charts discussion Should Billboard Move Toward a Revenue Chart???

[iHype.]

3 minutes ago, Adonis said:

This isn't 2000 anymore. The way record companies has changed and will continue to change. The HOT 100 in particular needs to reflect this. Sure airplay and sustained tv airtime will always increase the longevity of records. However, these items shouldn't necessarily count as revenue. These items are promotional tools to get people to part with their revenue. 

 

 

 

The Hot 100 is suppose to measure what the country is listening to most. Yeah! and Hot in Herre were some of the most listened to singles in the country regardless of the revenue during that period. Which is why revenue /=/ popularity.

 

A song generating more money from 5 million streams on Apple Music than a song generating 50 million streams on VEVO still isn't more popular. The second song still is more familiar with the public, has more people listening to it, and is more consumed. Which is why the Hot 100 would rank the latter song higher
 

[BennyThruelen]

On 4/1/2017 at 3:14 AM, Trent W said:

Idk ? 

 

If we get rid of airplay the hot 100 would be 100% legit.  I think streams and sales should be the only factors to decide if a song is popular, airplay is just corporate, elitist and extremely unfair for artists.

I agree with this.

Radio should just serve as a promo for the song.

Besides, radio is controlled by few powerful people & not much by the GP.

Edited April 4, 2017 by BennyThruelen

[Rawr]

On 3/31/2017 at 2:17 PM, frenchyisback said:

1,500 stream for 1 album equivalent when most album bought do not even get 1,500 listens.

i never thought about it like this wow