Billboard Hot 100: 02/20/2016 (PILLOWTALK #1)

[popmusic1]

^ There's no official MV but you can find plenty of fan uploaded videos. You can check how many WW streams Jumpman has on this YouTube auto-generated site: www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiM5ARaexPE (not really accurate because it has 85m)

[Ravi]

Feb 9, 2016 3:52:28 GMT -5 popmusic1 said:

YOUTUBE WEEKLY CHART
Week ending: 02/04

TW	Title	Artist	Streams TW	CHG
1	Sorry	Justin Bieber	7.965	-2.4%
2	PILLOWTALK	Zayn Malik	7.084	NEW
3	Watch Me (Whip / Nae Nae)	Silento	6.347	+6.9%
4	Love Yourself	Justin Bieber	6.345	-1.5%
5	Hello	Adele	5.918	-8%
6	Stressed Out	twenty one pilots	4.335	+5.8%
7	Don't	Bryson Tiller	4.041	-2.8%
8	White Iverson	Post Malone	3.855	-10.4%
9	What Do You Mean?	Justin Bieber	3.717	-9.4%
10	Uptown Funk	Mark Ronson	3.598	+3.8%
11	Hotline Bling	Drake	3.558	-12%
12	Hymn For The Weekend	Coldplay	3.526	NEW
13	See You Again (feat. Charlie Puth)	Wiz Khalifa	3.4	-2.3%
14	Me, Myself & I	G-Eazy	3.3	+13%
15	679	Fetty Wap	3.196	-3.8%
16	Trap Queen	Fetty Wap	3.188	-5.6%
17	The Hills	The Weeknd	3.123	-8.9%
18	Say It	Tory Lanez	3.057	-3.5%
19	Jumpman	Drake	2.998	+0.7%
20	Exchange	Bryson Tiller	2.968	+0.7%
21	Stitches	Shawn Mendes	2.901	-3%
22	Watch Me Work	Tinashe	2.825	+2494.2%
23	Down In the DM	Yo Gotti	2.814	NEW
24	Best Friend	Young Thug	2.791	-1.5%
25	Antidote	Travis Scott	2.684	-8.8%
26	2 Phones	Kevin Gates	2.618	+60.1%
27	My House	Flo Rida	2.485	+36.7%
28	Really Really	Kevin Gates	2.329	+55.5%
29	Lean On (feat. MĂ? & DJ Snake)	Major Lazer	2.305	-12.2%
30	Here	Alessia Cara	2.209	+5.8%
31	Shake It Off	Taylor Swift	2.18	-3.8%
32	Roses	The Chainsmokers	2.112	+9.1%
33	Hands To Myself	Selena Gomez	2.077	-50.7%
34	Betcha Can't Do It Like Me Challenge	DLow	2.061	-11.4%
35	Like I'm Gonna Lose You	Meghan Trainor	2.04	-4.8%
36	My Way (Feat. Monty)	Fetty Wap	2.008	-3.9%
37	Africa (Single Version)	Toto	1.988	+32%
38	Where Ya At	Future	1.936	-8.2%
39	Can't Feel My Face	The Weeknd	1.916	-10.1%
40	Same Old Love	Selena Gomez	1.915	-6.5%

How is PILLOWTALK holding this week? Any early numbers? I'd guess it is still doing 500k+ daily.

[The Upper Hand]

Feb 9, 2016 1:47:57 GMT -5 Ravi said:

As for the new formula, I'm confused between these two:

Sales/9 + Airplay/10,000 + Streams/1,200 or
Sales/9 + Airplay/10,000 + Streams/1,100

I am 99% sure the formula is one of these two..... but which one? We need to wait a couple of weeks to find out.

Sorry if it's been discussed here before, but what's the new formula? And when did they change it?

[popmusic1]

Feb 9, 2016 6:32:38 GMT -5 Ravi said:

How is PILLOWTALK holding this week? Any early numbers? I'd guess it is still doing 500k+ daily.

I'll post full 2-days update later but now I can say PILLOWTALK got 1.251m streams in 48h (1.323m with accoustic version). Also Beyonce 'Formation' isn't registered on Google database. If her label doesn't send master track to YouTube and register track on SoundScan system(or release on iTunes) till Sunday, it won't get any streams.

[jerz]

Is that true that Ariana Grande and Dawin already dropped out on Billboard Hot 100 or not yet? :(

[divasummer]

Doesn't Beyonce know she's messing up us chart nerds lives with this strange release. LoL.
We want to be able to watch the progression of Sales, airplay and streaming and fight about them like normal people.
Jeez..... LoL

[Ravi]

Feb 9, 2016 6:47:55 GMT -5 The Upper Hand said:

Feb 9, 2016 1:47:57 GMT -5 Ravi said:

As for the new formula, I'm confused between these two:

Sales/9 + Airplay/10,000 + Streams/1,200 or
Sales/9 + Airplay/10,000 + Streams/1,100

I am 99% sure the formula is one of these two..... but which one? We need to wait a couple of weeks to find out.

Sorry if it's been discussed here before, but what's the new formula? And when did they change it?

The new formula will be one of the above two..... probably former.

This is the second week with the new formula. Weight of sales has been increased while that of Streaming has been decreased.

[Ravi]

Feb 7, 2016 14:16:12 GMT -5 carreramd said:

Feb 7, 2016 10:50:16 GMT -5 Ravi said:

Light It Up is already a bigger hit than Powerful globally. On the worldwide cumulative sales total chart, Powerful is at #801 and barely gaining any points, while Light It Up is already at #874 and will surpass Powerful within a week.

Where can I find it?

kworb.net/ww/wwtotals.html

[Ravi]

Feb 9, 2016 6:49:54 GMT -5 popmusic1 said:

Feb 9, 2016 6:32:38 GMT -5 Ravi said:

How is PILLOWTALK holding this week? Any early numbers? I'd guess it is still doing 500k+ daily.

I'll post full 2-days update later but now I can say PILLOWTALK got 1.251m streams in 48h (1.323m with accoustic version). Also Beyonce 'Formation' isn't registered on Google database. If her label doesn't send master track to YouTube and register track on SoundScan system(or release on iTunes) till Sunday, it won't get any streams.

Thanks mate.

[Old-school 72]

Im so happy with the turnover with #1 songs. It reminds me of the UK charts. Yet even now songs are sticking around too long in the UK. I feel 26 weeks on the chart is long enough. I loved the Hot 100 back in the 80s. New singles were released every 3 or 4 months and radio stopped playing the old and went on with the new. Very few songs stayed past 20 weeks. I dont get how someone still is downloading os streaming Uptown funk even though its a great song...lets move on. Zayn for #1 now but time for the next #1.

[Gary]

I will post charts later today. .biz charts arriving late this morning

[jenglisbe]

Feb 9, 2016 1:42:28 GMT -5 @zach808 said:

Feb 9, 2016 0:45:53 GMT -5 85la said:

As of this posting, it is not in the US Spotify top 50, but that might be because it hasn't been released long enough to be eligible for the ranking. If it is eligible though, then that's a major cause for concern.

According to Kworb, it's not doing that great there. Around 200k streams daily. That creepy thumbnail probably doesn't help.

I remain confused why some people see this as a threat for #1. I love the song, but nothing in the past month or more has given any indication that it will be a huge hit. Yes the Grammys could help (do we even know it's the song she's performing?), but the Grammys will help a lot of other songs as well.

[Deleted]

Feb 9, 2016 8:29:28 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Feb 9, 2016 1:42:28 GMT -5 @zach808 said:

According to Kworb, it's not doing that great there. Around 200k streams daily. That creepy thumbnail probably doesn't help.

I remain confused why some people see this as a threat for #1. I love the song, but nothing in the past month or more has given any indication that it will be a huge hit. Yes the Grammys could help (do we even know it's the song she's performing?), but the Grammys will help a lot of other songs as well.

Every time she's performed WWWY (to much smaller audiences than the Grammys), it's had a healthy sales surge. This indicates to me that people react/respond to the song nicely when performed, even if its just a portion of the song like in Carpool Karaoke.  It's also been selling consistenly in the top 15 on iTunes with about 80m ai at radio.  But I think the thing about its potential for #1 - for me - is the combination of the sales surge from the Grammys and the (possible) new video streams.  No confirmation about the video release, but I'd think this Friday would be the date to do it. We'll see.

