Billboard Hot 100: 05/21/2016 (One Dance #1!)

[thabb]

May 11, 2016 10:14:17 GMT -5 Sherane Lamar said:

May 11, 2016 9:53:13 GMT -5 thabb said:

this "90s version" is actually its own thing. My Boo is a song from this really obscure band called ghost town DJs. they released one single for this So So Def Records's compilation album "So So Def Bass All Stars". they never released a single after My Boo, apparently.

it got sampled in body party, then some people started to listen to it. it became a little bit of a new presence but it wasn't really at the forefront til now.

this is all I know about my boo tbh.

My Boo can't be that obscure if it already spent 32 something weeks on the Hot 100. 

But I don't think I had ever heard it before. Other than in Body Party. I had to look it up on "WhoSampled" or whatever it's called. Because I knew it sounded familiar. 

I also think it sounds a lot like whatever R&B song was kanyefied for Game's "100". 

the band is obscure is what I said

I don't think they ever had an album

[divasummer]

May 9, 2016 21:14:53 GMT -5 Glove Slap said:

May 9, 2016 20:08:06 GMT -5 thabb said:

adding onto the whole recurrent discussion, I feel like they should just straight up REMOVE recurrent rules. a song will stay on the chart as much as it needs to, stop trying to curve it

No, that would be an absolutely horrible move. I'm going to copy one of my old posts here to explain why.

The Hot 100 is supposed to show the top 100 revenue generating songs, in relation to each other, and it is meant to be a tool for labels to read the success of their releases in that same relation as well. Having 15-25 old songs on the chart goes against that. Labels strongly benefit from seeing their songs enter various charts. Especially for new acts, it's helpful as they try to grow their presence. Additionally, it's a tool for planning resource management. Songs that have more potential and inching higher are ones that could have possibility to go much further if the opportunity is seized. If there are 20 other old songs on the chart, ones that are not being promoted any longer holding the current single lower or off the chart, there is no real benefit to anyone. The removal of the song by Billboard allows the label to have the opportunity to showcase another release, while still getting residual income from the previous one.

Now if a song is being actively pushed and has charted for more than 20 weeks, that's a different issue, but it is one which is addressed by the exception that allows re-entry if they're gaining on formats.

Then they should just do both a Hot 100 songs
and Hot 100 singles.
Do they feel it would lessen one of their charts????

When songs can't enter because of certain rules like recurrent rules it seems almost dishonest.
I also dislike when a song is forced to go recurrent.

I get the current way is for labels to track their current hits.
But a lot of people want songs to fall off completely on their own.
If it's selling enough to linger so be it.
I get both sides of the ongoing chart drama. LoL

[Glove Slap]

May 11, 2016 20:57:16 GMT -5 divasummer said:

Then they should just do both a Hot 100 songs
and Hot 100 singles.
Do they feel it would lessen one of their charts????

When songs can't enter because of certain rules like recurrent rules it seems almost dishonest.
I also dislike when a song is forced to go recurrent.

I get the current way is for labels to track their current hits.
But a lot of people want songs to fall off completely on their own.
If it's selling enough to linger so be it.
I get both sides of the ongoing chart drama. LoL

It's not so much that it would lessen it that it is simply not needed from an objective point of view.

These "people" you speak of who want to see the songs fall off on their own aren't the target audience of the charts. Whether you feel it's "dishonest" or not, that point in itself is just moot. For its purposes, the chart is far far more efficient and effective with the recurrent rules.

[divasummer]

May 11, 2016 21:13:33 GMT -5 Glove Slap said:

May 11, 2016 20:57:16 GMT -5 divasummer said:

Then they should just do both a Hot 100 songs
and Hot 100 singles.
Do they feel it would lessen one of their charts????

When songs can't enter because of certain rules like recurrent rules it seems almost dishonest.
I also dislike when a song is forced to go recurrent.

I get the current way is for labels to track their current hits.
But a lot of people want songs to fall off completely on their own.
If it's selling enough to linger so be it.
I get both sides of the ongoing chart drama. LoL

It's not so much that it would lessen it that it is simply not needed from an objective point of view.

These "people" you speak of who want to see the songs fall off on their own aren't the target audience of the charts. Whether you feel it's "dishonest" or not, that point in itself is just moot. For its purposes, the chart is far far more efficient and effective with the recurrent rules.

I know why they do this I just personally wish they would do two Hot 100's I guess.
I feel like now a days people like me are keeping Billboard around.
I still have a subscription and tap and share their links on Facebook to promote them and keep their name around.

[jenglisbe]

Good point re: two charts. If they can do multiple albums charts, why not multiple Hot 100 charts? I like the recurrent rules for the main Hot 100 chart, but why not publish a parallel one with no recurrent rules?

[THINKIN BOUT YOU]

May 11, 2016 22:43:54 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Good point re: two charts. If they can do multiple albums charts, why not multiple Hot 100 charts? I like the recurrent rules for the main Hot 100 chart, but why not publish a parallel one with no recurrent rules?

I got two, charts, one for the plug and one for the load

[MTSChart21]

May 11, 2016 22:43:54 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

But why not publish a parallel one with no recurrent rules?

I bet everything lower than 50 (at least) on the Hot 100 wouldn't even be on that chart XD

[thabb]

my favourite part is the fact that they got six thanks by copy-pasting an old post :kii: