Billboard Hot 100: 04/17/2021

[CF15]

"Leave the Door Open" could actually get that #1 this week? Please, let it happen! It really does seem like Bruno's team knows what they're doing!

[firefox]

Let's go LTDO! I wonder if Silk Sonic release their album, will the "Bruno Mars, Anderson.Paak" be in the artist tag in Spotify? Lol

[iHype.]

Apr 12, 2021 10:16:55 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Not saying this is what Bruno did, but do we think strategically timing the shipment of CD singles will be the new method of chart manipulation hitting #1? Or is it already?

Where were you in 2020? It already was lol.

They released a dozen different Vinyls, CDs, etc first week to debut #1 when they weren't even required to ship to count. Bad Guy/Circles/Watermelon Sugar/AIWFCIY/Savage/etc also used the tactic to reach #1 outside their debut weeks.

Now that shipping is required for them to count it happens less though, but it still happens. They just have to be more strategic with it and can usually only offer 1-2 versions, and not 20+ versions. 

Franchise/Holy/UP/etc all had CD singles sold during their first week that shipped that same week so they could count if I'm not mistaken.

[Taylor.]

Apr 12, 2021 10:33:52 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:16:55 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Not saying this is what Bruno did, but do we think strategically timing the shipment of CD singles will be the new method of chart manipulation hitting #1? Or is it already?

Where were you in 2020? It already was lol.

They released a dozen different Vinyls, CDs, etc first week to debut #1 when they weren't even required to ship to count. Bad Guy/Circles/Watermelon Sugar/AIWFCIY/Savage/etc also used the tactic to reach #1 outside their debut weeks.

Now that shipping is required for them to count it happens less though, but it still happens. They just have to be more strategic with it and can usually only offer 1-2 versions, and not 20+ versions. 

Franchise/Holy/UP/etc all had CD singles sold during their first week that shipped that same week so they could count if I'm not mistaken.

I meant specifically delaying the shipment of singles to maximize points in one week now that they don't count until they ship. Even if they're ready for shipment earlier, shipping them all out at once to push for #1 in a certain week.

Kind of like when labels would withhold making songs digitally available on iTunes until they were already huge on radio.

[Groovy]

Apr 12, 2021 10:07:05 GMT -5 chingaling said:

Apr 12, 2021 9:50:50 GMT -5 Groovy said:

2006 was also another weak year for the charts but I wouldn't say the hits were forgettable, some of the acts might be like Daniel Powter, James Blunt, Chamillionaire, etc but not the hits, there was Temperature, Promiscuous, Hips Don't Lie, Sexyback, SOS, etc. Definitely wouldn't call it forgettable.

It's all result of personal taste, perspective and your age. Probably you will remember and enjoy most hits of your teenage years. For instance, you said 1990 and 1991 were horrible years and the hits were mostly forgotten. Probably somebody who was 15 years old in 1990 has a very different point of view.
Some of my all time favorite songs are from 1990... such as "Nothing compares 2U", "Enjoy the silence" and "Vision of love". Madonna was at the top of the world with one of her all time classics, "Vogue". Janet was breaking ground with the RN era. Brand new styles appeared such as trip-hop with Massive Attack. Rap became mainstream. I know, MC Hammer and Vanilla Ice didn't survive after that, but it was the stepping stone. 
I agree those were transitional years, too modern to be 80s and too vintage to be properly 90s (1989/1991 era was a fundamental period for music to prepare the field for the arrival of grunge, modern electronic music and gansta rap to the mainstream.

I didn't say that, I said 1991 was the worst year in the 90s but I didn't give a real reason as to why I believe this and 1990 was a mediocre year. 

[iHype.]

Apr 12, 2021 10:35:37 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:33:52 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Where were you in 2020? It already was lol.

They released a dozen different Vinyls, CDs, etc first week to debut #1 when they weren't even required to ship to count. Bad Guy/Circles/Watermelon Sugar/AIWFCIY/Savage/etc also used the tactic to reach #1 outside their debut weeks.

Now that shipping is required for them to count it happens less though, but it still happens. They just have to be more strategic with it and can usually only offer 1-2 versions, and not 20+ versions. 

Franchise/Holy/UP/etc all had CD singles sold during their first week that shipped that same week so they could count if I'm not mistaken.

I meant specifically delaying the shipment of singles to maximize points in one week now that they don't count until they ship. Even if they're ready for shipment earlier, shipping them all out at once to push for #1 in a certain week.

They weren’t delayed though? This is the first week “Leave the Door Open” physical singles were available. Last week a few days before the tracking week began they went up for pre-order with the message they’d begin shipping next week.

It’s not like they were selling them since release and only decided to ship this week.

[Taylor.]

Apr 12, 2021 10:37:51 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:35:37 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

I meant specifically delaying the shipment of singles to maximize points in one week now that they don't count until they ship. Even if they're ready for shipment earlier, shipping them all out at once to push for #1 in a certain week.

They weren’t delayed though? This is the first week “Leave the Door Open” physical singles were available. Last week a few days before the tracking week began they went up for pre-order with the message they’d begin shipping next week.

It’s not like they were selling them since release and only decided to ship this week.

I said that's not necessarily what Bruno did, I'm just speculating about future tactics that labels could utilize.

[fhas]

Apr 12, 2021 10:16:55 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Not saying this is what Bruno did, but do we think strategically timing the shipment of CD singles will be the new method of chart manipulation hitting #1? Or is it already?

Yes, it's a new method of chart manipulation. I think it's the first or second song to do this since the bundles change - selling CDs in its first week and timing the shipment weeks/months later when it has a chance to hit #1. Franchise had its sales and shipment in the same week (58K physical copies).

Those ~15K CDs/digital sales via website will be more than enough to nullify any streaming that Montero had in its advantage on YouTube (15K sales = ~5.6M YouTube streams). Now it's just radio vs. audio streams.

Another reason why website sales should be removed from the Hot 100.

[iHype.]

Apr 12, 2021 10:39:15 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:37:51 GMT -5 iHype. said:

They weren’t delayed though? This is the first week “Leave the Door Open” physical singles were available. Last week a few days before the tracking week began they went up for pre-order with the message they’d begin shipping next week.

It’s not like they were selling them since release and only decided to ship this week.

I said that's not what Bruno did, I'm just speculating about future tactics that labels could utilize.

I suppose they could sell physical singles for a long period and hold out on shipping any until a specific week when they best believe a song could go #1.

The problem with that is though a label doesn’t have any clue into the future about how stable a song will be nor what numbers competition will be pulling. That would probably be executed wrong majority of the time.

If Travis & his team decided not to ship out any “Franchise” physical singles first week because they wanted to go #1 later on for example that would’ve been useless as the song was out the Top 40 just two weeks later and never returned. They would’ve just lowered the peak of the song as the best chance was first week.

[gikem]

Weren't there a lot of people predicting TROLLZ would return to the Hot 100 the week of the album release because the physical copies were supposed to ship then, but that never ended up happening?

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Apr 12, 2021 10:33:52 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:16:55 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Not saying this is what Bruno did, but do we think strategically timing the shipment of CD singles will be the new method of chart manipulation hitting #1? Or is it already?

Where were you in 2020? It already was lol.

They released a dozen different Vinyls, CDs, etc first week to debut #1 when they weren't even required to ship to count. Bad Guy/Circles/Watermelon Sugar/AIWFCIY/Savage/etc also used the tactic to reach #1 outside their debut weeks.

Now that shipping is required for them to count it happens less though, but it still happens. They just have to be more strategic with it and can usually only offer 1-2 versions, and not 20+ versions. 

Franchise/Holy/UP/etc all had CD singles sold during their first week that shipped that same week so they could count if I'm not mistaken.

In 2020, the numbers were still relatively consumer driven (although I suppose the timing around when they were made available is definitely worth questioning) even if the singles themselves didn’t ship for weeks or months later. By waiting for shipping to happen, it shifts control back to the label so it’s more out of the hands of consumers. I’d say this is as bad as, if not worse than mass stans organizing repetitive buying campaigns as far as chart manipulation goes.

[atg]

Apr 12, 2021 0:41:20 GMT -5 dann said:

Apr 12, 2021 0:21:09 GMT -5 mgkjn11 said:

I wonder how Lil Nas X is gonna feel now if Montero only spends one week at number one. He did all the controversy just to have one week at number one. He’s lost a lot of public support with his antics and now this will be the nail in the coffin. Hope it was worth it for him. The stan culture population is 100x smaller than the general public. Twitter is the complete opposite of real life don’t y’all forget.