If the video is released this Friday, going by the massive amount of video streams Hello received - even with just a small portion of those views and even with the decreased emphasis on streaming - WWWY could rack up enough points to get to #1.  Of course there are other variables at play - like you mentioned - a lot of other performers, something might make more of an impact, etc.  But I've come to conclusion that Adele's performances are usually very impactful, or impactful enough to at least put her in the running, especially combined with a new video release.  The possibility far outweighs the "no chance" option, imo.  

WWWY has been confirmed for the Grammys by Columbia. headlineplanet.com/home/2016/02/08/adele-performing-when-we-were-young-at-grammys-confirms-columbia/

[Deleted]

Feb 8, 2016 19:52:00 GMT -5 wjr15 said:

I wonder if Uptown Funk would still be on the Hot 100 if it wasn't for the new recurrent rule

Most likely. Which is why it is such BS that due to this stupid inconsistency, songs like Demons and I Gotta Feeling are officially considered to have been on the chart longer than Uptown Funk which is clearly far from being accurate (though I love both Demons and I Gotta Feeling). In my opinion this rule is the stupidest thing Billboard has ever implemented into their charts (I agree with the 20+ weeks & below #50 => gone from the chart, but not this crap)

Feb 9, 2016 1:42:28 GMT -5 @zach808 said:

Feb 9, 2016 0:45:53 GMT -5 85la said:

As of this posting, it is not in the US Spotify top 50, but that might be because it hasn't been released long enough to be eligible for the ranking. If it is eligible though, then that's a major cause for concern.

According to Kworb, it's not doing that great there. Around 200k streams daily. That creepy thumbnail probably doesn't help.

ohhhhhhh man, I'm SO glad I'm not the only person who feels this way   I try to avoid seeing it at all costs!  Very creepy indeed...

[yuh yuh]

Feb 9, 2016 11:46:11 GMT -5 @markg94 said:

Feb 8, 2016 19:52:00 GMT -5 wjr15 said:

I wonder if Uptown Funk would still be on the Hot 100 if it wasn't for the new recurrent rule

Most likely. Which is why it is such BS that due to this stupid inconsistency, songs like Demons and I Gotta Feeling are officially considered to have been on the chart longer than Uptown Funk which is clearly far from being accurate (though I love both Demons and I Gotta Feeling). In my opinion this rule is the stupidest thing Billboard has ever implemented into their charts (I agree with the 20+ weeks & below #50 => gone from the chart, but not this crap)

Completely agree. This new rule is horrible..

[badrobot]

To counter the negativity I am still looooving the new recurrent rule -- get that old stuff outta here!

[Gary]

We all should learn that not all eras are the same.

"I Gotta Feeling and Demons are officially considered to have been on the chart longer than Uptown Funk " is indeed accurate if you are looking at the Hot 100 from both eras as if they fell under the same set of rules.

Yes the chart run is bigger ON THIS CHART but it means nothing since you can no longer compare the two equally.

How many weeks would Demons and I Gotta Feeling had if they had the same rules? Without looking probably 52.

Uptown Funk on the other hand is at the first 10 weeks of perhaps a very long run at #1 on the recurrent chart.

[renfield75]

Exactly Gary. Alessia Cara's "Here" spent more time in the top ten than the Beatles' "Yesterday" (which was number one for 4 weeks) spent on the entire Hot 100. Different eras, different trends. If there were no re-current rules at all we would long ago have seen a song break 100 weeks on the chart. I'm not complaining that that hasn't happened.

[KeepDeanWeird]

Feb 9, 2016 16:20:42 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

Exactly Gary. Alessia Cara's "Here" spent more time in the top ten than the Beatles' "Yesterday" (which was number one for 4 weeks) spent on the entire Hot 100. Different eras, different trends. If there were no re-current rules at all we would long ago have seen a song break 100 weeks on the chart. I'm not complaining that that hasn't happened.

