jayhawk1117
2x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2013
Posts: 2,758 
|
Post by jayhawk1117 on Aug 7, 2016 19:01:29 GMT -5
^ So on average about 25% for sales, 30% for airplay, and 45% for streaming. I'd say that is a fair distribution. I personally think that the things people actually pay for should have the largest impact. So I think 45% Streams, 30% Sales, 25% Airplay. |
|
|
|
Post by Old-school 72 on Aug 7, 2016 19:08:42 GMT -5
I believe sales and streaming should have equal percentages at 40/40 leaving 20% for airplay.
|
|
Bigfatliar 3
Platinum Member
cool people call songs "joint" which is little inappropriate to me cuz i think of an elbow or someth
|
Post by Bigfatliar 3 on Aug 7, 2016 19:16:38 GMT -5
Sales should be lower than streaming IMO. Imagine if all americans buy #1 song just in first week. It will leave that song drops so hard in the next week.  |
|
felipe
3x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 3,058
|
Post by felipe on Aug 7, 2016 20:54:37 GMT -5
Why do people here keep saying streaming is bigger than radio nowadays? Is there any data to back that up?
|
|
Zach
7x Platinum Member
And at once I knew I was not magnificent...
Joined: September 2015
Posts: 7,544
|
Post by Zach on Aug 7, 2016 20:58:26 GMT -5
Did not realize just how large radio had become compared with sales. That's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. JT's 35/40/25 seems great to me. Why do people here keep saying streaming is bigger than radio nowadays? Is there any data to back that up? With regards to streaming and sales, industry reports have suggested that revenue from song streaming has surpassed revenue from song sales and its lead is obviously very quickly growing. I think Warner was the latest music company earlier this year to announce that streaming revenue had overtaken sales revenue, and that report included album sales, so imagine if they were comparing only to song sales. As for comparing streaming to radio, I'm not sure if anyone is really saying streaming is "bigger" than radio. Most people just don't believe that radio play should have as much sway on a song's chart position as sales or streams. The public doesn't directly decide what's played on radio. |
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 35,611
|
Post by jenglisbe on Aug 7, 2016 21:06:32 GMT -5
Did not realize just how large radio had become compared with sales. That's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. JT's 35/40/25 seems great to me. Why do people here keep saying streaming is bigger than radio nowadays? Is there any data to back that up? With regards to streaming and sales, industry reports have suggested that revenue from song streaming has surpassed revenue from song sales and its lead is obviously very quickly growing. I think Warner was the latest music company earlier this year to announce that streaming revenue had overtaken sales revenue, and that report included album sales, so imagine if they were comparing only to song sales. As for comparing streaming to radio, I'm not sure if anyone is really saying streaming is "bigger" than radio. Most people just don't believe that radio play should have as much sway on a song's chart position as sales or streams. The public doesn't directly decide what's played on radio. Revenue is only one way to measure, of course. I'd be more interested in what the majority of people use more often, regardless of profits. |
|
Zach
7x Platinum Member
And at once I knew I was not magnificent...
Joined: September 2015
Posts: 7,544
|
Post by Zach on Aug 7, 2016 21:24:02 GMT -5
Revenue is only one way to measure, of course. I'd be more interested in what the majority of people use more often, regardless of profits. Yeah I was thinking of that but I don't know of any such data. It probably exists though. |
|
|
|
Post by Parerastarr10 on Aug 7, 2016 22:17:52 GMT -5
Kudos on the chart georgetherunner314.
I'd take a few points away from airplay and several points away from streaming. The spread would be 38 (streaming), 34 (sales), 28 (airplay).
|
|
MTSChart21
4x Platinum Member
"My Name's Blurryface"
If I can't be close to you, I'll settle for the ghost of you
Joined: October 2015
Posts: 4,347
|
Post by MTSChart21 on Aug 7, 2016 22:27:14 GMT -5
Credit to: www.kworb.net/airadio*** indicates that the song dropped or added a format ------------------------------------------------------------------- Even without dropping a format, Don't Mind loses 5M+ AI again.  |
|
rimetm
2x Platinum Member
Just a Good Ol' Chart Shmuck
|
Post by rimetm on Aug 7, 2016 22:38:21 GMT -5
People thought it would be the next Panda or Watch Me. Instead, it's the next Nasty Freestyle in terms of longevity.
