AcerBen

Interesting point. You can look at it two ways - the Clean Bandit record shouldn't be as high on OCC if it's only there because of Amazon playlist plays, or it's being unfairly hampered by lack of playlist support elsewhere and people aren't able to discover it. Maybe both at the same time.

Still amazes me how there can be such huge discrepancies like this. I know the DSPs have different demographics, but still. Presumably it's well playlisted there then.

Anyone know how Clean Bandit have managed to get to #51 on OCC when it's not top 200 on Spotify, and below 100 on Apple? Is that just enough these days because of so many ACR or album tracks?

Someone on Facebook posted "When will people realise "Mr Brightside" is just an industry joke? The commercial playlist streaming companies disagreed with OCC on how the charts should be compiled. They spotted a flaw - if they all included a certain track in their playlists, which are played in supermarkets, large stores, call centres, etc, that would be enough to keep that track on the chart. The song they chose was "Mr Brightside". Few people actively choose to listen to that track (good as it may be); we just hear it without having the option not to. It's record as the longest running track on the chart is entirely bogus." This is bollocks, right?

Yes, it's bizarre to me that the industry hasn't cottoned on to the fact that most people like straight-forward pop songs than you can sing along to - and that there's not enough artists doing them.

What I'd really like to see is a chart that works like the chart used to in the pre-digital era. One that tracks people discovering songs for the first time, that sees songs move their way up the chart as they become more popular, but then once they've reached that peak of popularity, they don't hang around like a bad smell. It would be a complex formula, but if they have the data, they can do it. The problem is that would be seen as too radical to replace the official top 40 with, so it would probably have to be an alternative listing. However, then problem becomes how do you generate any interest for that chart. They tried the Breakers chart in the 90s and no one cared. Then they have that Trending chart that comes out on Tuesday and no one cares about that either. So maybe it can't work.

I'm pro-ACR and if anything think it should be harsher and do a better job at giving a boost to newer songs, maybe being based partly on momentum/build in listeners, kicking away older songs quicker. But the real problem is the behaviour of listeners, streaming services and the music business rather than the chart itself.

When an updated official all-time list was released in 2017, we saw huge changes at the top, with 8 of the top 11 songs having been released in only the last 4 years. https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/t...evealed__20459/ I of course understand that the older songs have a headstart, but I am still surprised at quite how dominant those mid-2010s songs still are on this list, with only Blinding Lights going really high. I would've expected to see more 2020s songs lower down the top 100 than there are.

I do think it's a bit of both though, because it does seem like the rate of turnover at the top of the "all time" lists has slowed down dramatically.

It's a weird list because it's so mid-2010s heavy. Whilst of course they all have a headstart on anything from the last few years, can't help thinking it's also because there are so few proper mainstream monster hits around these days. I was gonna say the likes of "Flowers" - but that's not even top 100!

2002 and 2006 were just re-issues of the first two. They did a new Christmas version in 2019.

That version made me so cross. If they were going to finally do a third one, why not futureproof the lyrics slightly. The 56 years of hurt / 20 weeks of hurt (for the women's game) and references to Christmas made it completely irrelevant about a fortnight after it came out.

So it was Shakespears Sister's fault in 92! 2019 is quite funny too

It did manage 4 weeks in the top 10 though and not a bad chart run for a #8 {8}-8-10-10-13-18-21-26-35-41-66-

Because the British music business has no idea what the public really wants. They sign artists that appeal to music journalists but the public just want good songs.

I'm Alive has been popular for some time. It was her 5th most streamed song by 2019. https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/c...d-songs__27738/

But not Northern Ireland?

Added Jackie's Strength but seems Raspberry Swirl was released - it charted at #135 on the compressed top 200

in fact this made #97

Why Great Britain?

BTH charted at #93. I don't reckon they had any intention on putting out the Relight My Fire single commercially. Gigi and Daft Punk I'll add, cheers.

I remember someone on an ESC forum betting on Marie at 75/1 to win and thinking he was mad. It definitely wasn't tipped to do well!

Yeh DJ Daz is good shout. There's a promo on Discogs but no commercial. I don't think any of the Eurovision winners you mention were planned. Back then they tended to rush them out as quickly as possible (Dana, Charlotte, Sertab) or not bother at all. The Olsens did chart on import though, at #112. Marie N seemed to be released in very few countries at all.

But not the UK ones I mean, as I recall

Yes, that is a weird one. I don't remember seeing the video or anything so don't think it was promoed anyway. Wonder what the label was thinking.