Did Billboard's Merch Bundle Ban go TOO Far? Discuss

[Koochie]

Hello, men. Let's review the carfax here. Let's look em over. Let's take a gander. Let's cop a peek. Let's get just a glimmer. Let's shed some light upon.

In July of 2020, Billboard issued an update that made merch bundles unviable for artists, thus worsening the overall economy of physical sales and forcing artists to resort to even more predatory, and dare I say tackier, practices (such as releasing bootleg Nike shoes) to promote their songs. As we can see from the numbers, the direct assault on physical purchases, putting products in the hands of consumers, while already horrible, dropped an APPALLING 23% in 2020. That is almost one fourth of a FULL (one hundred percent, 100%) loss. Couple this with the so-called "advantage" of more fair practices, which really only costs consumers MORE in the long run, and it makes producing physical copies of anything unviable. This rule change also homogeneously CRIPPLES the collectors industry, and their own submarket. How are we expected to purchase anything fairly, let alone make a profit?

Now onto real statistics. We're done with the baby math. This isn't your average high school trigonometry. Let me begin this segment by reiterating this piece of information from my earlier analyzation of Billboard's misdeeds: the physical production profit loss was ALMOST 1/4 of 100%. This, coupled with the lack of PR return should labels incentivize physical purchases is LUDICROUS. Assuming you ever live to see the scenario where you are able to successfully buy an album that comes bundled with ANYTHING of value, the fact that it won't even contribute to the overall success of your fav makes it WORTHLESS. The system is virtually broken now, for consumers and labels, and only hurts the industry overall!

(No need to compliment my skills of garnering evidence, stay on topic.)

I realize the complexity of this extrapolation on industry economics and egalitarian corruption may be a lot for many of you to take in, but onto more pressing matters.

There is a reason that the physical sale rate has gone down drastically since this "fair" rule change. Members of every group of the human race all over the world used to enjoy bundles because they got free stuff including, but not limited to: Asians, Europeans, Americans, Hispanics, and African Americans. So what do you think? Was this once amazing opportunity for labels and artists to offer MORE to their fans unjustly driven into to the ground? Why is Billboard gutting all of the best, most provocative aspects of the industry that we adore? If any of your opinions differ on the merit of my axiom, feel free to respond so I can explain to you why you are intellectually inferior and racist. Thank you.

[Limited Edition]

Lmao

[oliviafan101]

I don’t understand why they banned merch bundles without also not counting website sales. Oh yeah that’s right, corporate and capitalist shit.

[Koochie]

Apr 14, 2021 10:01:26 GMT -5 Limited Edition said:

Lmao

Is this the classist and nonsensical way of attempting to dismiss the facts I have spoon fed you?

[Koochie]

Apr 14, 2021 13:52:44 GMT -5 @bobpatience said:

This year to date US physical album sales are way up (10-15%) over the same period last year. But during this period last year merch bundles still counted and there were less covid restrictions.

Vinyl is currently selling so well that its growth is outpacing the diminishing sales of CDs and digital albums combined.

and it's costing consumers more, clearly you haven't studied the topic as well as I have but thankfully I am here to educate and enlighten 

[Deleted]

yes

[dovahduck]

I mean they can still do merch bundles if they really cared about the consumer. Nobody forced artists to get rid of them, although the Billboard charts are a way of showing success, one can also just look at how much profit an artist is making to see whether or not they're more successful than others. I honestly don't think they went too far and I agree with viewpoint of many that website sales (for digital products) should be banned from being accounted for in the charts.

[Lukas]

I think you're misinterpreting what the bundles rule changes actually ARE.

First, no one is "forcing" artists to not be able to do bundles. Artists can still do them, but Billboard won't count them. It's not Billboard's fault if artists get discouraged doing them because of that.

Also, Billboard charts are meant to track MUSIC chart consumption. Billboard banned bundles because of the whole Kenny Chesney vs. Drake fiasco about this time last year. So many people who buy bundles only buy them because of the merch item, and not because they actually want the music item. Do you think that the tour bundles Kenny Chesney did for his ultimately cancelled tour should've counted? I don't think so.

THE ONLY THING BILLBOARD BANNED LAST YEAR WAS BUYING A PHYSICAL ITEM AND A MERCH ITEM AT THE SAME TIME. IT IS STILL POSSIBLE TO DO BUNDLES TACTICS RIGHT NOW THAN IT WAS BACK THEN IF YOU ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BUY BOTH ITEMS SEPARATELY (like with Travis Scott with Franchise by offering discounts to people on the CD if they bought his merch).

