1 hour ago, Mr. C. Joel said:

Any other artist can do exactly the same though and have done. So how is it manipulation?

BTS release like 18 versions of the same song and have drip fed remixes / versions that let’s be honest are pointless and it’s only hardcore fans buying them.

Your answer is totally irrelevant with what me and others are saying about the shipping tactics. And lets not talk about different versions of songs or albums for TS, she is doing the best fan milking in the business., which is her biggest talent by the way.

1 hour ago, nikos said:

She was the first to do it as much and she is the one that does it all the time, dont compare her with the rest..

Cd singles with different covers are not a new concept, heck bands were doing the individual member covers before the turn of the millennium

2 minutes ago, nikos said:

Your answer is totally irrelevant with what me and others are saying about the shipping tactics. And lets not talk about different versions of songs or albums for TS, she is doing the best fan milking in the business., which is her biggest talent by the way.

Ellie goulding and Sam smith had loads of variants of their albums fans didnt buy them but they existed,

I mean Taylor is not sitting there each week rubbing her hands personally thinking how do I snatch the #1 from those cretin British bands is she. It's all EMI execs wanting to line their pockets.

4 hours ago, Mr. C. Joel said:

Just FYI you can't manipulate the chart when the rules are the same for everyone...

Not everybody has the same support from their company, the money, nor the fan base to support that, so no its not the same. Unless you believe all the copies from the variations are bought from indvidual fans

47 minutes ago, nikos said:

Not everybody has the same support from their company, the money, nor the fan base to support that, so no its not the same. Unless you believe all the copies from the variations are bought from indvidual fans

I refer you to Lewis’ very useful comment below:

48 minutes ago, lewistgreen said:

I mean Taylor is not sitting there each week rubbing her hands personally thinking how do I snatch the #1 from those cretin British bands is she. It's all EMI execs wanting to line their pockets.

5 hours ago, Mr. C. Joel said:

Just FYI you can't manipulate the chart when the rules are the same for everyone...

PREACH

59 minutes ago, lewistgreen said:

I mean Taylor is not sitting there each week rubbing her hands personally thinking how do I snatch the #1 from those cretin British bands is she. It's all EMI execs wanting to line their pockets.

Tbh she 100% does for some people. Such as the variants for The Tortured Poets Department that would appear and deny Billie Eilish & Charli XCX #1 debuts for their albums. Thankfully Charli got to #1 with the release of the remix album.

3 minutes ago, Envoirment said:

Tbh she 100% does for some people. Such as the variants for The Tortured Poets Department that would appear and deny Billie Eilish & Charli XCX #1 debuts for their albums. Thankfully Charli got to #1 with the release of the remix album.

Yeah and as shady as that was, I doubt Taylor herself was the person who decided on those variants to be released on those specific weeks, it would have been her label wanting to maximise on total weeks at #1. I agree it’s shady and I don’t agree with labels being able to pick and choose when to ship or release physical copies to secure a no1 or chart position but let’s not act like the artist is sat there like a supervillain going “release them so we block so and so” it will be a label decision to maximise chart positions and sales.

I do also agree with criticism leveled towards Taylor for doing this but the responses on here always seem to be loudest when she does it 🤷‍♂️ plenty of other artists have done it too let’s not act like she’s the only one

You can talk about artists all being restricted by the same rules but can your average indie band pull 30k signed CDs out of nowhere and conveniently ship them 2 weeks before their intended release date? The reason people say it's manipulation is because Taylor's label have all the power and can have whatever outcome they want, it may be completely fair in chart terms but it's extremely dirty tactics to deny rising artists who have 1 specific week to achieve their peak when in theory you could peak any week you like.

Edited October 8Oct 8 by gasman449

I just think its interesting she doesn't like Charli and blocked her, fell out with Olivia n blocked her. Its a little bit personal sometimes it feels like

2 minutes ago, Henessy Lake said:

I just think its interesting she doesn't like Charli and blocked her, fell out with Olivia n blocked her. Its a little bit personal sometimes it feels like

Theres no actual proof that Taylor and olivia "fell out" just because they arnt as close to each other as they once were, it mostly seems to be their respect fandoms trying to pit one against the other

2 minutes ago, conorw said:

Yeah and as shady as that was, I doubt Taylor herself was the person who decided on those variants to be released on those specific weeks, it would have been her label wanting to maximise on total weeks at #1. I agree it’s shady and I don’t agree with labels being able to pick and choose when to ship or release physical copies to secure a no1 or chart position but let’s not act like the artist is sat there like a supervillain going “release them so we block so and so” it will be a label decision to maximise chart positions and sales.

