If physicals only make up about 5% of total sales when combined, why is it that...when artists say they're releasing a song as download only it doesn't do great but if it's released both ways- physical and downloads... it does a lot better? :unsure: Using 5% as a rough figure, surely that shouldn't make a big difference in the total sales?...

 

I was thinking about it and think the figure is a bit low ;) What you think?

Edited January 30, 200817 yr by Johnny

I think it's 5% of the total market. Which is slightly misleading as all the catalogue tracks (from 'Rehab' and 'Chasing Cars' to 'Don't Stop Me Now' and 'In The Air Tonight') sell ENTIRELY on downloads. The % is much higher the further up the chart you go.

I think it's because of the fact that physical releases have still lots of promo and airplay while download only tracks not much as of yet. But there are some exception: Nelly Furtado - Say It Right, Oasis - Lord... etc. With the decrease of physical sales I think this will change.

 

I think the 5% could be right. I remember that in the first singles chart of the year the sales were: 96% downloads, 4 % physicals of total sales according to MW.

^Because there are millions of songs that are available to download from the last 50 years. Only the latest physical releases are available.

 

Anyway, physical releases aren't making that much difference to chart peaks anymore. In 2006, getting top 10 on downloads alone was an almost definate sign that it would #1 when physically released. Yet now, even getting to #2 on downloads won't confirm a #1 (as proved by Adele)