Exactly. Different eras, single turnover, metrics, measurements, etc. It's still hard to believe that so much power was given to radio stations to create their supposed playlists, which was far from accurate on any front. I remember the Top 40 station where I grew up used to talk about their weekly chart as a combination of local sales, station play and request and that chart was submitted to Billboard. And don't get me started on the sales side.

Honestly, I've moved more to relying on the various component charts - sales, radio, YouTube, Spotify to gauge what's hot and active and turning into a hit. The H100 with its flaky weighing and stubborn rules hasn't cut it for me for a long time. But, of course, I still follow it religiously!

[jenglisbe]

Feb 9, 2016 11:46:11 GMT -5 @markg94 said:

Feb 8, 2016 19:52:00 GMT -5 wjr15 said:

I wonder if Uptown Funk would still be on the Hot 100 if it wasn't for the new recurrent rule

Most likely. Which is why it is such BS that due to this stupid inconsistency, songs like Demons and I Gotta Feeling are officially considered to have been on the chart longer than Uptown Funk which is clearly far from being accurate (though I love both Demons and I Gotta Feeling). In my opinion this rule is the stupidest thing Billboard has ever implemented into their charts (I agree with the 20+ weeks & below #50 => gone from the chart, but not this crap)

But without the addition of the recurrent rule once songs fell past 50, there could be songs that would have been on the chart even longer than any of the songs you mentioned. That's why it's tough to compare across "eras."

[godjanny]

It's a tradeoff. If it wasn't for the new rule, Acquainted by The Weeknd and Alive by Sia wouldn't be on the chart right now, so at least there's that.

[Deleted]

Feb 9, 2016 18:22:40 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Feb 9, 2016 16:20:42 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

Exactly Gary. Alessia Cara's "Here" spent more time in the top ten than the Beatles' "Yesterday" (which was number one for 4 weeks) spent on the entire Hot 100. Different eras, different trends. If there were no re-current rules at all we would long ago have seen a song break 100 weeks on the chart. I'm not complaining that that hasn't happened.

Exactly. Different eras, single turnover, metrics, measurements, etc. It's still hard to believe that so much power was given to radio stations to create their supposed playlists, which was far from accurate on any front. I remember the Top 40 station where I grew up used to talk about their weekly chart as a combination of local sales, station play and request and that chart was submitted to Billboard. And don't get me started on the sales side.

Honestly, I've moved more to relying on the various component charts - sales, radio, YouTube, Spotify to gauge what's hot and active and turning into a hit. The H100 with its flaky weighing and stubborn rules hasn't cut it for me for a long time. But, of course, I still follow it religiously!

Billboard's Hot 100 is one of the most difficult jobs in showbiz! :)   It's impossible to perfect it, but they sure do keep trying, don't they?  The struggle is real and will never end.  I can't be mad at them, cuz like you, i follow it religiously.  There's nothing else like it that even comes close to doing what it does.  It's fun to watch from week to week, and fun to look back on as well, as long as I'm not trying to apples-to-apples compare anything between eras/decades, cuz that's where it all gets complicated and frustrating at times.  It helps that I don't stan for anyone, so I'm not pressed about things that seem to get the best of some people. Billboard is the "bad guy" too often - and it sucks the joy out of it at times.  It's just for fun, especially for people who aren't getting paid based on what charts - or doesn't chart!  LOL.

[85la]

Feb 9, 2016 20:46:38 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

Feb 9, 2016 18:22:40 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Exactly. Different eras, single turnover, metrics, measurements, etc. It's still hard to believe that so much power was given to radio stations to create their supposed playlists, which was far from accurate on any front. I remember the Top 40 station where I grew up used to talk about their weekly chart as a combination of local sales, station play and request and that chart was submitted to Billboard. And don't get me started on the sales side.

Honestly, I've moved more to relying on the various component charts - sales, radio, YouTube, Spotify to gauge what's hot and active and turning into a hit. The H100 with its flaky weighing and stubborn rules hasn't cut it for me for a long time. But, of course, I still follow it religiously!

