Graham A

I get what he means. I think it started when iTunes got the largest share of the market. This American company attracts only a certain type of users. They were basically interested in certain types of music in the USA top 30. For example they don't give a toss about the Country music that's in there. Only R&B and Rap. There's another section of it's buyers that are interested in dance music. Any other genres are of course sold, but have little shelf life. Bands and acts that could sell CD singles, such as Westlife, couldn't sell a thing on iTunes. Nor could many of the guitar based bands. Sites other than iTunes that could sell them, such as HMV, were blocked from using the Apple ipod, as they had to sell WMA files, which didn't work on it. These were also copy protected. So they couldn't be transferred. Even when the sites could sell MP3, they were so marginalised they couldn't get iTunes buyers to move to them. One of the problems being customers had to use cards to pay. The youngsters didn't have bank accounts, so the parents could give them money for iTunes vouchers instead. But they are no good for the other sites, so thanks to ipods and the voucher, iTunes had customers locked into the system. You can bet your life that many of the people who buy the records in the physical charts don't have iTunes accounts. Hence why they are so like the charts of old. As I'm not a radio listener, I couldn't say if the dance music buyers of iTunes source the records from radio airplay. But since the record companies are holding back the release of these records to ensure radio airplay and cover versions are getting the sales, presumably it must be certain stations that are playing these records a lot.

You don't think you actually are seeing record sales issued out of the OCC computer? What you are seeing each week is a computer program of what the record sales should look like according to the terms dictated by the music industry. It has to take in a great deal of errors each week, caused by consumers and retailers, plus electronic issues. Then there are the complex rules about streaming data. Millions of streaming information all needing adjustments, so they don't cause an in balance between sales and streams. Name one piece of complex software you have used that doesn't crash or produce data errors. Then imagine trying to collect data from all over the UK using it. Apparently the OCC chart once had a packet of KP salted peanuts top of the chart, till somebody noticed it. Don't forget the chart's have to be completed in just over 12 hours, after close of play.

Just because people are driving home at that time and listening to the Radio doesn't mean they are interested in what's in the charts. The chart show on a Sunday was flopping because they had a sequence of DJ's presenting it that were not interested in the chart. This was obvious from the fact there was no discussion about the acts, chart movements. In fact many presented it got facts wrong, insulted acts that were in the charts, by saying things like "ask your dad". No doubt Greg James will be no different. Even James Masterton, a supporter of the move, since he sucks up to anything the OCC send his way, was clearly thinking that Radio One would use the option to cut down the chart run down to a top ten when they can. The fact that they can't shift the news is clear how the future chart show will go. Many on here pointed out that with streaming records hang around for a long time, thus making the chart boring each week. Thus a reduced chart will allow Radio One to play the interesting records such as climbers or new ones. But Radio One could have solved the problem of long running records repeated each week by playing the numerous remixed versions of the tracks, instead of the radio edit. But they didn't even try. That shows you how unimaginative Radio One is. Initially the Chart Show will do OK, but as the novelty wears off, then the audience will go away. To get them back they will introduce an oldies section. The top five from 10 years ago etc, or something along those lines. And competitions. Reducing the top 40 records, but keeping the top ten of course. It doesn't really concern me anyway as Radio lost me ages ago. The only time I listen to radio now is friends cars, but more frequently Taxi's. Most taxi drivers listen to Radio Two, BBC Local stations or ILR Radio Stations. We have used Taxi's a lot for many years. I don't recall any listening to Radio One.

They will when the Friday show flops ;)

I would use the physical top 40 chart instead. It's fast and extremely variable Have a look: physical top 100 occ

