Well considering the guardian reckons 60k is just 60k people listening are they really a legitimate source here

The Guardian is a reliable source, yes.

There's a whole thread for this kind of discussion

A reliable source that cant even get a basic fact correct and with that, its the last ill say on it

2 hours ago, JosephStyles said:

I'd be gobsmacked if Choosin' Texas became a long-running #1 here, we'd have to have an even drier period than we're in given it doesn't seem to be making major progress upwards. If it did get there, it'd be because Rein Me In and Dai Dai go to ACR and it's stayed ahead of the rest, but for a long-running #1 to happen on sub-30k sales would require an extreme dry period.

It's surprised me by making steady progress for so long, so you never know, but last week it was only a couple of thousand sales above where it was when it first entered the top 10 at #9.

What is left for Q4?

Maybe Taylor Swift- Debut Taylor's Version

Maaaaaaaybeee Beyonce's Part III although that is looking more like next year now.

Obviously there is stuff unreleased that we cant anticipate and viral hits but 2026 looks lean

3 hours ago, 777666jason said:

Well considering the guardian reckons 60k is just 60k people listening are they really a legitimate source here

Aha! I’m glad I’m not the only person who spotted that. I saw that on Facebook and made a comment. Ridiculous!

That article is yearning for yesteryear with mentions of TOTP, The Chart Show etc., - music focused TV has long gone.

The world has moved on, many chart followers still live in 1994 it seems.

The article makes some fair points and generally The Guardian is a reliable source but it definitely is undermined by that 60k error. I hope they correct that because it makes the numbers sound way more pitiful than reality. Readers will think 1 stream is equivalent to 1 download.

7 hours ago, ___∆___ said:

So a song can only go to #1 in one country?

Of course not. If its really good it should go to many , if its average one country is enough 😂

58 minutes ago, gooddelta said:

The article makes some fair points and generally The Guardian is a reliable source but it definitely is undermined by that 60k error. I hope they correct that because it makes the numbers sound way more pitiful than reality. Readers will think 1 stream is equivalent to 1 download.

Well exactly, I feel like everyone is totally disregarding the whole article because of one error and because they want any excuse to act like the article is nonsense. In reality the chart rules are so convoluted and have such little relevance in culture anymore that it’s no surprise journalists can’t get their heads around the rules, we barely can!