Billboard's Hot 100 is one of the most difficult jobs in showbiz! :)   It's impossible to perfect it, but they sure do keep trying, don't they?  The struggle is real and will never end.  I can't be mad at them, cuz like you, i follow it religiously.  There's nothing else like it that even comes close to doing what it does.  It's fun to watch from week to week, and fun to look back on as well, as long as I'm not trying to apples-to-apples compare anything between eras/decades, cuz that's where it all gets complicated and frustrating at times.  It helps that I don't stan for anyone, so I'm not pressed about things that seem to get the best of some people. Billboard is the "bad guy" too often - and it sucks the joy out of it at times.  It's just for fun, especially for people who aren't getting paid based on what charts - or doesn't chart!  LOL.

[KeepDeanWeird]

Feb 9, 2016 20:46:38 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

Feb 9, 2016 18:22:40 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Exactly. Different eras, single turnover, metrics, measurements, etc. It's still hard to believe that so much power was given to radio stations to create their supposed playlists, which was far from accurate on any front. I remember the Top 40 station where I grew up used to talk about their weekly chart as a combination of local sales, station play and request and that chart was submitted to Billboard. And don't get me started on the sales side.

Honestly, I've moved more to relying on the various component charts - sales, radio, YouTube, Spotify to gauge what's hot and active and turning into a hit. The H100 with its flaky weighing and stubborn rules hasn't cut it for me for a long time. But, of course, I still follow it religiously!

Billboard's Hot 100 is one of the most difficult jobs in showbiz! :)   It's impossible to perfect it, but they sure do keep trying, don't they?  The struggle is real and will never end.  I can't be mad at them, cuz like you, i follow it religiously.  There's nothing else like it that even comes close to doing what it does.  It's fun to watch from week to week, and fun to look back on as well, as long as I'm not trying to apples-to-apples compare anything between eras/decades, cuz that's where it all gets complicated and frustrating at times.  It helps that I don't stan for anyone, so I'm not pressed about things that seem to get the best of some people. Billboard is the "bad guy" too often - and it sucks the joy out of it at times.  It's just for fun, especially for people who aren't getting paid based on what charts - or doesn't chart!  LOL.

Agreed - nothing will ever be perfect. My main issue has to do with consistency and logic - for example how "Dope" ends up as a Top 10 single because of a streaming quirk and Passengers LHG commercial (with the full song) gets kicked for a classification reason. That's just but one of dozens of examples where it doesn't make sense. However, recently they have sped up changes - like streaming, video, recurrents allowed to chart, etc. It was ridiculous it took 5 years to address the very real issue of limited/deleted/airplay-only singles. The charts from 1993-1998 are far from representative of what was happening in music. But it's still fun to watch. Fortunately, we're in an era where a lot of raw data is easily accessible.

[carreramd]

Feb 10, 2016 13:38:02 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Feb 9, 2016 20:46:38 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

Billboard's Hot 100 is one of the most difficult jobs in showbiz! :)   It's impossible to perfect it, but they sure do keep trying, don't they?  The struggle is real and will never end.  I can't be mad at them, cuz like you, i follow it religiously.  There's nothing else like it that even comes close to doing what it does.  It's fun to watch from week to week, and fun to look back on as well, as long as I'm not trying to apples-to-apples compare anything between eras/decades, cuz that's where it all gets complicated and frustrating at times.  It helps that I don't stan for anyone, so I'm not pressed about things that seem to get the best of some people. Billboard is the "bad guy" too often - and it sucks the joy out of it at times.  It's just for fun, especially for people who aren't getting paid based on what charts - or doesn't chart!  LOL.

Agreed - nothing will ever be perfect. My main issue has to do with consistency and logic - for example how "Dope" ends up as a Top 10 single because of a streaming quirk and Passengers LHG commercial (with the full song) gets kicked for a classification reason. That's just but one of dozens of examples where it doesn't make sense. However, recently they have sped up changes - like streaming, video, recurrents allowed to chart, etc. It was ridiculous it took 5 years to address the very real issue of limited/deleted/airplay-only singles. The charts from 1993-1998 are far from representative of what was happening in music. But it's still fun to watch. Fortunately, we're in an era where a lot of raw data is easily accessible.

What's the streaming quirk of Dope?

[Deleted]

carreramd  The only thing I recall is that almost all of Dope's streaming points were from a live performance on YouTube.  Is that the quirk?  I don't know.