I think iTunes download sales will continue to collapse and as the Record Industry is only interested in iTunes sales, the figures of what constitute the difference between streams and sales are manipulated to reflect the decline in iTunes sales only. The sales have simply gone somewhere else. The ACTUAL drop in sales for the UK is only 3% compared to this time last year for the singles market. It simply amazes me every Sunday now when the OCC sales chart is revealed and the combined streaming chart is too, how different the two charts are . But the OCC have filtered out nearly all the continuous streams, from members of the public thus reducing the ability for a record to chart on streams alone. But when it comes down to the OCC sales top 100, as someone who monitors the top 100 charts on iTunes, I can say that chart looks like the iTunes chart for the week. YET it's suppose to incorporate every sales site! We have the likes of Google Play, HMV/7 Digital, Amazon and Sainsbury incorporated in this sales chart apprantley, but most 59p records on iTunes register on the OCC chart, but a number one on Amazon doesn't? But add streaming and a record that enters at 10 on iTunes - from say Chris Brown - is 10 on OCC sales chart, 25 on combined, while on the Amazon chart gets no higher than 60 all week and isn't available all week on the other sites. (I picked Chris Brown because his records do tend to sell better on iTunes than other sites). My point is that streaming pulls the iTunes sales down, but not being available to download on other main sites doesn't. Nor does it seem to make any difference how many copies are in the iTunes chart of the same record. I have seen records do this - say the main copy to be at number 15 on iTunes chart all week. And indeed it does turn up on the OCC chart at 15. Yet the iTunes chart has say 6 more versions of the record scattered below the 15 of the main one. So how come it's at 15 on the OCC? All this proves to me that the OCC chart simply registers certain sales for iTunes and if they fall then streaming is winning. That last statement is what this thread is about. Think on that!

Why does the BBC think there is a link between Radio One Listeners and CBBC? Films and computer games make really good radio!!!!

The HMV website is more like the NME website than a place to sell music and DVD's. They need to ask themselves if they are trying to be music magazine or a Record Store?

Just to clarify things. The Friday release date was introduced in the early 1960's (Probably around 1962). Prior to that records were released in the first week of each month. In 1980 Polydor released a Jam Single on a Monday as apposed to the Friday. Records continued to be released for several years on a Friday, though some record companies released them Monday. Physical records continue to be released Monday, but iTunes introduced a Sunday release day instead. There were no charts issued in the UK prior to 1952, apart from Sheet Music Charts. The top 30 charts reported by the forum member from 1940 to 1952 were never issued at the time they cover. They were based on Music Publishers sending records out the shops, not what was actually sold to members of the public. The charts themselves are thus flawed. For example Christmas records were ordered in large numbers up to Christmas and the orders stopped afterwards. These charts show that effect with a popular Christmas record being placed top and the chart after Christmas the record removed from the chart. Something which wouldn't happen in a sales based chart, not based on physical records anyway. The book that these charts are found in is full of errors. With the incorrect record A side listed a lot of the time. The Official charts from 1969 always used the date system that is in place now. The fact that Radio One reported it on Tuesday was down to the fact that the BMRB couldn't produce the chart for broadcast the previous Sunday due to the way it was compiled. This meant that when it was broadcast on a Sunday it was two weeks old. There wasn't any need to change the chart date at all. Especially as the Official Chart uses streaming now. Record companies pressed for the change to the chart in the belief that certain boybands and some dance tracks who have big fan bases, will push the record to number one if they have a full first week of sales only. If the chart stayed as it is then, these acts will only a have two days of sales then a week with reduced sales as the fans would have got what they want in the first four days of sales. However since streaming was introduced it's unlikely even a big sales push can give one of these acts a number one now. If they had kept to the correct week of sales. The record companies of these acts could have continued to use the Sunday or Monday dates to pull the above off. As the Global release date is simply a "gentlemen's agreement" and is not compulsory. But it would have made the Music Industry look stupid if they broke the rule quickly. It seems these days that few records actually stick to the official release date anyway. Amazon, HMV and Google Play are already selling the Lost Frequencies track, which is still on pre-order on iTunes. They themselves release tracks off albums any time they wish. As it has been stated the Global release date will not stop the UK getting tracks later than other parts of Europe. But that might go if the European Union allows Download sellers to sell to customers outside the areas the sellers are based in. Apparently this is being introduced.

There's nothing to stop you downloading Audacity or other recording software and record what is playing. You can have everything you want on Spotify with no limit (apart from the time needed to listen to them all) and it doesn't cost a penny using this method. I use to do that with these streaming sites. But I found it quicker to download and of course it does pay the people who make the music a decent amount. Which is more than can be said about the streaming sites.

