CSPC: Enrique Iglesias Popularity Analysis

ahr0chm6ly9plnnjzg4uy28vaw1hz2uvnwrlmtixmjuxmwjiytfhndu5nzg4mzewzwuxntcxmji5ntuxowe0nq
Cosas De La Vida (1998)
  • America
    • US – 1,000,000
    • Canada – N/A
    • Brazil – 125,000
    • Mexico – 250,000
    • Argentina – 90,000
  • Asia
    • Japan – N/A
  • Oceania
    • Australia – N/A
    • New Zealand – N/A
  • Europe – 420,000
    • UK – N/A
    • France – 25,000
    • Germany – N/A
    • Italy – 50,000
    • Spain – 150,000
    • Sweden – 20,000
    • Netherland – 10,000
    • Switzerland – 20,000
    • Austria – N/A
    • Finland – N/A
  • World – 2,600,000

8 thoughts on “CSPC: Enrique Iglesias Popularity Analysis”

  1. Hello dear Hernàn congratulations for CSPC analysis for Enrique Iglesias; I would like to know if this week you also analyzed other artists or groups. I hope that you analyzed the Fab Four ( The Beatles).
    I look forward to your reply !!!

  2. Hi everyone!
    I reversed MJD’s formulas to determine the CSP for each track. We could interpret this as the CSP total “due to” a track, so its success.

    I have calculated the top 10 below (All songs):
    Song [Album] = CSP total (millions sales equivalent)

    Hero [Escape] = 6,90
    Bailamos [Enrique] = 5,06
    Nunca te olvidaré [Cosas De La Vida] = 1,76
    Bailando [Sex And Love] = 1,75
    Enamorado por primera vez [Vivir] = 1,72
    Be With You [Enrique] = 1,62
    Sólo en ti [Vivir] = 1,61
    Escape [Escape] = 1,54
    Could I Have This Kiss Forever [Enrique] = 1,39
    Experiencia Religiosa [Enrique Iglesias] = 1,21

    Two big hits at the turn of the century, and after that a lot of tracks with a more modest success… Will he return to the top of the charts?

    If you have any question/remarks about the method/calculation I used to obtained these numbers, I will be pleased to answer you.
    Tony

  3. I’d love to see how Shakira, Jennifer Lopez and Ricky Martin compare to these stats. Are you planning to do them later?

    1. Hello Martin,

      The aim of ChartMasters.org is very precisely to bring back some accuracy rather than repeated fanciful claims found on fansites or Wikipedia pages. All information provided here is backed by official and legitimate sources unlike what you have most likely read before.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *