Official Singles Chart on 24/6/2016

If someone purchases a song as a gift for 20 people, do those purchases count? The answer is yes from what I can tell, and the same principle applies here. By streaming a song multiple times, you are either generating more ads that derive revenue (as a non-subscriber) or you are helping increase the proportion of your subscription money that goes to the associated artist and label. In essence, these are both transactions, like purchasing multiple copies of a single.

Spotify itself doesn't distinguish paid and ad-supported streams on a weekly basis. The current equivalence model is based around studies of the 2014 average revenue generated by labels from on-demand streaming (which also counts stuff like Deezer and Rara) divided by the amount of streams that year (260 million per week at that point), ending up with the 100:1 formula. I could be a little off on how it happened, but that's the general gist.

Thanks for the info, RIME. A free stream of a Spotify song counts to the chart? Hmm, that seems a bit unfair. I thought the whole point of a chart: it's based on sales. I don't think any free streaming services should contribute to the overall chart. What if a lot of Drake's streaming views are done via Free Spotify and not paid streaming sites? That would mean Drake is number one based on free listens! That would be bizarre.

I'm not against free streaming sites - if people want to to sign up to ad-supported free Spotify they should be allowed to do so (I use the 'free' model of Spotify) but it does go against the essence of the singles chart. The chart has changed beyond recognition!

The thing though is that labels get revenue through a combined pot of subscriber revenue and ad revenue. The current formula accounts for this and has derived the average value a stream gives given the distribution of subscription plays (which depending on the user's frequency could be around 1 cent per play to 20 cents) and ad-supported plays (which has already been optimized by Spotify itself to be about .06 to .08 cents if I recall). Either way, both methods derive revenue, and it's not like the concern you mention hasn't been addressed in the best way possible at the moment.

Surely the revenue would be in pounds sterling not dollars, though! After all, this is the *UK* top 40 or top 100 (depending which chart you prefer!).

If people outside the UK can stream and this influences the UK chart then I give up! It's too confusing. LOL

Sorry, sorry, I've only seen stats in reference to US dollars and I forgot where I was posting, heh. Don't worry, streaming reporting is separated by country by all the streaming services, so the chart isn't insane or anything.

I agree with you. SALES chart is the REAL CHART!!! People: Forget about the "Official chart"!!!!!

Looks a lot better

I completely agree with that video.

Thank you. But no one else is listening.

SO DO I!!! I used to listen to UK top 40 singles chart back in the early 80´s on RADIO LUXEMBOURG here in Finland, just when the new romantics came about. The reception on the radio was quite bad because it wasn´t on FM frequences. But it was so exciting to listen to all those new and "never heard here in Finland"- tracks. Here on Finnish radio they used to play punk and heavy rock. 1 in 100 tracks was smt. like disco or synth tracks and I was so because I still like those groups like Ultravox etc. Back in the day the charts were true, not "polluted" with any stupid, irrelevant ways of compiling the charts like today. Now I only go through the SALES chart.

You have a good point. Each of releases are getting better, yet each release is less successful than the last. People don't know real music anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NSWLa1UtIY

Just because I said 'anymore' after 'real music' doesn't mean I'm -kissing old .

Yeah, but there was very little choice back then and very few radio stations so people didn't hear the same song all day long.

That's because he was one of the great pre Rock 'n' Roll singers. Whose appeal went right across the genders and ages. This was also the age when if you wanted a song you had to go to the store and buy it in person. Make you wonder what the total sales of his was. Probably more than the combined sales for the whole chart for the year so far.

"Set to"? You mean by the update on Tuesday? That only takes into account the first 3 days of the tracking week, and singles burn out the further they get away from debut day. That's been true even before the streaming era.

Speaking of, the same system that "set" GMYL to 4 is the same one that got House Every Weekend to #1 because the change in week meant only a half-week's data were used.

Yeah I'm aware of that, I'm saying GMYL should have hit a LOT higher than 9.

It's only 52 in the streaming chart. That's why. But in streaming it should continue to climb.

It's not much better on the sales chart; only two songs enter the top 10 (Give Me Your Love and Dancin' on My Own).

So what if two songs enter the top 10? There's lots of movement elsewhere in the 10 too.

This week by far is the worst week in the charts so far this year.

The charts r fixed Everybody knows they're fixed

I'm actually starting to agree with you. This week by far is the worst week in the charts so far this year.

I wouldn't be surprised, when rubbish like One Dance gets to #1 for 11 weeks despite being #8 in sales, it does make me think something fishy is going on.