Billboard Hot 100: 12/26/2020

[jenglisbe]

Dec 21, 2020 13:03:20 GMT -5 👑 Eloquent ™ said:

So "Willow" sold 60k? Why was there a 44k estimate earlier? I wonder how much it sold before the last day (31hr) discounts?

Some sources don't count sales that are essentially free.

[jayhawk1117]

Dec 21, 2020 16:25:57 GMT -5 Ｓｏｕｎｄｃｌ🕤ｃｋ said:

yeah this is what I expected tbh. There's gonna be a solid 15 (at least) Christmas songs ahead of her most likely plus the natural week 2 drop off. Lol this songs first two weeks are gonna need asterisks huh

[iHype.]

Dec 21, 2020 16:19:20 GMT -5 Gary said:

Dec 21, 2020 16:14:14 GMT -5 iHype. said:

And the song will probably never even surpass 200k total pure sales seeing as it's possibly going to fall below 5k sales next week. We are in a time where songs are going Diamond off streams alone.

Digital sales are practically a dead horse in comparison to streaming. Arguing over to the extent of how much they've eroded and how much further they can erode is rather semantics at this point. 

Wasn't trying to argue anything actually

The point of my post was to point out people still download songs if there is enough interest in the song.

 But even for Taylor it's beyond a far decline now. A lead single with 5 versions and $0.39 pricing at one point, only doing 55k first week.

She used to sell like 300k first-week with promotional tracks that had absolutely no promotion.

Also if you take out the mass-buying I can't even imagine the Willow number. I think the days of digital singles (outside of abusing a Hot 100 #1 peak) for everyone are gone. Blinding Lights having 6 months at #1 on radio this year and struggling to pass 500k is the biggest shock to me. We may practically never another released song go Gold in pure digital sales if Billboard makes rules against mass-buying.

[c0ldasfire]

Any idea what “Matches” sold?

[14887fan]

It's an amazing feat for Taylor Swift, to have opened two completely original (and wonderful) albums and their lead singles at #1 in their same respective weeks. Bravo and props to her and her team.

Having said that....... the obvious and very manageable manipulation for Billboard Hot 100 #1 debuts over the last couple of years has been very frustrating to watch unfold. Seeing 12 songs do it in 2020 alone, when prior to the start of this year there were 35 songs to have done it in the chart's entire history, is just silly. Not that I expect Billboard to change something so much that it'd come as a clear hit against acts like BTS (considering their social media accounts have turned into K-Pop stan accounts for the sake of gaining clout and impressions), but obviously glaring cracks have formed in the system. Feels weird to see something that was once such a monumental, borderline-unachievable feat for most artists, become casually normal. Literally didn't know what "Franchise," "Trollz," or "Life Goes On" were until I looked on Wikipedia.

IDK. Am I sounding "old man yells at cloud"-ish here?

[neverduplicated]

I'm curious if anyone knows if there were any common tactics used to boost chart placements in the 60s, 70s, and 80s? I've heard about chart tactics since then, and of course this year more than ever, but is this really a new thing or has it just changed forms?

[lurker2]

Idk if it was common, but we know Billboard sometimes just made shit up (Shadow Dancing vs Baker Street).

[iHype.]

Dec 21, 2020 16:39:44 GMT -5 14887fan said:

IDK. Am I sounding "old man yells at cloud"-ish here?

Opposite lol... their formula is still giving too much weight to sales compared to streaming/radio, which is the root of pushing most of these #1 debuts to #1.

Maybe Billboard will make rule changes in 2021. 

[Gary]

Dec 21, 2020 16:36:07 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Dec 21, 2020 16:19:20 GMT -5 Gary said:

Wasn't trying to argue anything actually

The point of my post was to point out people still download songs if there is enough interest in the song.

 But even for Taylor it's beyond a far decline now. A lead single with 5 versions and $0.39 pricing at one point, only doing 55k first week.

She used to sell like 300k first-week with promotional tracks that had absolutely no promotion.

Also if you take out the mass-buying I can't even imagine the Willow number. I think the days of digital singles (outside of abusing a Hot 100 #1 peak) for everyone are gone. Blinding Lights having 6 months at #1 on radio this year and struggling to pass 500k is the biggest shock to me. We may practically never another released song go Gold in pure digital sales if Billboard makes rules against mass-buying.

