| |
Chart Listings: Billboard Charts (November 22-29, 2015)
Member Since: 12/15/2008
Posts: 38,248
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jeiboy=berberocka
So Hello wont be affected  |
Thing is... Something happened this week. "What Do You Mean?" is lower than "Love Yourself", when WDYM? is higher on Streaming AND Airplay, only way LY is higher is because WDYM? sold around 10k which it seems so because it's not on Digital Songs Top 50.
Previously, those HDS sales weren't used for Hot 100 (2013-2015) BUT they used to count and affect chart positions (2011-2012). And since this is the first 2016 chart, it's time for new rules. So it seems it's not only the recurrent change.
Everything looks like they're back to CMA rule counting for Hot 100, too.
Quote:
Originally posted by iamvladd
How did SIO go back to #1 (with a 1 percent gain in overall points) if it fell off the Digital Songs Chart?
This gets so confusing.  |
Because the real sales without this CMA thing were reported for Hot 100 purposes. So the numbers Kworb predicts (who never substracts CMA sales) were the ones used for Hot 100 that week. But they never tell us what that number was
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2008
Posts: 38,248
|
A very good explanation of how "Complete My Album" works:
Quote:
"When a consumer completes an album, the original tracks that were bought individually get processed as returns. That means that as albums are completed, charting songs will have some sales subtracted from the title's sales in the weeks such returns are processed. However, the original sale continues to count in the week the song purchase was made."
In other words, we don't go back and and refigure the charts, as what's done is done. But when the "singles" are processed as "returns," the total sales numbers for a given song would be subtracted from that sales week's total.
|
http://pulsemusic.proboards.com/post/4069549/thread
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Why wouldn't Billboard announce that the CMA rule is back? They used to do stuff like that.
Also, why would the CMA option count against anyone on the BB200? I thought it was only used for accumulating points on the Hot 100.
Also, a lot of people were worried about the instant gratifications hurting "Hello." I would assume everything should be fine for "Hello".
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/27/2006
Posts: 51,546
|
I really hate that it'll subtract the sales it has gained so quickly. I understand the concept but meh.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2008
Posts: 38,248
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cap10Planet
Why wouldn't Billboard announce that the CMA rule is back? They used to do stuff like that.
|
Because they never announced. Times we've have known is because a song is affected and something looks fishy. So it's gonna be interesting what they say about "Hello" next week since it's a big case of CMA.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ger-55
Because they never announced. Times we've have known is because a song is affected and something looks fishy. So it's gonna be interesting what they say about "Hello" next week since it's a big case of CMA.
|
So is any sales lost going to count against its certifications? I know it's separate entity, but still.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2008
Posts: 38,248
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cap10Planet
So is any sales lost going to count against its certifications? I know it's separate entity, but still.
|
Unfourtanely, I think so.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ger-55
Unfourtanely, I think so.
|
Yeah, that's unfortunate. Still don't understand why anything needs to be subtracted anyway. People originally bought the song because they liked it, and it wouldn't have made sense to purchase the song twice - once as a standalone and another as a part of the album, so the CMA option was implemented. But its their rules.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2008
Posts: 38,248
|
Also, I don't think the CMA mess has an effect for Billboard 200, or at least it seems so. "Purpose" this week moved 649k units (522k being pure album sales). Using Kworb data the singles sold almost 590k combined.. So let's say 59k from TEA. (He doesn't substract CMA sales). And it was reported he did at least 77M streams from Spotify so let's around 92M from all the services, that would be around 61k from SEA
120k estimated units from TEA+SEA, and he moved 127k units from TEA+SEA. So yeah, definetely, CMA doesn't have effect on Billboard 200 consumption system.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/8/2011
Posts: 27,650
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ger-55
Also, I don't think the CMA mess has an effect for Billboard 200, or at least it seems so. "Purpose" this week moved 649k units (522k being pure album sales). Using Kworb data the singles sold almost 590k combined.. So let's say 59k from TEA. (He doesn't substract CMA sales). And it was reported he did at least 77M streams from Spotify so let's around 92M from all the services, that would be around 61k from SEA
120k estimated units from TEA+SEA, and he moved 127k units from TEA+SEA. So yeah, definetely, CMA doesn't have effect on Billboard 200 consumption system.
|
Ok, that's good then. 
Quote:
Originally posted by Ger-55
Because the real sales without this CMA thing were reported for Hot 100 purposes. So the numbers Kworb predicts (who never substracts CMA sales) were the ones used for Hot 100 that week. But they never tell us what that number was
|
Do they still do this?
--
Let me know if I'm not understanding this correctly, but how did "Sorry" only decreased 46% from the prior week? CMA?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2008
Posts: 38,248
|
Quote:
Originally posted by iamvladd
Do they still do this?
--
Let me know if I'm not understanding this correctly, but how did "Sorry" only decreased 46% from the prior week? CMA?
|
We don't know but us chart freaks agree that they started to apply CMA rule again on Hot 100. This chart was the first one for 2016 so it's another reason why it's a valid statement.
Why do we think they're back to 2011-2012 when this used to happen and songs like WANEGBT, HIAM and Boyfrind were affected:
1. "Love Yourself" debutted at #4. It's higher than WDYM?, when the later is higher on Airplay AND Streaming. Only thing matching is that they used WDYM?'s Hot Digital Songs figure (less than 15k at least) to look correct.
2. Songs by 1D (DMD and Perfect) should be easily Top 30 using Kworb estimates but they are way down. Only logic is using HDS' figure (which again is less than 15k)
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/27/2010
Posts: 9,806
|
The truth is billboard needs to stop counting instrant grats as actual sales...and the sales need to be subtracted as soon as the individual song converts to an album sale. This way the measurement is correct rather than some erratic mess that isn't truly reflective of the popularity of a song during a given week. I suspect many people originally bought the album and got the track as a result which means the first week's sales number for Hello were grossly inflated.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Isn't that what Billboard already does? "Hello" was reported to have sold 1.2 million, but those were after the instant gratifications were removed. No?
And an album sale isn't official until the day of its release and you hit "Buy Now" (or whatever the function may be), simply because you can easily cancel a pre-order.
Can anyone confirm this?
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ger-55
Thing is... Something happened this week. "What Do You Mean?" is lower than "Love Yourself", when WDYM? is higher on Streaming AND Airplay, only way LY is higher is because WDYM? sold around 10k which it seems so because it's not on Digital Songs Top 50.
Previously, those HDS sales weren't used for Hot 100 (2013-2015) BUT they used to count and affect chart positions (2011-2012). And since this is the first 2016 chart, it's time for new rules. So it seems it's not only the recurrent change.
Everything looks like they're back to CMA rule counting for Hot 100, too.
Because the real sales without this CMA thing were reported for Hot 100 purposes. So the numbers Kworb predicts (who never subtracts CMA sales) were the ones used for Hot 100 that week. But they never tell us what that number was
|
I saw somewhere SIO sold 11,000 downloads separate from 1989 that week of release.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cap10Planet
Isn't that what Billboard already does? "Hello" was reported to have sold 1.2 million, but those were after the instant gratifications were removed. No?
And an album sale isn't official until the day of its release and you hit "Buy Now" (or whatever the function may be), simply because you can easily cancel a pre-order.
Can anyone confirm this?
|
The weekly sales for "Hello" have indeed been totals given AFTER pre-order sales were removed from the total. Otherwise Hello would've opened with over 1.5 million.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ger-55
Because they never announced. Times we've have known is because a song is affected and something looks fishy. So it's gonna be interesting what they say about "Hello" next week since it's a big case of CMA.
|
Does BB really want to take on even more heat for changing its CMA policy right before the biggest album release ever, after BB's already getting tons of negative feedback regarding its 25/52 policy? If BB made the CMA change without bothering to announce it, and it forces "Hello" to drop from #1, this will cause a HUGE PR-related headache for BB. BB better fix something before Monday, or the entity is at risk of losing a lot more credibility.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/4/2005
Posts: 5,423
|
So they're really gonna try and give that douche another number 1?
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
This is the tweet I just sent out:
@silpiet @gthot20 Did Billboard change the Hot 100 CMA policy right before the release of '25' and say nothing at all about it?
Remember, I'm limited to 140 characters, and I don't feel like sending another email for this, so I couldn't elaborate any further.
But boy will BB have jacked up its reputation and credibility making a change right before the release of a huge album. It's just like BB suddenly adding YouTube views and putting "Harlem Shake" a #1 when "Thrift Shop" was gaining strongly in every metric (had gone over 400k in sales that week) was #1 Airplay/Digital/ODS, and even #2 on overall streaming.
Those five weeks at #2 instead of #1 likely kept TS out of the all-time Hot 100. And with as much flack as BB caught after making that move with no warning, why would they want to shoot themselves in the foot and make their readers even more mad than they already are after BB's implementation of the ridiculous 25/52 super-recurrency rule?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/4/2007
Posts: 24,859
|
Aren't the readers they care about mostly those actually in the industry, and not, say, people on ATRL?
...
5+ concurrent T40 hits as a lead artist, through the end of 2010 (cuz that’s where the stat was reported on UKMix):
Beatles did it a bunch, with the most being 7
Taylor got 7 when Fearless was re-released
Elvis got 5 a few times in 56/57
Bieber had 5 this week.
I scoured through this decade’s album debut weeks that opened with 200k+; all the rest with at least 1T40 debut did not have 5 total T40s. I suppose I could still be overlooking someone - either an album that opened not great but still had a handful of simultaneous hits, or a big-opening album that managed a handful of hits outside of opening week...
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
Quote:
Originally posted by fridayteenage
Aren't the readers they care about mostly those actually in the industry, and not, say, people on ATRL?
|
As I said, a sudden unannounced shift in CMA policy at such a crucial time in music chart history would not go over well with music executives either. It could appear to many of them that BB is trying to manipulate the chart, and changing the rules a week or two before they knew a tremendous album was being released, therefore leading to an altered Hot 100 that isn't accurate. "Hello" is far and away the most popular song in the US right now, so changing the policy that results in Hello falling to #2 or #3 the week its parent album debuts on the BB 200 with around 3.5 million units could cost Billboard a large amount of credibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