|
|
|
|
Post by ListenToItTwice on Aug 7, 2016 22:50:44 GMT -5
I don't think there's been another #1 song in recent memory for which an official video hasn't been released, or even a relatively big top ten hit. Anyone know? Harlem Shake and Sorry technically. Neither had official videos. One had a viral component and the other just had a lyric video. You could even through Set Fire to the Rain in there if you want to exclude live videos. Which, I don't think that ever was intended to be the video, it just happened. Harlem Shake would be the last one; Sorry had an official video, didn't it? I would count SFttR; to me that's not an official video. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2016 23:00:18 GMT -5
Harlem Shake and Sorry technically. Neither had official videos. One had a viral component and the other just had a lyric video. You could even through Set Fire to the Rain in there if you want to exclude live videos. Which, I don't think that ever was intended to be the video, it just happened. Harlem Shake would be the last one; Sorry had an official video, didn't it? I would count SFttR; to me that's not an official video. Panda was #1 before it had a video |
|
Au$tin
Diamond Member
Pop Culture Guru
Grrrrrrrrrr. Fuckity fuck why don't you watch my film before you judge it? FURY.
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 54,623
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his/him
|
Post by Au$tin on Aug 8, 2016 1:07:30 GMT -5
Harlem Shake would be the last one; Sorry had an official video, didn't it? I would count SFttR; to me that's not an official video. Panda was #1 before it had a video The question was asking about songs that never had videos at all. Though, poor phrasing made it seem like the last #1 without a video, which of course would be any song that hit the top spot before its video came out, but the intended question was not that. RE: Sorry music video. If that's what you want to call it. It was just a video of random chicks dancing to the song. Many people even expected a real video to be released later, but one never came.  |
|
Ravi
Charting
Joined: February 2015
Posts: 420
|
Post by Ravi on Aug 8, 2016 3:02:05 GMT -5
RE: Sorry music video. If that's what you want to call it. It was just a video of random chicks dancing to the song. Many people even expected a real video to be released later, but one never came.  Maybe it could have something to do with the fact that those random chicks video generated 1.5B+ views. :) |
|
Bigfatliar 3
Platinum Member
cool people call songs "joint" which is little inappropriate to me cuz i think of an elbow or someth
|
Post by Bigfatliar 3 on Aug 8, 2016 3:25:50 GMT -5
RE: Sorry music video. If that's what you want to call it. It was just a video of random chicks dancing to the song. Many people even expected a real video to be released later, but one never came. Maybe it could have something to do with the fact that those random chicks video generated 1.5B+ views. :) I could say it is an official video for Sorry. Not every official video have "official" one on the title. Panda should be the last one to reach #1 w/out video, and Harlem Shake is the one to peak at #1 w/out video at all. |
|
rimetm
2x Platinum Member
Just a Good Ol' Chart Shmuck
|
Post by rimetm on Aug 8, 2016 7:52:18 GMT -5
The tricky thing about Sorry is that it was part of a film called Purpose: the Movement that also provided music videos for Where Are Ü Now, What Do You Mean (which already had music videos) and Company (which would later get a music video). Therefore its status as a proper music video is questionable.
Cheap Thrills is also in a weird spot. Its main video can't even be agreed upon: one uses the album cut, but is labeled (Performance Edit) because it's literally the routine and set design used for live performances, and the other (the one with more views) uses a remix cut and functions officially as a (Lyric Video). So, you could make the argument that technically our current chart topper is doing so without a music video.
|
|
felipe
3x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 3,058
|
Post by felipe on Aug 8, 2016 8:05:57 GMT -5
Did not realize just how large radio had become compared with sales. That's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. JT's 35/40/25 seems great to me. Why do people here keep saying streaming is bigger than radio nowadays? Is there any data to back that up? With regards to streaming and sales, industry reports have suggested that revenue from song streaming has surpassed revenue from song sales and its lead is obviously very quickly growing. I think Warner was the latest music company earlier this year to announce that streaming revenue had overtaken sales revenue, and that report included album sales, so imagine if they were comparing only to song sales. As for comparing streaming to radio, I'm not sure if anyone is really saying streaming is "bigger" than radio. Most people just don't believe that radio play should have as much sway on a song's chart position as sales or streams. The public doesn't directly decide what's played on radio. I understand that the public doesn't "directly" decide what's played on the radio, but it's hard to say that streaming or sales represent as much popularity as being heard 200 million times on radio. One could argue (and has) that Panda deserved to be #1 because it was massive with over 20 mi streams in a week. But was it more popular that week than the song that was heard 10 times more on radio? Whether those people chose to listen to the song, whether they liked it or not... a popular song is popular whether one likes it or not. I have the impression that streaming and sales specially represent a very small percentage of the country's population, so even when a song is #1 on iTunes that actually means a small amount of people purchased it. When a song is #1 - or even top 10 - on radio that represents a large part of the population, a lot of people that have heard it the past week. |
|
badrobot
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,392
|
Post by badrobot on Aug 8, 2016 8:40:32 GMT -5
If streaming used "audience impressions" the same way radio does, I am betting it would have wider reach. Restaurants, gyms, and other public places frequently use online streaming for their music, meaning each stream is heard by dozens or hundreds of people. And then there's friends, parties, etc. 20m streams could easily mean a song is being heard 200m times.