Maybe it will help if I post this again. What about my original post goes against any point you are making? I said streaming is not quite 100% of the market yet. With the arguments you posted about sales being really low but still greater than zero - you agree streaming is not 100%, no?

Dec 21, 2020 16:10:30 GMT -5 Gary said:

From a market perspective, all the remixes being downloaded suggests to me that the digital single isn't quite dead yet and there is still a market for it. It is not really 100% streaming quite yet, people still buy stuff.

Whether or not sales completely fall to zero, I would have to point to vinyl sales, once upon a time vinyl was the primary means of music consumption, then it fell to insignificant numbers for a number of years but never zero, now it is rebounding.

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

We'll see how long the twelve songs debuting at #1 this year holds for.

[Deleted]

Dec 21, 2020 16:41:37 GMT -5 neverduplicated said:

I'm curious if anyone knows if there were any common tactics used to boost chart placements in the 60s, 70s, and 80s? I've heard about chart tactics since then, and of course this year more than ever, but is this really a new thing or has it just changed forms?

Before Soundscan (in 1991), it was very easy to manipulate the charts... except it wasn't the consumer doing it.. it was DJs, record store owners, etc. who reported the most played songs, best sellers, etc. but the highly sophisticated systems we have in place to measure these things now didn't exist.. so it was basically an honor system. Then there was that period in 1974 where I believe Billboard has been accused of manipulating the charts.. which is why there were so many steep drops from #1 in a short period of time. I'm sure someone else here can provide a more detailed historical perspective.

[neverduplicated]

For digital music to make a real comeback, it seems like streaming services would have to charge more or digital music would have to cost less. It seems to be a ripoff to buy a digital single or album these days, but maybe if all singles were priced at $0.39 and albums at $3.99, there could be a digital music resurgence. Even that might not be a good deal for a lot of consumers who like to listen to lots of different music. I'm not sure it's comparable to vinyl since there is something different about having a physical product. The tactile nature of vinyls, the large high-quality photographs, and the nostalgia factor all help vinyls, but I'm not sure digital music has any appeal like that.

[iHype.]

Dec 21, 2020 16:41:37 GMT -5 neverduplicated said:

I'm curious if anyone knows if there were any common tactics used to boost chart placements in the 60s, 70s, and 80s? I've heard about chart tactics since then, and of course this year more than ever, but is this really a new thing or has it just changed forms?

I think there was much less need to do tactics when there was no actual reporting of real sales/airplay.

I'm sure there was manipulation with stores/radios compiling their top lists, and submitting to them Billboard, which was how the charts were compiled. 

Less discounting/remixing a song, more sending gifts to managers instead to place a song higher than it actually was on their lists.

[gikem]

Dec 21, 2020 16:39:44 GMT -5 14887fan said:

It's an amazing feat for Taylor Swift, to have opened two completely original (and wonderful) albums and their lead singles at #1 in their same respective weeks. Bravo and props to her and her team.

Having said that....... the obvious and very manageable manipulation for Billboard Hot 100 #1 debuts over the last couple of years has been very frustrating to watch unfold. Seeing 12 songs do it in 2020 alone, when prior to the start of this year there were 35 songs to have done it in the chart's entire history, is just silly. Not that I expect Billboard to change something so much that it'd come as a clear hit against acts like BTS (considering their social media accounts have turned into K-Pop stan accounts for the sake of gaining clout and impressions), but obviously glaring cracks have formed in the system. Feels weird to see something that was once such a monumental, borderline-unachievable feat for most artists, become casually normal. Literally didn't know what "Franchise," "Trollz," or "Life Goes On" were until I looked on Wikipedia.

IDK. Am I sounding "old man yells at cloud"-ish here?

No, this is absolutely valid. The pandemic may be partially to blame, but I could see this coming when Billboard removed non-song UGC back in January. Songs from big-name artists that come out now, where the charts are weaker than normal, have an easier time gaming the system to debut as high as possible because record-low streaming numbers + gradual removal of UGC + sales manipulation that Billboard has barely addressed outside of bundles = constant #1 debuts.

