soundman

I think Talbot is being dishonest to the public. The album tracks are not singles PERIOD so for him to say "The fact Ed Sheeran has got so many singles in the Top 20 is a reflection of the fact that people are listening to those singles, and they are also buying those singles" is a load of nonsense. He praised Sheeran's album sales - the highest since Adele and Oasis - but sees no problem in consumers streaming the tracks from the album and they're given singles-status. It's absolute nonsense, unfair, and he's sticking his two fingers up at chart fans and really saying: "you lot must be morons if you believe what I just said!" The format is completely flawed and it's no surprise the OCC defend it. If Talbot said "the current situation is unacceptable, we're changing the rules in April" it would mean he was responsible for the unacceptable situation.It's like Jeremy Hunt saying "NHS waiting times are too long, too unacceptable" but he doesn't add "I think I should do something about it or resign." And Talbot is no different. Talbot doesn't see any problem in artists having multiple singles in the chart, he doesn't care that FREE streams add to the overall sales figures, he doesn't care about a slow, often stagnant chart. If Sheeran's album tracks remain in the top 20/40 for the next three months or so - thereby limiting new 'singles', new entries - I think Talbot should resign.

You lot are just doing a 'Donald Trump' and trying to move the topic away from the main point. The main point isn't about women liking Sheeran... it's about a corrupt or incompetent OCC ruining the chart. If any Ed Sheeran fan seriously believes the singles chart benefits from him having sixteen songs inside the top 20, you are deluded.

Who are the OCC to misrepresent the chart? It's called THE OFFICIAL UK SINGLES CHART It's not called The Official UK Singles Chart With Album Tracks Added A single is a single. A single is supposed to be one unit - hence the term, I guess. Not part of an album. Music acts are supposed to have one single at a time. That's the format, the rules. But now the OCC has said "**** the rules, there are no rules. Ed Sheeran can have all his album tracks in the chart. We don't give a sh*t!" I'm not telling people what they can or cannot stream. I'm stating that the OCC is marketing a false product - a singles chart full of album tracks. In law, a company can be prosecuted for misrepresentation. The OCC is no different to a company intentionally misleading the customer. Come Friday the chart is dead to me. I'll moan for a day and feel sad the chart ended up like this, but then forget about it. The streamers won. The chart purists lost.

As The Doors sang:

The chart is a BRITISH institution. It's part of the fabric of British popular culture. Sure, the chart isn't that important anymore - when the internet came along and you could download music it made the top 40 a bit irrelevant, and I don't think the overall quality of chart music improved when things went digital - but the chart, imperfect as it is, was worth keeping. What the OCC have done is, no exaggeration, disgraceful. As I bored you lot with an earlier post where I mentioned Justin Bieber's eight album tracks and the OCC did sod all about it, so that was the warning sign, that was the omen things were going to get worse for the chart. And then Ed Sheeran comes along with his drippy pop and he appeals to teen girls and women that used to like Take That but prefer Sheeran to Gary Barlow and his fanbase swells and they've hijacked the chart. The OCC has let Sheeran's large fanbase hijack the singles chart with these album songs and are they gonna apologize for this disaster? Heck, no. I'll put money on Friday evening's OCC website praising "RECORD BREAKING" Ed Sheeran! They won't admit it's a disaster. They'll pretend everything is fine in chart land. Chart fans will see through their charade. The chart won't recover from this. I pray it doesn't. I said the chart was worth keeping but not after this scandal. It should die. Let a new chart format replace it. Perhaps some decent compromise format can be worked out. Who knows, this might be a blessing in disguise. Sheeran and the lame ass OCC destroy the chart and its replaced with something better. I hope so.

The singles chart began in November 1952. Al Martino's 'Here In My Heart' was the first number one record. Radio 1 began broadcasting a regular chart show from 1967. In 1978 the chart became the UK Top 40, replacing the top 20 format. Since 1978 the chart has adapted to the times: records to compact discs to digital downloads to streaming. And now, in March of 2017, the Official Chart Company has killed the chart. RIP UK Singles Chart 1978 - 2017 :(

Friday will be the crappiest moment in chart history. When Greg James introduces the chart on Friday afternoon... that's it, the final insult, the final humiliation. It's the greatest scandal in chart history. I was so disgusted by this I went on Sheeran's Facebook page and told him (I've no idea if he reads the posts!) that he is undeserving of nine hits in the top ten. I've also been on Radio 1, the OCC, and Spotify's FB pages and told them how I feel about this. Admittedly, I probably need 'to get a life' :lol: and put this all into perspective but even so, it's a bloody disgrace. I hope the chart dies. Good riddance to it. I've still got memories of the old chart which had several new entries per week, where people bought records/cds. The OCC and streaming apps can't take away my memories!!!!

