile concerts and TV shows throughout that period. This will never happen again, therefore, it is highly unlikely that Hayley will ever repeat that degree of UK chart and sales success.

However... What 2003 did was enable Hayley to build a solid fan base in the UK of at least 100,000 and perhaps up towards 200,000 with the right album and enough promotion. It would have been higher still if Hayley had stayed in the UK in 2004 but she spent most of that year out of the Country and delayed releasing her second full album here until the year after that, by which time many people and the media had almost forgotten about her. This was of course in an attempt to build success in other Countries especially the US, and others too. I do not think the Record Company - who must have financed this - achieved their expectations then... and they may not do so again, this year. We shall see.

However, in the UK I think the sales achieved since Pure demonstrate that now, Hayley is established - as she is in NZ even though she isn't often there. She should not make the same mistake (in my view) as 2004, when she stayed out of the UK for too long and lost support. The UK can be a base from which to make repeated forays into the US and hopefully, one day, to "break through". But it's tough for any foreign singer to do that - especially, as I understand it, classical/crossover acts who apparently get zero airplay (it isn't much higher than that even in the UK!).

Hayley's UK over-the-counter album sales (estimates from memory) are about:

730,000 Pure (original 2003)
75,000 Pure (Special Edition 2004)
100,000 Odyssey (original 2005)
85,000 Odyssey Special Edition 2006)
55,000 Treasure (after 4 weeks, roughly).

All these were treated as separate albums by the UK charts. So for the last three years, Hayley's UK sales have been fairly consistent - with the Odyssey Special Edition last year doing particularly well (compared to what you'd expect for a re-release).

There is no reason that I can see why Treasure cannot eventually match or exceed the sales of Odyssey - there will I suspect be a Special Edition in time for Christmas - but only time will tell.

Whatever happens in the US this time round, I am sure Hayley willl be back there regularly to continue the battle for recognition, a battle she has already won I think in NZ and the UK. Next up - the US and Canada but that will be a long hard slog, I suspect!

Cheers, Dave