I will never understand the impetus that some here at Pulse have on the end of his career. Each release is the same, "this will be the end of he", but he remains here. He may not stay at #1 in the US this week, but streams and sales have remained stable and growing worldwide, which is much better.

If i was doing better internationally compared to the US, i wouldn’t complain at all. People actually forget that there’s an outside world, and not everything is centered around the US, even though its the biggest market for music. Lil Nas is just sitting comfortably in the devil’s chair not worrying about anything. I think a #1 internationally holds way more of an effect than just a local #1 anyways, so if his career fades out in the US, it’s not a big deal as y’all claim it to be.

[iHype.]

Apr 12, 2021 10:48:14 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:33:52 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Where were you in 2020? It already was lol.

They released a dozen different Vinyls, CDs, etc first week to debut #1 when they weren't even required to ship to count. Bad Guy/Circles/Watermelon Sugar/AIWFCIY/Savage/etc also used the tactic to reach #1 outside their debut weeks.

Now that shipping is required for them to count it happens less though, but it still happens. They just have to be more strategic with it and can usually only offer 1-2 versions, and not 20+ versions. 

Franchise/Holy/UP/etc all had CD singles sold during their first week that shipped that same week so they could count if I'm not mistaken.

In 2020, the numbers were still relatively consumer driven (although I suppose the timing around when they were made available is definitely worth questioning) even if the singles themselves didn’t ship for weeks or months later. By waiting for shipping to happen, it shifts control back to the label so it’s more out of the hands of consumers. I’d say this is as bad as, if not worse than mass stans organizing repetitive buying campaigns as far as chart manipulation goes.

Absolutely not.

Not requiring shipping put the ultimate control in the hands of a label.

You could sell 258 different versions of a CD single to stans willing to buy each, and then not ever plan on shipping because it was already counted. Labels did not have to actually fulfill the duty of giving the product. That was ULTIMATE control of label manipulation.

Labels actually now have to specifically have a plan to give them what they are paying for. A label attempting to hold out on shipments until a specific week 5-10 weeks down the line as I said would not really be smart because you cannot predict how stable a song will be by then nor what the competition will be. It'd be a hard trick for a label to actually pull off.

[CF15]

Apr 12, 2021 10:40:20 GMT -5 fhas said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:16:55 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Not saying this is what Bruno did, but do we think strategically timing the shipment of CD singles will be the new method of chart manipulation hitting #1? Or is it already?

Yes, it's a new method of chart manipulation. I think it's the first or second song to do this since the bundles change - selling CDs in its first week and timing the shipment weeks/months later when it has a chance to hit #1. Franchise had its sales and shipment in the same week (58K physical copies).

Those ~15K CDs/digital sales via website will be more than enough to nullify any streaming that Montero had in its advantage on YouTube (15K sales = ~5.6M YouTube streams). Now it's just radio vs. audio streams.

Another reason why website sales should be removed from the Hot 100.

It is called strategy, lol. It is, after all, the team's choice of when they want to release the singles. This has always been something that is done. It's not like they're recalling every sold copy and making the fans buy it multiple times. They're just releasing it at the optimal time. They can release it whenever they want to. I don't see anything unethical about this, regardless of who is doing it. It's not like re-purchasing something you already have that does not bring you any benefit just to steal records from someone that actually earned it, like a certain group with way too much money and free time on their hands has been doing...

[Groovy]

Apr 12, 2021 10:18:15 GMT -5 gikem said:

Apr 12, 2021 9:50:50 GMT -5 Groovy said:

2006 was also another weak year for the charts but I wouldn't say the hits were forgettable, some of the acts might be like Daniel Powter, James Blunt, Chamillionaire, etc but not the hits, there was Temperature, Promiscuous, Hips Don't Lie, Sexyback, SOS, etc. Definitely wouldn't call it forgettable.

2005/2006 is kind of a reverse 1990/1991 for me. 2005 has the better overall good songs and the worse overall bad songs, but 2006 has more bad songs and less memorable good ones. In both cases, the two years back-to-back are probably the weakest of their respective decades, IMO.

To me, 2006 is the worst year for the charts in the 2000s, the only years 2005 is far better than is 2006 and maybe 2008 so it's not that far behind. 