It's not relevant if it's an album deal with a major label or self-financed. The fact remains his album tracks were eligible for the chart. Last week he had 15 tracks in the chart! I guess that was a record stat for most new entries by an artist (?), but it's going to be surpassed by Ed Sheeran on Friday. In the old days you had to wait a few months before album tracks were given single status. The singles were 'staggered releases'. I believe the OCC should implement a one single per artist/group rule. An artist/group has to wait eight weeks before a follow-up single is eligible for the chart. This will prevent the likes of Sheeran, Stormzy, Bieber etc clogging up the chart with many so-called 'singles'. After eight weeks the song is classified as 'chart compliant' and any stream sales can be added to the chart. I don't see any big deal with this suggestion. Eight weeks (two months) per single release doesn't seem unreasonable. Another rule OCC should implement is a 20 week time limit. No song needs to be streamed for more than 20 weeks. Sure, you can stream a song for longer, do what you like, but after 20 weeks the OCC remove it from the top 100. No more stream sales are counted. The track cannot be allowed to re-enter the top 100. At the present moment in time we have the lame situation with songs leaving and re-entering the top 100. That situation should end. The last two weeks have seen the dramatic decline of the chart. Stormzy with 15 songs in the chart and this week it looks as if Ed Sheeran will have 18 songs in the chart. The chart has gone from gradual decline to dramatic terminal decline. If other acts become as popular as Sheeran and Stormzy - and there will be some new acts with mega-popularity, that's the nature of pop, some artists do get mega-big - the chart will be full of album tracks. This is a major warning sign to the OCC. They need to act now and change the chart rules. Act this month, not in six months time.

Hi, my first post here. I thought I'd post due to the historic chart we'll be seeing on Friday. I believe the Official Chart Company is incompetent or disinterested in maintaining a fair chart. For example: Justin Bieber had eight album tracks in 2016, three of them at numbers 1, 2 and 3! What did the OCC do about this? Nothing. They didn't change the rules. All they did was promote the chart positions on their site: What we're about to witness on Friday is an inevitable consequence of inaction and disinterest by the OCC. The OCC didn't get together with the record labels and major streaming apps and come to a decision: "no albums tracks are eligible for the UK top 100 singles chart." They have colluded with the streaming apps to allow artists on big labels to have album tracks in the chart. This is wrong as it's misrepresentation - the chart is clearly marketed as the OFFICIAL UK SINGLES CHART, it's not marketed as the 'official UK singles chart with some album tracks included'. The current chart is also unfair to artists with no album deals. Ed Sheeran is hugely popular, fair enough, but why should he have an advantage over every artist/group trying to secure singles success but without an album deal. These artists can't get their album tracks in the singles chart if they've yet to make an album! Ed Sheeran and other popular acts with albums have an unfair advantage. See directly below: Friday's top 100 chart is going to have: 18 Ed Sheeran songs (16 from his new album, two songs from other albums) 3 Little Mix songs 11 Stormzy songs Songs taken from their albums. This shows you how the chart is completely busted. Streaming and album sales are not singles sales and the OCC can't fool us any longer. They've fooled enough people since July 2014 when they incorporated streaming into the official chart but the deception no longer works. We've seen through it. The singles chart should be scrapped as it's unfit for purpose. Let the OCC introduce a new Official Top 100 streaming chart with no album tracks, a one track per artist rule (for eight weeks), and a 20 weeks time limit on all songs in the top 100. I reckon that will invigourate the chart, allow more entries and more movement. Many people have posted on the OCC's comment sections about the problems with streaming. It's not new criticism. Since July 2014 people have been critical of the decision to include streaming, and the way streams are measured in relation to digital downloadsl/physical sales. The OCC have seen the comments on the site. They weren't interested in listening, not interested in changing the chart, not interested in improving it and on Friday the Ed Sheeran chickens come home to roost. Karma can be unkind, OCC!