Physical stores have been doing this for donkey's years. ITunes and Amazon and the branches of other multi-national download sites, will just make them available to buy in the UK stores as an import. Much preferable to all the mucking about setting up accounts with several download sites abroad then signing in just to get one track that isn't yet released in the UK. The OCC I don't believe will not be able to track sales in other European countries. It would also increase the cost of making the charts if they did. So I can't see that happening. Since they can track download sales from Scotland, I should imagine if someone outside the UK buys from a UK download site, they should be able to remove that sale, if they wish to. I do think it has more implications for other European Countries than the UK. Many of them have poor access to download sites in their own areas and therefore this means that they get them much easily than now. It has some big implications for price and tax issues. The price of a download is known to be higher in the UK, but I don't no if this is compared to the USA, which isn't covered by this law anyway, or if the price is lower in other parts of Europe?

I actually think it's been people switching to streaming that had iTunes accounts that has been causing the perceived fall off in download sales in the UK. So it comes as no surprise to me that Apple are introducing the streaming services. The question now is what they do about the download side of the market. Will they eventually pull the plug on downloads completely and force everyone with iTunes accounts to stream? It wouldn't surprise me if they did. It's what Sky did to customers with analogue boxes. They just sent out loads of free digital boxes and switched off the services, even though they could have left it running. If fact the German TV service started using ex Sky Channels! Killed a lot of business off with Sky box repair people too. It wold work too, as the people who download from iTunes don't seem to shop around. For example even this week Walk The Moon has just entered the iTunes charts and very high. But iTunes buyers could have got the record weeks ago if they shopped at Amazon. It's not an isolated example either. I would predict that when the iTunes streaming service is up and running for all, that if iTunes said it was closing down the download service very few of iTunes customers would start downloading from the other download sites. Taking up the streaming service instead.

One thing I bet they won't answer. A list of the records that were removed from the charts any week for not having genuine sales.

Where's fchd with the rest of the M section? No update for several weeks now???

One reason might be down to TV shows especially on BBC Four Friday nights. The Queen jump in sales will defiantly be down to this, as they featured Good Friday on the channel.

Yes it was common practice from about 1963 to 1981. However the chart that came out was never up to date and distribution of records meant records tended to climb up anyway so the release date was far less important back then. Only the Beatles tracks would see people desperate to get hold of them in the first week.

Somebody should have told Will Young record company that the Friday new release day doesn't start while July. His new single was released yesterday (Friday)! It will be a kind of test on the Friday date thing on a proper weekly chart - not a bit of one and a lot of the other chart -or the- BOOALOTO Chart! :heehee: Of the future!

I would imagine that to be right the first Friday Chart being the 10th, otherwise you would get two sets of new release records in the Chart if they broadcast a chart on Sunday the 12th. So the last Sunday chart show will be on the 5 July. Then after that the Official Chart becomes a bit of one and a lot of the other week chart. Can I have the pleasure of naming the Friday 10th Chart as the "3 Quarters Chart". :w00t: Please!!

It will be an informal "rule" just not enforceable. That's why the OCC are having to shift the chart date. The Record Industry has come up with an agreement to release records on Friday, but since they can't enforce it, the Industry knows that if they left the chart date as it was most record companies would simply ignore Friday and release records Sunday or Monday. This would make a mockery of the international agreement and so the OCC have no choice but to move the date back. I think the OCC personally think it's a bad move and Radio One and the BBC do too. But you won't get any official to admit that in public due to the agreement and the UK don't want to be seen as a block to it. Since the X-Factor final is on a Sunday it's not possible to release records the same day, though downloads of the winners single could take place. But iTunes wouldn't be happy with putting the record straight out after the show, because the public would crash the system. I think they did anyway last year!

