Col1967

Any idea why it's gone back up? That's far to big a rise to be just some random movement. I don't think I saw it on the 59p list, come to think of it I don't recall seeing it in the Kworb top 100 this past week at all. Anyway it's currently no.109, no.333 & no.1071 on iTunes so I expect the boost, whatever the cause, to be short lived.

I suspect you will be proved right. 30 years ago it would have been unthinkable for a big, mainstream hit to have the F word in the title. (I know about the Dead Kennedy's in 1981 but that was only a minor top 40 hit) But of course it happened some time ago now. But once you use the C word, well that's the 'last taboo' in swearing, what's ruder than that word, where do you go from there?

I'm sure she will. In fact I wouldn't be totally shocked to see her get another no.1. However she needs the right material to transcend from fanbase buys to mass-appeaL Another 'Spinning Around' in other words. Unfortunately 'Into the Blue' is far from another Spinning Around.

I don't think that is the case. When the Now 87 version came out it made no difference to the top version, sales appeared steady. There was no indication that the second version was taking sales from the first. In other words the second version sales are 'extra' sales and the top version is behaving as it would have done if the second one didn't exist.

Especially so if people are buying it because her death was announced on a Monday.

It wasn't all that many years ago when the standard iTunes rate was 79p. Then it gradually reached 99p. However that happened at a time when the download market was rapidly growing and such an increase would have been seen as being able to be absorbed. Today however download sales can be described as 'stagnant' at the very best, many would say the decline due to streaming has already begun, so a price increase wouldn't really be an option.

Yeah, coming for that top 400 smash....

What's the big deal about the Chart Show playing a track that happens to be from the 80s? Radio One play songs they don't playlist all the time when they are doing the chart rundown. They are not (and I don't think ever have been ) a 'Top 40' type radio station, despite having the exclusive rights to be the first to broadcast the new Top 40. There seems to be a lot of sentiment on here that playing an 'oldie' on the Chart Show will be awkward or embarrassing, but I don't see how.

It was in a way. It was a double A side along with '1999' which reached no.2, although 1999 always the most played and effectively the A side.

It's awful, just awful. Little Mix have removed all the soul & passion of the original by Cameo and replaced it with a bland & dreary rendition that makes me weep. But of course it's all for charidee, so that's allright then, any old crap is acceptable. Here's the original: bwatch?v=MZjAantupsA Check out that cod-piece!

But does her back catalogue really sell markedly less well than her contemporaries from the era she was having her biggest hits? Take Madonna for instance, in the current iTunes top 1500 she has just one entry 'Like a Prayer' at no.1347.

The key word is *eventually* of course. Trouble with EFY is that it's very much of its time and as such won't trickle sell very well. Of course if the two of them ever decided to reprise the song on a major TV show, it would probably make up that 3k deficit in a few hours.....

The Stonk was a Comic Relief single though, the rules governing quality & success don't apply to charity singles.

I don't see why the BBC would care that they are broadcasting someithing similar to the iTunes chart. Why does it matter? So what if there is one retailer that dominates the market, it is their job to play the chart, not be concerned as to where the sales happened to have come from. Would they have been bothered in the old vinyl days if the top 40 was very similar to the HMV chart? I don't see how it's even any of their business.

He's covered his house entirely with speakers, how can that not be music with 'feeling'?

It's OK but it doesn't really go anywhere. It's just kinda 'there'.

How much of a boost will it really get though, with an album version being available? If you are going to buy it, I don't see why the album being available would make that more likely, it's already no.1 on iTunes so it's pretty prominantly displayed! Of course people will cherry-pick from the album but won't that just take sales from the current version, I can't see it producing all that many *extra* sales. I would like to be proved wrong though.

Same here, I wonder if she has a pussy?

Also John Travolta & Olivia Newton John - 'You're the One that I Want' & 'Summer Nights' in 1978

I wonder what the last non-charity/talent show track that sold its millionth copy whilst at no.1 was? I reckon you'd have to go back to the 90s, 'Believe', 'Barbie Girl', 'Hit me Baby One More Time', something like that. If those didn't do it, then 'Love is all Around' must certainly have done so.

I don't think Pharrell has it quite 'in the bag' yet but it looks increasingly likely he will return to no.1 for the second time. I know Sam Smith has a couple of other versions but it's not enough and unless he gets a boost (or Pharrell tails off unexpectedly) 'Happy' will be no.1.

I think the relative simplicity of this track is it's strength and indeed why it has such broad appeal and ultimately why it has sold so much and so consistently. It's just a great 'feel good' track and people like that.

There's not much on there to be honest, but this was (and still is) the only thread I've ever started. I was rather disappointed it didn't garner much interest first time round so I'm glad to see it getting a new lease of life!

I see what you did there :) I made the same joke a few weeks ago!

Did you really predict 'Get Lucky' would sell a million copies before it even entered the chart though?