HOME | MAIN BOARD | TWITTER | LOGIN | REGISTER | SEARCH | FLAT MODE

not logged in

re: Jim would be nothing with Meat

Posted by:
Pudding 12:12 am UTC 05/29/08
In reply to: re: Jim would be nothing with Meat - tragichippy 08:16 pm UTC 05/28/08

> > If you're going to use chart statistics to try and prove a
> > point then you need to get your facts correct. None of the
> > songs from Bat1 were really deemed chart successes (Took
> > The Words #33, 2 Out Of 3 #32 and Bat #15)
>
> Bat hit #8 in the 90s, didn't it?

It did, Dec '93, a re-issue on the back of the hugely successful Anything For Love single, Meat could've released any old shit at the time and I bet it would've been a Top 40 hit. First time around though (which is what we're talking) it didn't do so well, which is the point of the post.


reply |

Previous: re: Jim would be nothing with Meat - tragichippy 08:16 pm UTC 05/28/08
Next: re: Jim would be nothing with Meat - wenners 03:01 pm UTC 05/27/08

Thread:



    HOME | MAIN BOARD | LOG OFF | START A NEW THREAD | EDIT PROFILE | SEARCH | FLAT MODE