As the Big Top 40 Show will stay on a Sunday, due to the fact member stations can't broadcast it at 4pm Friday, then the Big Top 40 show will presumably keep the same week as they do now. Which means that when the Radio One top 40 comes out Friday the Radio One chart will be a week behind, or at least seem that way, thanks to the fact that new entries would be in the Big Top 40 before Radio One's chart. Since the Big Top 40 show is not moving to a different day it will keep it's audience. And despite the fact that it's not the Official Chart, anyone wanting to listen to the chart music will have to tune into it as the Radio One chart has gone! Thus the only winners in the chart move is the Big Top 40. Having looked at the Calendar for this Christmas, I reckon that if the X-Factor winner record is going to be a contender for the Christmas Number One Simon Cowell would have to break the rule and release the download after the Sunday final on the 20th of December. Or they have the final on the 13th and risk the record not being top when the chart is announced Friday 25 December. However the Big Top Show if the final was on the 13, could claim it as Christmas Number One because their chart would be for the 20 and that would cover x-mas week. In any case I still think that Simon will break the release date rule as I can't see them waiting till the following Friday after the show's final on Sunday (on whatever day) to release the download. The cover version of the song alone would pull in a lot of sales in that time.

Only because Independent Radio Stations were targeting their individual top 40's at them. Later on the Network Chart was broadcast there and it was faster, the BBC chart audience plummeted, so they increased it. They even dropped the 4.30 news bulletin for fear of losing audience members not interested in Tory propaganda. Radio One will need to build up the audience to convince the target listeners to actually tune in at that time. Friday tea time telly can be tough on Radio. There biggest audience being people driving home. Are they that interested in what's a 24? Since we know it's stopping 15 minutes earlier and the top ten will be played, that will take 40 minutes assuming the average length of a record to be 3.30. I reckon they will play only another 16 records at the most in the time left.

I don't think they can because the countdown might not be ready till after 3pm. Final data would come in after midnight Thursday, then it has to be sorted and checked. Data errors missing data form shops and download sites all need to be sorted out. Streaming data, plus adjustments of various types, means that it's not possible. Radio One would also need time to "produce" the show. Times of records, what to play, phone calls to artists and the rest of the show needs to be sorted out. They simply don't make up the show as they go along. If it could have been broadcast earlier in the day then I think it would have been, by now. I do think they could have broadcast it Saturday between 9am and 12pm, though. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the chart show is moved from Friday back to Sunday, or even to Saturday, as I suggest, because I'm certain it will flop at that time and be wiped out by Hit 40 UK.

Why would you start a chart at 4pm Friday when kids are still getting home from school? It kills off most of the audience! Then to have the cheek of putting it on CBBC and thinking that will raise the profile of chart music!! Yes everyone over 15 is going to suddenly tune into the CBBC channel! It will appeal to the young girls who like One Direction and the other boybands and the like, that's all. The other thing that's not being discussed so far here is what will fill the slot currently occupied by the top 40 on a Sunday and compete against the Big Top 40 show, which will be faster and more comprehensive than the top 40 broadcast by Radio One. I really think this is VERY bad move for the BBC and will make the charts less important in the British public's eye. As some of the people on this thread have stated they can't listen to the show or catch only a part of it. We have gone backwards to the days of the top 20 and breakers. It's 2015 BBC!!! Not 1950!!!!

Delta Goodrem has a single out now on Amazon with the same title. Is it the same thing? I believe she will sing it on the 30 years of Neighbours on Channel 5. It will clearly cause some confusion!

In the 50's it was very common for multi versions of the same record in the chart. Simply because of the old publisher system. That worked by song writers going to the music publishers or working inside them instead of recording the song themselves. The music publishers would then go to the labels with the songs for the A&R men to listen too. Often around the same table. In EMI for example a chap from each imprint of the record company would be there. They would say that song could be sung by an artist(s) on there books. With very popular songs nearly all the artists would record it, if they could sing it. Each record company would be approached in this way. There could be as many as 20 recordings or more of a very popular song. The artist would often have little say in what they recorded. The system started to fail when Lennon & McCartney came along. It's likely that the early NME charts excluded some of these versions, because of the way it counted the information. I understand that the NME would phone shops up and ask for say the 20 best sellers. Each shop would supply this list, but the shop didn't list the sales. Instead the number one was given 20 points and the 20 I point. However some records were only sold at dealers of certain labels. If there was not enough of these shops in the sample, there records would not get sufficient points to make the chart. There was no weighting, so if a big branch outsold a certain record by all the other shops taking part, it would only get 20 points for it's number one not say 600 to balance the sample.