[Deleted]

Feb 11, 2016 9:01:58 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

carreramd  The only thing I recall is that almost all of Dope's streaming points were from a live performance on YouTube.  Is that the quirk?  I don't know.

I believe it was the only quirk for it. Recall it dropped 8-71 in its second week, never saw the Hot 100 again afterwards.

[jenglisbe]

Feb 10, 2016 13:38:02 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Feb 9, 2016 20:46:38 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

Billboard's Hot 100 is one of the most difficult jobs in showbiz! :)   It's impossible to perfect it, but they sure do keep trying, don't they?  The struggle is real and will never end.  I can't be mad at them, cuz like you, i follow it religiously.  There's nothing else like it that even comes close to doing what it does.  It's fun to watch from week to week, and fun to look back on as well, as long as I'm not trying to apples-to-apples compare anything between eras/decades, cuz that's where it all gets complicated and frustrating at times.  It helps that I don't stan for anyone, so I'm not pressed about things that seem to get the best of some people. Billboard is the "bad guy" too often - and it sucks the joy out of it at times.  It's just for fun, especially for people who aren't getting paid based on what charts - or doesn't chart!  LOL.

Agreed - nothing will ever be perfect. My main issue has to do with consistency and logic - for example how "Dope" ends up as a Top 10 single because of a streaming quirk and Passengers LHG commercial (with the full song) gets kicked for a classification reason. That's just but one of dozens of examples where it doesn't make sense. However, recently they have sped up changes - like streaming, video, recurrents allowed to chart, etc. It was ridiculous it took 5 years to address the very real issue of limited/deleted/airplay-only singles. The charts from 1993-1998 are far from representative of what was happening in music. But it's still fun to watch. Fortunately, we're in an era where a lot of raw data is easily accessible.

Some of this isn't Billboard's fault, though. I assume with the 1993-1998 point you mean because airplay-only singles weren't allowed to chart. Well, if they had been and songs that were big airplay hits peaked in the teens because of the lack of chart points from sales, then people would be saying those peaks weren't representative of the song's popularity. What could Billboard do about those situations, though?

[Zach]

Feb 11, 2016 9:12:03 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Some of this isn't Billboard's fault, though. I assume with the 1993-1998 point you mean because airplay-only singles weren't allowed to chart. Well, if they had been and songs that were big airplay hits peaked in the teens because of the lack of chart points from sales, then people would be saying those peaks weren't representative of the song's popularity. What could Billboard do about those situations, though?

How's that different from chart methodologies since 1998 though? Are you saying that in 15 years time we'll look back at the 2016 Hot 100 and complain that it didn't represent of true popularity of songs which were bigger airplay hits than their sales may imply and therefore failed to reach the absolute top reaches of the Hot 100? Or am I misunderstanding?

[jenglisbe]

Feb 11, 2016 10:21:56 GMT -5 Zach said:

Feb 11, 2016 9:12:03 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Some of this isn't Billboard's fault, though. I assume with the 1993-1998 point you mean because airplay-only singles weren't allowed to chart. Well, if they had been and songs that were big airplay hits peaked in the teens because of the lack of chart points from sales, then people would be saying those peaks weren't representative of the song's popularity. What could Billboard do about those situations, though?

How's that different from chart methodologies since 1998 though? Are you saying that in 15 years time we'll look back at the 2016 Hot 100 and complain that it didn't represent of true popularity of songs which were bigger airplay hits than their sales may imply and therefore failed to reach the absolute top reaches of the Hot 100? Or am I misunderstanding?

I don't know, I was asking the person who made that post. People complained that in, say, 1995 a lot of songs weren't allowed to chart because they didn't have a commercial single. I am saying that even now with all relevant measures counting, people still complain that the Hot 100 doesn't accurately portray some song's peaks. So, if airplay-only songs had been allowed to chart from 1993-1998, my guess is the complaint now would be that the peaks for those songs don't reflect how popular they actually were. That isn't Billboard's fault, though, as they can't control what was or wasn't released. In other words I'm saying that from 1993-1998 (and then even after that when songs like "Bye Bye Bye" had a lower chart peak than you'd assume) Billboard was in a no-win situation.