I realize streaming has a bummer effect on the charts for some people, but it is the first time in history where we have a music format that accurately captures what songs people choose to listen to over time.
I would be in favor of billboard switching to using on demand streaming only though, and rebranding the radio component to include "internet radio" aka passive streaming.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 35,611
|
Post by jenglisbe on Aug 8, 2016 9:40:27 GMT -5
If streaming used "audience impressions" the same way radio does, I am betting it would have wider reach. Restaurants, gyms, and other public places frequently use online streaming for their music, meaning each stream is heard by dozens or hundreds of people. And then there's friends, parties, etc. 20m streams could easily mean a song is being heard 200m times. At least with radio people are choosing what station to listen to, though. If I'm in a restaurant or gym I have no control over what is being played, and I may not even be listening. I don't consider that to be on the same level as radio impressions (though admit radio has its issues, too). Do we have accurate stats yet on how many and who streams? |
|
MTSChart21
4x Platinum Member
"My Name's Blurryface"
If I can't be close to you, I'll settle for the ghost of you
Joined: October 2015
Posts: 4,347
|
Post by MTSChart21 on Aug 8, 2016 10:10:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by KeepDeanWeird on Aug 8, 2016 10:46:06 GMT -5
Sales should be lower than streaming IMO. Imagine if all americans buy #1 song just in first week. It will leave that song drops so hard in the next week. But when someone buys song they play it multiple times. Unlike streaming, those plays don't count. I still think it's off to count my streaming of, say, Rise or Cheap Thrills, multiple times over weeks, than my purchase of One Dance or Gold. There needs to be a balance because for chart purposes, it far better to stream than sell. |
|
Dylan :)
Diamond Member
smth 'bout youu
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 13,029
|
Post by Dylan :) on Aug 8, 2016 11:57:51 GMT -5
I thought Harlem Shake had an official video? It was released with the original release of the song
|
|
Zach
7x Platinum Member
And at once I knew I was not magnificent...
Joined: September 2015
Posts: 7,544
|
Post by Zach on Aug 8, 2016 12:36:52 GMT -5
At least with radio people are choosing what station to listen to, though. If I'm in a restaurant or gym I have no control over what is being played, and I may not even be listening. I don't consider that to be on the same level as radio impressions (though admit radio has its issues, too). That's a point, but what percentage of that radio AI do you think actually comes from situations where people have control over the station being listened to? I doubt too much of a large percentage of a song's 100m+ impressions comes from people sitting in their cars listening to the radio or other situations like this. If that were the case I see no reason why AI would be THAT high and not somewhere closer to streaming's numbers. I've just always assumed that radio impressions were so high because of mass listening in public places where people can't just get up and switch the station. ^Those are genuine questions by the way. As a non-American I'm not aware if public places like stores and gyms and malls in the US sometimes play radio stations for music rather than stream it, as is the case sometimes where I'm from. |
|
Au$tin
Diamond Member
Pop Culture Guru
Grrrrrrrrrr. Fuckity fuck why don't you watch my film before you judge it? FURY.