Can you still buy a physical CD and a merch item? Absolutely. If you want. But if you only care about getting the merch item, it should count towards a chart that tracks the most sales from a particular merch item, and NOT a chart that tracks sales for MUSIC.

Apr 14, 2021 9:57:45 GMT -5 Koochie said:

There is a reason that the physical sale rate has gone down drastically since this "fair" rule change. Members of every group of the human race all over the world used to enjoy bundles because they got free stuff including, but not limited to: Asians, Europeans, Americans, Hispanics, and African Americans. So what do you think? Was this once amazing opportunity for labels and artists to offer MORE to their fans unjustly driven into to the ground? Why is Billboard gutting all of the best, most provocative aspects of the industry that we adore?

This is false. Billboard already REQUIRED, before the rule change, for artists to allow separate physical or merch items, and in ADDITION, the merch item + the physical item had to be worth at least DOUBLE the amount of the price of the physical item standalone to count. The ONLY thing Billboard took away was the option to buy both IN THE SAME PACKAGE. If anything, they even made the rules for buying both items even LESS STRICT because now the separate physical item can be ANY cost, rather than the required physical item price previously.

I'd rather not have another Kenny Chesney vs. Drake situation so I think this is fair. If you want people to buy your merch, go the route of Travis Scott or something. The Billboard charts are meant to represent the MOST consumed MUSIC each week by the PUBLIC. Just remember this.

Good day.

[Gary]

Yes Billboard didn't actually "ban" anything. Artists are free to sell their product however they want. Billboard does not have that much power, except what they count and not count in their product they put out.

[Koochie]

Apr 14, 2021 16:06:59 GMT -5 Lukas said:

I think you're misinterpreting what the bundles rule changes actually ARE.

First, no one is "forcing" artists to not be able to do bundles. Artists can still do them, but Billboard won't count them. It's not Billboard's fault if artists get discouraged doing them because of that.

Also, Billboard charts are meant to track MUSIC chart consumption. Billboard banned bundles because of the whole Kenny Chesney vs. Drake fiasco about this time last year. So many people who buy bundles only buy them because of the merch item, and not because they actually want the music item. Do you think that the tour bundles Kenny Chesney did for his ultimately cancelled tour should've counted? I don't think so.

THE ONLY THING BILLBOARD BANNED LAST YEAR WAS BUYING A PHYSICAL ITEM AND A MERCH ITEM AT THE SAME TIME. IT IS STILL POSSIBLE TO DO BUNDLES TACTICS RIGHT NOW THAN IT WAS BACK THEN IF YOU ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BUY BOTH ITEMS SEPARATELY (like with Travis Scott with Franchise by offering discounts to people on the CD if they bought his merch).

Can you still buy a physical CD and a merch item? Absolutely. If you want. But if you only care about getting the merch item, it should count towards a chart that tracks the most sales from a particular merch item, and NOT a chart that tracks sales for MUSIC.

Apr 14, 2021 9:57:45 GMT -5 Koochie said:

There is a reason that the physical sale rate has gone down drastically since this "fair" rule change. Members of every group of the human race all over the world used to enjoy bundles because they got free stuff including, but not limited to: Asians, Europeans, Americans, Hispanics, and African Americans. So what do you think? Was this once amazing opportunity for labels and artists to offer MORE to their fans unjustly driven into to the ground? Why is Billboard gutting all of the best, most provocative aspects of the industry that we adore?

This is false. Billboard already REQUIRED, before the rule change, for artists to allow separate physical or merch items, and in ADDITION, the merch item + the physical item had to be worth at least DOUBLE the amount of the price of the physical item standalone to count. The ONLY thing Billboard took away was the option to buy both IN THE SAME PACKAGE. If anything, they even made the rules for buying both items even LESS STRICT because now the separate physical item can be ANY cost, rather than the required physical item price previously.

I'd rather not have another Kenny Chesney vs. Drake situation so I think this is fair. If you want people to buy your merch, go the route of Travis Scott or something. The Billboard charts are meant to represent the MOST consumed MUSIC each week by the PUBLIC. Just remember this.

Good day.

clearly I’ve upset you with a superior argument that you do not agree with (not understand) which is why you’ve responded with salacious lies and misinformation. You are refuting facts... I would have provided further arguments but I didn’t want to overwhelm the public by obfuscating the optimal analysis presented herein.