[iHype.]

Dec 21, 2020 16:46:28 GMT -5 Gary said:

Dec 21, 2020 16:36:07 GMT -5 iHype. said:

 But even for Taylor it's beyond a far decline now. A lead single with 5 versions and $0.39 pricing at one point, only doing 55k first week.

She used to sell like 300k first-week with promotional tracks that had absolutely no promotion.

Also if you take out the mass-buying I can't even imagine the Willow number. I think the days of digital singles (outside of abusing a Hot 100 #1 peak) for everyone are gone. Blinding Lights having 6 months at #1 on radio this year and struggling to pass 500k is the biggest shock to me. We may practically never another released song go Gold in pure digital sales if Billboard makes rules against mass-buying.

Maybe it will help if I post this again. What about my original post goes against any point you are making? I said streaming is not quite 100% of the market yet. With the arguments you posted about sales being really low but still greater than zero - you agree streaming is not 100%, no?

Well yes... streaming will never be 100%, as long as 1 person in a population of over 330 million purchases some music every year....

As I said though, you like to just argue random semantics for the sake of doing so. You really had to explain to us that there's still a tiny population of buyers as if this isn't known?

[Verisimilitude]

Dec 21, 2020 16:26:45 GMT -5 iHype. said:

2020 Mid-Year Report:

TOP 10 DIGITAL SONG CONSUMPTION
1 “The Box” - 6.058 million (182k sales, 3% of total consumption)
2 “Life Is Good” - 4.248 million (145k sales, 3% of total consumption)
3 “Blinding Lights” - 3.748 million (372k sales, 10% of total consumption)
4 “Say So” - 2.677 million (217k sales, 8% of total consumption)
5."Dance Monkey” - 2.645 million (275k sales, 10% of total consumption)
6. “Savage” - 2.625 million (261k sales, 10% of total consumption)
7. "Don't Start Now” - 2.594 million (204k sales, 8% of total consumption)
8. "Circles” - 2.438 million (214k sales, 9% of total consumption)
9. “Rockstar” - 2.425 million (124k sales, 5% of total consumption)
10. “Roxanne” - 2.362 million (96k sales, 4% of total consumption)

And that's before they outruled the not-shipped-for-months bundles boosting some of these songs sales numbers lol. Let's see how lower sales are in the total consumption for hits a year from now.

Sales for songs are easily at early 2000s level at irrelevance. I think total digital sales will be the lowest since 2004.

Updated total consumption numbers since then from HDD/RIAA:

8.1M The Box
7.0M Life Is Good (RIAA)
6.6M Circles
6.1M Blinding Lights
5.2M Rockstar
4.1M Don't Start Now
4.1M Savage
4.0M Dance Monkey (RIAA)
4.0M Roxanne (RIAA)
3.8M Say So

[Gary]

Dec 21, 2020 17:01:09 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Dec 21, 2020 16:46:28 GMT -5 Gary said:

Maybe it will help if I post this again. What about my original post goes against any point you are making? I said streaming is not quite 100% of the market yet. With the arguments you posted about sales being really low but still greater than zero - you agree streaming is not 100%, no?

Well yes... streaming will never be 100%, as long as 1 person in a population of over 330 million purchases some music every year....

As I said though, you like to just argue random semantics for the sake of doing so. You really had to explain to us that there's still a tiny population of buyers as if this isn't known?

Ugh - You were arguing with me more like it. All I said was streaming is not 100% quite yet and there still seems to be a market for digital.

You seemed to want to pick that apart with facts and figures to say basically the same thing, which I wasn't understanding why you wanted to do that.



Since I agree with you and you agree with me, this seems to be wasted energy.

[HolidayGuy]

The nerve of one of the hottest acts of the last 15 years to release new music in December. That's a way to upset the apple cart- well, at least the one that was established last year. At least it made things interesting, if even for just a single week.

As for holiday songs- I think something may be done in the future. When that would be, I have no idea. Most of these songs aren't going to top what they've accomplished, in regard to peak position. And it becomes the same ol' song(s) each year.

[Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815...]