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 54,623
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his/him
|
Post by Au$tin on Aug 8, 2016 12:52:26 GMT -5
At least with radio people are choosing what station to listen to, though. If I'm in a restaurant or gym I have no control over what is being played, and I may not even be listening. I don't consider that to be on the same level as radio impressions (though admit radio has its issues, too). That's a point, but what percentage of that radio AI do you think actually comes from situations where people have control over the station being listened to? I doubt too much of a large percentage of a song's 100m+ impressions comes from people sitting in their cars listening to the radio or other situations like this. If that were the case I see no reason why AI would be THAT high and not somewhere closer to streaming's numbers. I've just always assumed that radio impressions were so high because of mass listening in public places where people can't just get up and switch the station. ^Those are genuine questions by the way. As a non-American I'm not aware if public places like stores and gyms and malls in the US sometimes play radio stations for music rather than stream it, as is the case sometimes where I'm from. Smaller locations will have radio stations playing, but most large corporations either don't have music or have their own special station/playlist. It's not streaming or radio, just some random playlist set by corporate or something. |
|
|
|
Post by georgetherunner314 on Aug 8, 2016 13:07:26 GMT -5
Is anyone else watching the Periscope stream today? I can post the rankings (edit them into this post) according to Billboard for this week, if no one else is.
Ok, Gary can take care of that.
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,889
|
Post by Gary on Aug 8, 2016 13:09:55 GMT -5
96 Starving - Hailee Steinfeld 67. (-15) Make Me - Britney Spears 50. Record Year - Eric Church 43. (=) Rise - Katy Perry 27 I Hate U I Love U 24 (+1) All In My Head 22. (+1) Into You - Ariana Grande 21 (-3) Controlla - Drake 20 (=) Too Good - Drake 19. (+3) We Don't Talk Anymore - Charlie Puth 18. (-2) Shawn Mendes 16. (+1) Work From Home
14. (-1) Me Too - Meghan Trainor 11. (+4) Heathens - Twenty One Pilots 10. (-1) Send My Love (To Your New Lover) - Adele 9. (New) Closer - Chainsmokers ft Halsey (#1 digital 103k) 8. (=) Needed Me - Rihanna 7. (=) Ride - Twenty One Pilots 6. (=) Don't Let Me Down - Chainsmokers (1st duo to have 2 songs in the top ten since Macklemore & Ryan Lewis in 2013) 5. (-3) Cold Water - Major Lazer ft Justin Bieber & M0 (#1 streaming) 4. (+1) Can't Stop The Feeling - Justin Timberlake 3. (+1) This Is What You Came For - Calvin Harris ft Rihanna 2. (+1) One Dance - Drake 1. (=) Cheap Thrills - Sia ft Sean Paul (#1 radio)
Drake now in top 10 for 47 straight weeks (A record among men)
|
|
Dylan :)
Diamond Member
smth 'bout youu
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 13,029
|
Post by Dylan :) on Aug 8, 2016 13:41:23 GMT -5
15 Record Year - Eric Church
It's #50 this week, not #15 :) |
|
|
|
Post by Golden Bluebird on Aug 8, 2016 13:42:48 GMT -5
50. Record Year - Eric Church Fixed. EDIT: Got ninja'd there. |
|
bigbertha
Gold Member
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 696
|
Post by bigbertha on Aug 8, 2016 13:43:16 GMT -5
96 Starving - Hailee Steinfeld 67. (-15) Make Me - Britney Spears 43. (=) Rise - Katy Perry 27 I Hate U I Love U 24 (+1) All In My Head 22. (+1) Into You - Ariana Grande 21 (-3) Controlla - Drake 20 (=) Too Good - Drake 19. (+3) We Don't Talk Anymore - Charlie Puth 18. (-2) Shawn Mendes 16. (+1) Work From Home 15 Record Year - Eric Church 14. (-1) Me Too - Meghan Trainor 11. (+4) Heathens - Twenty One Pilots 10. (-1) Send My Love (To Your New Lover) - Adele 9. (New) Closer - Chainsmokers ft Halsey (#1 digital 103k) 8. (=) Needed Me - Rihanna 7. (=) Ride - Twenty One Pilots 6. (=) Don't Let Me Down - Chainsmokers (1st duo to have 2 songs in the top ten since Macklemore & Ryan Lewis in 2013) 5. (-3) Cold Water - Major Lazer ft Justin Bieber & M0 (#1 streaming) 4. (+1) Can't Stop The Feeling - Justin Timberlake 3. (+1) This Is What You Came For - Calvin Harris ft Rihanna 2. (+1) One Dance - Drake 1. (=) Cheap Thrills - Sia ft Sean Paul (#1 radio)
Drake now in top 10 for 47 straight weeks (A record among men)
Record Year???? |
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,889
|
Post by Gary on Aug 8, 2016 13:44:17 GMT -5
Sorry about that - fixed
If you get a phone call while you watch the stream on your phone - the stream stops - LOL
|
|
