Col1967

Why is it expected that this will be their best sales week? I know they increased slightly last week, but I put that down to the SCD/X-Factor boost, which has already worn off. Is this just the iTunes no.1 effect I have heard about, whereby a track which hits that position for any length of time can expect futher boosts in sales simply by being in that most prominent of positions?

I say good on him for standing up for what he believed in. It was after all his field and has every right to decree what goes on there. He apparently had never heard of her so my only criticism wold be that he should have a little bit of research beforehand so he knew what he was letting himself in for.

In the UK at least the Brits appearance *was* the video for SLY. That was what sent the track towards it's mega sales. I doubt it will have much effect here.

Well considering that M5 will probably be selling around 65k next week, it will be a rather 'soft' no.1 and vulnerable to any surprises. Let's hope some random X-Factor thing doesn't thwart it.

I can't see it. If even now they are still behind overall, they'd have to build up a massive lead very quickly to claw back the excess sales Sak has been making all week. As ever with Maroon 5, there is always next week.....

In 1994, All 4 One spent 7 weeks at no.2 with 'I swear' behind 'Love is All Around' by Wet Wet Wet. I'm sure that you are thinking of 'I'm too Sexy' by Right Said Fred which spent 6 weeks behind Bryan Adams in 1991.

For fans ol MLJ (like me!) surely the danger isn't from The Goo Goo dolls, which as you say will surely start to tail off soon but Sak Noel. MLJ will show a very slight decline day on day but should be well ahead of Iris by week end. The danger is that Sak Noel isn't just front loaded but stabilises and starts selling more consistently. Personally I think Maroon 5 will do it with a reasonably comfortable margin.

Agree totally, but I wanted to broaden my point out to all those people who just casually follow the charts, to whom no.1 is just no.1. Perhaps it's because I'm old enough to remember the time when you never got weekly sales info of any kind and if you wanted to know who was no.1 you had to just listen to the charts on Radio One..... I guess you could see it as some kind of 'recognition' for all those high sales weeks at no.2. At the end of the day the chart is merely a sales list. Any track can only compete with those around it.

I don't like the term, though I can understand why some people use it. To me, no.1 is no.1. If you sell more copies of your track than anybody else then you are no.1, whatever actual sales might be. The vast majority of people who follow the charts i.e. listen on a Sunday afternoon won't know (or care) what sales levels are. They will just see a record at no.1. Given sales so far you could argue that MLJ is a very 'deserving' no.1. And indeed given what total sales this track is likely to amass would be considered very unlucky to miss out on the top spot. Indeed one of the highest selling singles not to make no.1, were that to happen.

I didn't know you could add something to somebody else's post. I think the moderators would take a very dim view of that..... Of course iTunes isn't the entire download market let alone the market as a whole so the effect (if it exists) could simply be drowned out. This has got me intrigued now. I have seen people talking about this effect but never really considered it much. I think it would be an interesting statistical exercise to work out the difference (divisor method) between no.9 & 10, 10 &11 and 11&12. I'll do this every evening for a month and we'll see.

One snapshot proves nothing but the popbars right at this very moment show the effect very nicely.

What was added? Not 'Vidcapper is talking nonsense' by any chance :)

I'd say it was comfortably outsell all of them. Maroon 5's sales are starting to dip now though are still very respectable. If there is a quiet week for new releases coming up they might just make it but I doubt it. Even if they do somebody will point and shout 'default no.1!' as if it somehow counts for less if it's achieved on relatively modest sales.

Possibly, but only time will tell which tracks are regarded as 'classics'. Ultimately such a status is achieved by being a well-loved & memorable track, not by being thwarted week after week in getting to no.1. The most famous 'should have been no.1' of them all, 'Ultravox' by Vienna would be remembered today as a classic regardless of whether it reached no.1 or not. Actually, the whole Joe Dolce thing only seemed to come to peoples' attention a few years later. At the time I don't recall any complaints that it was being held off the top by some novelty nonsense.

Simon Cowell's having a go.....

I was aware that sales rose, but not by that amount. Where did all those people come from who hadn't bought the single in all those preceeding weeks but suddenly felt they had to have it when deletion was threatened?

'Love is all Around' by Wet Wet Wet was deleted in it's 15th weeks at no.1, but this is widely considered to be a marketing ploy which tried (and failed) to match the 16 weeks of Bryan Adams by encourage people to buy it before copies ran out. I don't know if this happened with BA, falls down the chart were much faster in those days, but that does seem to be particulary rapid, especially for such a huge hit.

10 weeks at no.1? That's nothing. You should have been around in 1991 when Bryan Adams spent 16 weeks at no.1. At first it was indeed exciting as chart records were shattered, but at the end I was glad to see the back of it to be honest. Once it slipped from no.1 it actually dropped down the chart very quickly. 1-4-4-6-12-36-63-x-73

Is this your response to anyone who disagrees with you, stamping your feet and calling them a troll? I think you are some kind of a f***wit.

You mean there maybe someone like you?

You could have made it clearer by avoiding the use of the words 'or not'. This implies some kind of 'either/or' situation and you are not sure which is correct. This ambiguity has led to misunderstanding and argument. If you wish to avoid this in future, I suggest you make your posts clear as to what you mean to say.

Perhaps a lot will be given it for Christmas, whether they want it or not :)

You said 'Mother's day or not' which indicated to me you weren't sure whether that was the reason.

My point was completely necessary. How can you argue it was not? 21 reached those levels of sales due to Mother's day. Yes it's unusual for an album to reach a sales peak 10 weeks after release but so what, how else can you account for the huge rise in sales in that particular week, and indeed even bigger drop the week after?

Well, what else could it have been to cause such a tremendous spike in sales?