[Amnesiac]

Apr 12, 2021 10:33:52 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:16:55 GMT -5 Taylor. said:

Not saying this is what Bruno did, but do we think strategically timing the shipment of CD singles will be the new method of chart manipulation hitting #1? Or is it already?

Where were you in 2020? It already was lol.

They released a dozen different Vinyls, CDs, etc first week to debut #1 when they weren't even required to ship to count. Bad Guy/Circles/Watermelon Sugar/AIWFCIY/Savage/etc also used the tactic to reach #1 outside their debut weeks.

Now that shipping is required for them to count it happens less though, but it still happens. They just have to be more strategic with it and can usually only offer 1-2 versions, and not 20+ versions. 

Franchise/Holy/UP/etc all had CD singles sold during their first week that shipped that same week so they could count if I'm not mistaken.

There is also historical precedence for this, too. In the '90s when the major labels were trying to kill the CD single (leading to some of the biggest hits of the decade being ineligible to chart on the Hot 100 because they had no physical single release), they would sometimes release songs as physical singles right at their peak to ensure a high "debut" on the Hot 100. "Sunny Came Home" by Shawn Colvin, for instance, "debuted" at #8 on the Hot 100 in July 1997 and peaked at #7 a few weeks later, but it had been all over radio for months at that point. Around the same time it peaked on the Hot 100, it was the #1 song on radio and had been on the Radio Songs chart for 18 weeks. If the rules that were in place now were then, it would have probably been a Top 3 hit instead of #7.

[goldentakes]

I'm glad LTDO open might snag the top spot, such a great song. Although I do find it interesting that I haven't seen anyone here criticize the Radio push, CD sales, or Itunes discount like they did with so many songs last year......seems like nobody minds when it's an artist that we all collectively enjoy lol. But nonetheless, I'm just glad it's doing well.

[Groovy]

Spotify finally update their charts and whoever made that comment Taylor Swift comment was somewhat right.

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

In case anybody was wondering why Dynamite's music video views surged suddenly on YouTube, it was to get it to one billion of views there.

[CF15]

Wait, why is "Sweater Weather" so high on the Spotify chart more than seven years later?

[iHype.]

Apr 12, 2021 11:21:09 GMT -5 CF15 said:

Wait, why is "Sweater Weather" so high on the Spotify chart more than seven years later?

The reason any other years old song is randomly high these days.

[CF15]

Apr 12, 2021 11:22:54 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 11:21:09 GMT -5 CF15 said:

Wait, why is "Sweater Weather" so high on the Spotify chart more than seven years later?

The reason any other years old song is randomly high these days.

Makes sense, lol.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Apr 12, 2021 10:56:59 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:48:14 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

In 2020, the numbers were still relatively consumer driven (although I suppose the timing around when they were made available is definitely worth questioning) even if the singles themselves didn’t ship for weeks or months later. By waiting for shipping to happen, it shifts control back to the label so it’s more out of the hands of consumers. I’d say this is as bad as, if not worse than mass stans organizing repetitive buying campaigns as far as chart manipulation goes.

Absolutely not.

Not requiring shipping put the ultimate control in the hands of a label.

You could sell 258 different versions of a CD single to stans willing to buy each, and then not ever plan on shipping because it was already counted. Labels did not have to actually fulfill the duty of giving the product. That was ULTIMATE control of label manipulation.

Isn’t there a word for that even beyond chart discussion? Theft? Fraud? If you pay for a service or product and never get it, that’s a completely different issue.

Maybe the solution is not allowing website sales to count as many others have brought up. Maybe it’s counting them only if an item is shipped within 5 business days from purchase (or date of availability in the case of pre-orders). That way, demand aligns with what ultimately is counted for the chart. Otherwise, if a bunch of people order a single in one week (the week demand is there) And it ships 8 months later when everyone and their dog and AC radio has moved on, there’s zero reason is should be counted toward the chart there.

There are ways around this pending issue and Billboard should be ready to address it if it becomes an issue.

[iHype.]

Apr 12, 2021 11:33:03 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Apr 12, 2021 10:56:59 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Absolutely not.

Not requiring shipping put the ultimate control in the hands of a label.