[Deleted]

Yes

[dovahduck]

Apr 14, 2021 17:48:04 GMT -5 Koochie said:

Apr 14, 2021 16:06:59 GMT -5 Lukas said:

I think you're misinterpreting what the bundles rule changes actually ARE.

First, no one is "forcing" artists to not be able to do bundles. Artists can still do them, but Billboard won't count them. It's not Billboard's fault if artists get discouraged doing them because of that.

Also, Billboard charts are meant to track MUSIC chart consumption. Billboard banned bundles because of the whole Kenny Chesney vs. Drake fiasco about this time last year. So many people who buy bundles only buy them because of the merch item, and not because they actually want the music item. Do you think that the tour bundles Kenny Chesney did for his ultimately cancelled tour should've counted? I don't think so.

THE ONLY THING BILLBOARD BANNED LAST YEAR WAS BUYING A PHYSICAL ITEM AND A MERCH ITEM AT THE SAME TIME. IT IS STILL POSSIBLE TO DO BUNDLES TACTICS RIGHT NOW THAN IT WAS BACK THEN IF YOU ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BUY BOTH ITEMS SEPARATELY (like with Travis Scott with Franchise by offering discounts to people on the CD if they bought his merch).

Can you still buy a physical CD and a merch item? Absolutely. If you want. But if you only care about getting the merch item, it should count towards a chart that tracks the most sales from a particular merch item, and NOT a chart that tracks sales for MUSIC.

This is false. Billboard already REQUIRED, before the rule change, for artists to allow separate physical or merch items, and in ADDITION, the merch item + the physical item had to be worth at least DOUBLE the amount of the price of the physical item standalone to count. The ONLY thing Billboard took away was the option to buy both IN THE SAME PACKAGE. If anything, they even made the rules for buying both items even LESS STRICT because now the separate physical item can be ANY cost, rather than the required physical item price previously.

I'd rather not have another Kenny Chesney vs. Drake situation so I think this is fair. If you want people to buy your merch, go the route of Travis Scott or something. The Billboard charts are meant to represent the MOST consumed MUSIC each week by the PUBLIC. Just remember this.

Good day.

clearly I’ve upset you with a superior argument that you do not agree with (not understand) which is why you’ve responded with salacious lies and misinformation. You are refuting facts... I would have provided further arguments but I didn’t want to overwhelm the public by obfuscating the optimal analysis presented herein.

Looks like Ben Shapiro is in Pulse.

[Koochie]

Apr 14, 2021 19:14:19 GMT -5 dovahduck said:

Apr 14, 2021 17:48:04 GMT -5 Koochie said:

clearly I’ve upset you with a superior argument that you do not agree with (not understand) which is why you’ve responded with salacious lies and misinformation. You are refuting facts... I would have provided further arguments but I didn’t want to overwhelm the public by obfuscating the optimal analysis presented herein.

Looks like Ben Shapiro is in Pulse.

I did not come into this thread to be personally attacked like this

[oliviafan101]

Apr 14, 2021 19:14:19 GMT -5 dovahduck said:

Apr 14, 2021 17:48:04 GMT -5 Koochie said:

clearly I’ve upset you with a superior argument that you do not agree with (not understand) which is why you’ve responded with salacious lies and misinformation. You are refuting facts... I would have provided further arguments but I didn’t want to overwhelm the public by obfuscating the optimal analysis presented herein.

Looks like Ben Shapiro is in Pulse.

Ben Shapiro is based and funny /s

[jodakyellow]

The character work in this thread is A+ but the conversation itself is D-

[ificanthaveyou]

I’m really surprised that the labels didn’t all ban together to fight for bundles to be counted. I’m sure Billboard is unaffected either way, but bundles were pushing physical albums and offsetting the costs of promo. As the album dies so does the traditional singles campaign. So sad that the end is near.

[kimberly]

Apr 14, 2021 21:05:03 GMT -5 oliviafan101 said:

Apr 14, 2021 19:14:19 GMT -5 dovahduck said:

Looks like Ben Shapiro is in Pulse.

Ben Shapiro is based and funny /s

Ben Shapiro can only be based by accident I don't make the rules

[phieaglesfan712]

Apr 14, 2021 16:06:59 GMT -5 Lukas said:

I'd rather not have another Kenny Chesney vs. Drake situation so I think this is fair. If you want people to buy your merch, go the route of Travis Scott or something. The Billboard charts are meant to represent the MOST consumed MUSIC each week by the PUBLIC. Just remember this.

Good day.

