^^I doubt the Bowie track is chart eligible - It's a track you get with the pre-order of the album which is #3 already on the album chart. This is the same situation as the Rolling Stones track.

Yeah I just noticed that too, booooo. Then again maybe it'll be on the Big Top 40 :kink:

Finally 53 - Frank Ocean - Lost, Really hope this becomes a hit and the album gets a surge in sales.

 

YES. :cheer:

Yeah I just noticed that too, booooo. Then again maybe it'll be on the Big Top 40 :kink:

Surely it'll be well out of the top 10 by tonight, so it won't be anywhere near top 40 come Sunday? :lol:

 

Just gave the Bowie track a listen, I can't say I'm a fan tbh. So dull.

Bowie is already top 3...

The Bowie track is so beautiful it makes me cry towards the end.

Emeli Sandé up to 40

Vato Gonzalez up to 47

Matrix & Futurebound up to 65

Conor Maynard up to 78

 

David Bowie #2

 

Animal #75

Diamonds #11

Wow cant belive Bowie is as high as no3 already, gutted he wont be able to chart!!

David Bowie #2

 

INSANE. I don't think an album pre-order single has ever got this high before (where did Coldplay get to?) They really need to look at changing the rules for album pre-order tracks, this is clearly a hit record that no-one will ever hear on the radio :(

If Bowie were to sell enough to make #1 this week there would be uproar, I could see the OCC scrapping its dodgy pre-order rule.

The only thing I don't get is why they find it so hard to differentiate from the people ordering the album and getting the track that way, from the people who just want that one track. :lol:

 

Ah well. I'll be surprised if Bowie is this high at the end of the day.

Arrs agog at the fact that Bowie won't be chart eligible! Sometimes OCC surprise me with their arrogance. They know this problem for a long while and do nothing with it when there clearly IS a solution (see US charts which somehow deal with it).

 

I won't say I'm a huge fan of Bowie and of his new song but as a chart geek I'm bothered that the charts won't be representative once more again.

The only thing I don't get is why they find it so hard to differentiate from the people ordering the album and getting the track that way, from the people who just want that one track. :lol:

 

I remember them giving a sales figure for Paradise for what it sold during the pre-order stage, so I think they can do it.

I remember them giving a sales figure for Paradise for what it sold during the pre-order stage, so I think they can do it.

I know. But is it really hard for them to split them seperately straight away so that it IS eligible to chart?

I know. But is it really hard for them to split them seperately straight away so that it IS eligible to chart?

It's more likely that they just don't care, neither do the record labels that might have an influence on them.

Edited January 8, 201312 yr by Arrs

David Bowie and Bon Jovi both inside the Top 10!?! :hithead: :blink:

At least we can safely assume David Bowie is a dead cert for #1 with his album when it's released in March. :P He's number 1 on the albums chart already.

 

But yeah, who'd have thought this time last week we'd have both Bon Jovi and David Bowie simultaneously in the iTunes top 10 together? :lol: (Well, at all, but together is even weirder! Lol). Nice that veteran acts can still get a hit now with some new stuff though!

 

EDIT: If you're a Of Monsters & Men fan, you'll probably like the "iTunes single of the week" this week by Milo Greene. It's quite nice to listen to actually.

Ha at Bowie and Bon Jovi top ten, what happened there :o Bowie for #1, Scream & Shout to do a Moves Like Jagger? :o