You could sell 258 different versions of a CD single to stans willing to buy each, and then not ever plan on shipping because it was already counted. Labels did not have to actually fulfill the duty of giving the product. That was ULTIMATE control of label manipulation.

Isn’t there a word for that even beyond chart discussion? Theft? Fraud? If you pay for a service or product and never get it, that’s a completely different issue.

Maybe the solution is not allowing website sales to count as many others have brought up. Maybe it’s counting them only if an item is shipped within 5 business days from purchase (or date of availability in the case of pre-orders). That way, demand aligns with what ultimately is counted for the chart. Otherwise, if a bunch of people order a single in one week (the week demand is there) And it ships 8 months later when everyone and their dog and AC radio has moved on, there’s zero reason is should be counted toward the chart there.

There are ways around this pending issue and Billboard should be ready to address it if it becomes an issue.

They could cancel the orders, refund the money. However if this occurred after the charts were released then obviously it'd have been too late for Billboard to account for the fact these 'sales' never ended up really happening.

This is what was happening with tour bundles. All those 'sales' counted of tickets that came with albums, only for COVID to ravage the entire touring industry, and have tickets fully refunded with tours cancelled. 

"And it ships 8 months later when everyone and their dog and AC radio has moved on, there’s zero reason is should be counted toward the chart there."

This is what was happening BEFORE lmao. People were not receiving those physical singles until months after because Billboard didn't require shipping to happen. I received my signed Weeknd "Heartless" CD single 6 months after ordering, when it had already left the Hot 100 altogether.

The new rule has prevented those instances. As said... what would be the point of specifically delaying something to count 8 months later now. You can't even predict where the charts will be and where that song will be to make it worth the hassle. 

[renfield75]

Apr 12, 2021 11:38:36 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 11:33:03 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Isn’t there a word for that even beyond chart discussion? Theft? Fraud? If you pay for a service or product and never get it, that’s a completely different issue.

Maybe the solution is not allowing website sales to count as many others have brought up. Maybe it’s counting them only if an item is shipped within 5 business days from purchase (or date of availability in the case of pre-orders). That way, demand aligns with what ultimately is counted for the chart. Otherwise, if a bunch of people order a single in one week (the week demand is there) And it ships 8 months later when everyone and their dog and AC radio has moved on, there’s zero reason is should be counted toward the chart there.

There are ways around this pending issue and Billboard should be ready to address it if it becomes an issue.

They could cancel the orders, refund the money. However if this occurred after the charts were released then obviously it'd have been too late for Billboard to account for the fact these 'sales' never ended up really happening.

This is what was happening with tour bundles. All those 'sales' counted of tickets that came with albums, only for COVID to ravage the entire touring industry, and have tickets fully refunded with tours cancelled. 

"And it ships 8 months later when everyone and their dog and AC radio has moved on, there’s zero reason is should be counted toward the chart there."

This is what was happening BEFORE lmao. People were not receiving those physical singles until months after because Billboard didn't require shipping to happen. I received my signed Weeknd "Heartless" CD single 6 months after ordering, when it had already left the Hot 100 altogether.

The new rule has prevented those instances. As said... what would be the point of specifically delaying something to count 8 months later now. You can't even predict where the charts will be and where that song will be to make it worth the hassle. 

It would be weird if a song sold enough to make a return once the CDs shipped. Say "Franchise" debuted at number 15 without the web sales, then dropped off two weeks later. 6 months after that the CDs ship and it re-enters at number 17 for one week. It would be kinda like that Bon Jovi album re-entering the Billboard 200 at number 1 when the tour bundles kicked in, then breaking its own "biggest fall from number one" record the following week. The Hot 100 would be a total mess with flash-in-the-pan songs re-entering for one week months after they had disappeared. There's no incentive for labels to do that but it could conceivably happen.

[Enigma.]

Apr 12, 2021 11:22:54 GMT -5 iHype. said:

Apr 12, 2021 11:21:09 GMT -5 CF15 said:

Wait, why is "Sweater Weather" so high on the Spotify chart more than seven years later?

The reason any other years old song is randomly high these days.

Any other song EXCEPT that one :(

[dremolus - solarpunk]

[korbel16]

All number 1 top 5!

[Deleted]

so if rapstar goes #1 next week.. that’s 6 new no. 1’s in 6 weeks like last year, woah

[areyoureadytojump]