Dec 21, 2020 16:07:59 GMT -5 Choco said:

Tbh blocking Mariah next year is as easy as "BTS Xmas Single".

Imagine the mass buying.

Taylor did it this week and it wasn't even one of her strongest number one hits in terms of SPS.

Keep putting this shit into the universe....

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Or course there’s a market for digital just like there’s still a market for physical (cds and records), but it doesn’t take a genius to guess that the digital market as it is now exists primarily to be taken advantage of by stans using it to boost sales of their favs’ current singles. It’s a perfectly reasonable assumption to make, even if we don’t know for sure. The numbers are enough to suggest it.

I’d be curious to know how many people who currently buy digital singles also subscribe to a streaming site and/or use free streaming sites (YouTube or Spotify with ads) for most of their music consumption. Nearly all issues that arise on here with the Hot 100 are because of stan manipulation.

[HolidayGuy]

Even if overall sales are not robust like they once were, the vast majority, if not all, of, major releases are released to purchase as individual tracks. It's nothing like what the physical-singles market became, when most releases/his were not available to purchase. For that reason alone, Billboard will want to keep sales an important factor. Everyone has the option to market their releases however they please, as long as they fall in line with the rules. Now, if they want to make the criteria for singles at 69 cents, which is the lowest a track sells for on iTunes, that would be fine.

The Hot 100 and Billboard 200 measure the most popular track or album of the week, looking at various metrics. The long-term legs, or lack thereof, of such titles are not relevant to weekly peak positions. All-time, decade, etc. lists reflect such things.

RE the Billboard article- I don't see it as shade, really. Why shouldn't they mention the details of what went into the track hitting No. 1. Plus, Singles Spotlight would mention when a single was deeply discounted in the past, so why not now.

[kacpi]

Dec 21, 2020 16:46:04 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Maybe Billboard will make rule changes in 2021. 

I think we said that before 2019 ended  At this point Rihanna will release a new album sooner than Billboard makes these rule changes

[fridayteenage]

Dec 21, 2020 17:57:48 GMT -5 kacpi said:

Dec 21, 2020 16:46:04 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Maybe Billboard will make rule changes in 2021. 

I think we said that before 2019 ended  At this point Rihanna will release a new album sooner than Billboard makes these rule changes

Well, 2020 was the first (and more) time we had a one-week-T10 #1.

Dec 21, 2020 16:27:31 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Dec 21, 2020 13:03:20 GMT -5 👑 Eloquent ™ said:

So "Willow" sold 60k? Why was there a 44k estimate earlier? I wonder how much it sold before the last day (31hr) discounts?

Some sources don't count sales that are essentially free.

If it was 'essentially free,' it wouldn't count as sales.
Actually free, that would be streams.

[ificanthaveyou]

God I’m so relieved willow took it. Mariah girl, you can have the crown back next week. Thank you for not promoting harder 😂🙏🏽

[at40fansince1984]

Again Billboard's smelling those Taylor ass vapors!!

[ificanthaveyou]

Dec 21, 2020 16:27:31 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Dec 21, 2020 13:03:20 GMT -5 👑 Eloquent ™ said:

So "Willow" sold 60k? Why was there a 44k estimate earlier? I wonder how much it sold before the last day (31hr) discounts?

Some sources don't count sales that are essentially free.

Lol you’ve been the biggest hater this week. Hope willow at #1 is the coal in your stocking that you deserve!

[lurker2]

Dec 21, 2020 18:29:21 GMT -5 at40fansince1984 said:

Again Billboard's smelling those Taylor ass vapors!!

Damn bro, you got the whole squad laughing.

[renaboss]

Guys, super random and I do apologize, but I just realized Styles and Jadakiss were removed from the official YouTube video for "Jenny from the Block", does anyone know the reason for that? I tried looking in the comments for an explanation but nothing.

[firefox]

willow will definitely recover after the Christmas season

[at40fansince1984]

Dec 21, 2020 18:50:59 GMT -5 renaboss said:

Guys, super random and I do apologize, but I just realized Styles and Jadakiss were removed from the official YouTube video for "Jenny from the Block", does anyone know the reason for that? I tried looking in the comments for an explanation but nothing.

J'Lo realized they had more talent than her!