I do also agree with criticism leveled towards Taylor for doing this but the responses on here always seem to be loudest when she does it 🤷‍♂️ plenty of other artists have done it too let’s not act like she’s the only one

Nope. You can't tell me Taylor releases a UK specific variant the week of Charli's album release after already getting many weeks at #1 because her label decided Taylor is petty, always has been. Although fair play to her!

Edited October 8Oct 8 by Envoirment

Hmmm… what if you’re ALL correct? And you’re arguing about something that, in essence, you all agree on.

I mean: I seem to be ‘liking’ comments on both ‘sides’ of the argument.

8 hours ago, gasman449 said:

You can talk about artists all being restricted by the same rules but can your average indie band pull 30k signed CDs out of nowhere and conveniently ship them 2 weeks before their intended release date? The reason people say it's manipulation is because Taylor's label have all the power and can have whatever outcome they want, it may be completely fair in chart terms but it's extremely dirty tactics to deny rising artists who have 1 specific week to achieve their peak when in theory you could peak any week you like.

There's a big difference between tactics and manipulation. The OCC rules are the same for everyone you can't manipulate an outcome when everyone's following the same rules.

Taylor just gets loads of heat because her sales / fanbase is HUGE but that's essentially what the charts are anyway whoever can sell the most.

10 hours ago, nikos said:

Not everybody has the same support from their company, the money, nor the fan base to support that, so no its not the same. Unless you believe all the copies from the variations are bought from indvidual fans

That makes no sense because if we go by label support / artists wealth then we may as well just not have a chart at all, because there's great artists who release music yet don't make a dent in the charts because they don't have label support or budget.

At the end of the day the charts are essentially the most consumed music of that week so do you honestly think people / consumers are only listening to songs once? For instance Sienna was number 1 I've listened to Great Expectation hundreds of times so is that now chart manipulation because I've listened more than once?

The Charts reflect what people are consuming and yes the charts are essentially collectors and hardcore fans buying physicals now but my point still stands. You can't manipulate a chart when everyone has the same rules, just because Taylor has a monumental fanbase compared to other artists and times releases to secure the highest position possible doesn't make her a manipulator when ALL artists are reducing downloads, adding signed copies, ticket / CD bundles for intimate shows and have stacks of variants it's just Taylor can do it on a bigger scale because of her following...

Blossoms just this week have adding extra shows, signed copies, reducing prices and had a pop up shop (Are you telling me fans haven't bought multiple copies..?!?)

Edited Friday at 08:245 days by Mr. C. Joel

To me it's pretty clear that Taylor always seeks for validation and wants to be the best and the biggest commercially. Nothing wrong with that in general, but it has also hindered her musical output so much since the covid pandemic. Her best music has been released when it wasn't guaranteed that all her singles are #1's in the US and the UK. If you look at other markets, the response is way more dependent on the quality of the music. But she gets hits on two important charts with ease so why bother.

The wake up call will happen when she doesn't debut at #1 on Hot 100 but cannot see it happening anytime soon. In the meantime she will release whatever comes out from the mill every 4-6 months.

Hi everyone! Does anyone have access to UK Charts Plus and could check whether my new single, Tasos P. & ChristosK – Midnight Frequency, has entered today’s Top 200 Download Chart? I’d really appreciate it if someone could check for me. Thanks in advance!

2 minutes ago, tasospe said:

Hi everyone! Does anyone have access to UK Charts Plus and could check whether my new single, Tasos P. & ChristosK – Midnight Frequency, has entered today’s Top 200 Download Chart? I’d really appreciate it if someone could check for me. Thanks in advance!

Well you just got a play on Spotify after your post, not really my cup of tea but a very good instrumental and a nice tune

I think it comes down to the bigger the artist the more resources are thrown behind them and that includes well-planned, dynamic chart shenanigans. It’s just ironic that the acts who would benefit more from this support don’t have it when arguably Taylor didn’t need that number one.