I thought Kenny Chesney pulling the upset over Drake was one of the best things to happen on the Billboard charts in 2020. (I know Drake fans will disagree, but most people love an upset unless its happening to their favorite.) An upset like this shows that anything can happen on the charts, and that creates intrigue. These charts would be so boring if the bluebloods like Drake and Taylor went to #1 every time they released an album.

[divasummer]

This is kind of OT but slightly On topic I guess.
Years ago Billboard wouldn't allow store exclusives to be eligible to count towards the Billboard 200.
I think there were some Garth Brooks albums and maybe a rock artists who sold the most during tracking weeks but weren't counted towards the charts.
I "think" The Eagles changed that and they were allowed to chart and Britney's "Blackout" came out at num.2 .
Britney fans were not very happy but the sales weren't even close.

[Deleted]

I concur.

[thegreatdivine]

Apr 15, 2021 7:34:11 GMT -5 phieaglesfan712 said:

Apr 14, 2021 16:06:59 GMT -5 Lukas said:

I'd rather not have another Kenny Chesney vs. Drake situation so I think this is fair. If you want people to buy your merch, go the route of Travis Scott or something. The Billboard charts are meant to represent the MOST consumed MUSIC each week by the PUBLIC. Just remember this.

Good day.

I thought Kenny Chesney pulling the upset over Drake was one of the best things to happen on the Billboard charts in 2020. (I know Drake fans will disagree, but most people love an upset unless its happening to their favorite.) An upset like this shows that anything can happen on the charts, and that creates intrigue. These charts would be so boring if the bluebloods like Drake and Taylor went to #1 every time they released an album.

This comes across as very dumb to me considering the fact that Billboard's charts are meant to reflect MUSIC CONSUMPTION. Many older acts managed to use tour bundles to get their albums to debut high but those albums always experienced a huge drop in the following weeks because they were never actually being consumed by anyone. Kenny Chesney used tour bundles to boost his numbers and cancelled the tour right after the Billboard 200 numbers for his album came in so tour bundles counted for a tour that still hasn't happened and he charted over the actual project that was the most consumed of the week.

The Kenny Chesney album that debuted at #1 had this as it's chart run:
1-38-83-120-102-123-125-148-151-137-OUT

It's his worst-performing album on the Billboard 200 and it only charted for 10 weeks.

In a way, I'm glad it debuted at #1 because it exposed just how much of a joke Billboard's charts were becoming because of bundles and the way artists were abusing it for their own benefit. It also brought a lot of negative press to Billboard. The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal are just a few of the publications that wrote about it and that only happened because Drake is such a popular figure in music. When I saw that, I knew Billboard would be making changes as soon as they could.

In my opinion, bundles should have never counted towards any of Billboard's charts. Yes, artists can sell as much merchandise as they want to fans. They can continue to use bundles but in no way should they have ever counted towards the total consumption tally of any chart week. I'm glad they addressed that.

[Koochie]

Apr 15, 2021 9:20:38 GMT -5 divasummer said:

This is kind of OT but slightly On topic I guess.
Years ago Billboard wouldn't allow store exclusives to be eligible to count towards the Billboard 200.
I think there were some Garth Brooks albums and maybe a rock artists who sold the most during tracking weeks but weren't counted towards the charts.
I "think" The Eagles changed that and they were allowed to chart and Britney's "Blackout" came out at num.2 .
Britney fans were not very happy but the sales weren't even close.

This was not the same rule change, and it's implementation was sexist. I'm surprised Billboard wasn't held accountable for this either, but it appears people are willing to overlook these egregious grievances if it conveniences the narrative. Sad.

[Gary]

Rather than comment on that I will just provide this link for those who want to relive the Pulse discussion back in the day when that happened

pulsemusic.proboards.com/thread/53698

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

Removing the bundling rule made sense for me when the chart was based only on sales. But when streaming is added to the mix, free streams contributed to the album chart so it makes less sense to me to remove something that contributes to determining an artist’s album popularity over a dollar amount/bundles while allowing free streams to count.

[HolidayGuy]

Merchandise bundles were a bit more iffy than album redemptions, the latter for which consumers had to take action to obtain a copy of the album. And, per Billboard, album-redemption rates, in general, were not high, with some acts faring better than others. Kenny Chesney, by the way, was not the only act who benefited from album redemptions, tied to a tour that was canceled after the redemptions occurred.

In any event, all acts had the opportunity to have merch bundles with a new album release, as well as album redemptions if they opted to tour. Which brings this question: have any acts releasing new albums in recent months sold merchandise that had the option to add the album to the purchase? That kind of transaction would count for the charts.