Col1967

How come you've been awarded 'person who represents the worst of Buzzjack 2011'? I don't recall seeing any contest being held. Right ungrateful lot here anyway, after all you do for them as regards sales info.

I've just Youtubed it up. I always feel very mean-spirited if I hope that charity tracks do badly because they aren't selling 'on-merit' but this is a pretty decent song, so yeah, I can't complain at that. At least they have made an effort, unlike many charity tracks whose producers seem to think that just because it's for a good cause they can get away with any old rubbish.

Just shows how low sales were at the time if 8 weeks at no.1 couldn't even sell half a million.

Agreed. I read them with interest but the numbers really speak for themselves. That said, it must be rather disheartening to put all that work in and receive little or no feedback.

What, like two? That's just a simple double negative!

Yet this week SLY sunk to a career low of no.58 overall. Something tells me this won't be so low again for a while.....

Is this a boost in sales on pensions day?

Same here :)

It just seems an odd mentality to me that's all. People generally buy music because they like it, do they not? 'I Will Always Love You' is the same track now as it was yesterday, it hasn't got any better. If you didn't want to buy it then, why buy it now? This has puzzled me ever since the death of John Lennon in 1980, so I doubt I will ever understand it :)

No, because that is a general appreciation of her. Downloading a track that you would never have thought of buying were she still alive, isn't.

Well said. I said the same thing when Amy Winehouse died. It's all rather grisly. True Whitney fans will have her music anyway. It's not just Brits though. 'I Will Always Love You' is currently no.3 on US iTunes.

I think you will find that it's Titanium that's the 'non-event' of a song. Personal preferences - don't you just love 'em :) Go Gotye!

No, don't say that, another track I love spending an eternity at no.2, being thwarted every week, usually by 'non' no.1's! ISTR that the closest MLJ got was in it's *first* week at no.2, just 400 copies or something, is this correct?

I know that this isn't against the rules so I wouldn't call it cheating as such, however I do think it's a rather underhand method to employ, 'unsportsman like behaviour' if you like. And of course if too many tracks end up discounting like this then we'll end up going full circle back to the early 2000s when the CD singles were at reduced price in the first week which helped fuel the 'crash straight in at peak position then plummet' frenzy of the era. 'Somebody that I Used to Know' is a fantastic track, just downloaded it. The intro to this reminds me of the intro to XTC's 'Senses Working Overtime'.

The no.1 single shouldn't be decided by price!

Surely nobody wants to see the charts reduced to a mere 'price war' though. Reductions to 59p are fine to help a dying single sell a few more copies but it's a pretty cynical weapon to employ in order to make no.1. Of course this used to happen routinely in the early 2000s when CD singles were discounted in the first week which helped almost every no.1 single debut at the top, then fall rapidly. I hope this isn't the beginning of a new trend......

I'd say 'Material Girl' just edges it over 'Like Virgin'. Even today, people still refer to Madonna as being 'the material girl'.

I can't properly answer question one as I don't have a favourite format. I prefer downloads for singles but CDs for albums.

Aren't new entries destined for the no.1 spot usually well inside the top 10 by this time?

At first I didn't have a clue as to what information you were trying to impart. Then, when I got over the information overload and worked out exactly how you were presenting it, I'm thinking *wow* how long did it take you to collate all that lot (don't say one year)! It isn't obvious at first glance that you have months in columns and that is initially confusing, especially when one is confronted with such a mass of data, information overload again :) Edit -forgot to ask, do the different colours mean anything?

I know it got a boost after Dancing on Ice, but I was amazed to see it still no.10 on the R1 mids, quite obviously this can't last until Sunday but the sheer staying power of this track is incredible. Much as I love this track, I don't really care whether it manages another week in the top 10 or not, as it has already achieved so much. And it goes like this..... 16 consecutive weeks in the top 10 - check. 7 consecutive weeks at no.2 - check. A million copies sold by year end - check. Sales of 1.1m are only a few weeks away and beyond that overhauling SLY.

In a similar vein, Elvis - 'Way Down'. 46-42-4-1-1-1-1-1-2-6-10-19-30 I can only assume Elvis died part way through a chart week, or perhaps there were distribution problems the week it was no.4 due to the sudden unexpected demand for a track which hitherto looked like it might struggle to make even the top 40.

This one is easily explained. The video was released.

That's not just a morbid thought, it's a completely unnecessary one. Adele has no addiction issues, well apart from nicotine unfortunately, so to speculate upon her death in that manner seems rather nasty to me.

Even after almost 50 years, this track is still in the top ten of the best selling singles of all time. Something like 1.8m I believe, that's what 18 weeks in the top 3 got you in the early 60s!