official chart HDD Final: #1 DJ Khaled 150k SPS; #2 ID 148k SPS

[iHype.]

3 minutes ago, Jackson said:

Imagine Dragons is definitely selling at least 300k in the end, most likely over 500k pure. They sold well over 500k with their last album 2 years ago with 0 hits. Meanwhile Believer is just blowing up and Thunder looks ready to slay into the fall. Like everything they've ever released, the album will be a slow burner. 

Ed has the biggest song of the entire year and his last album sold 2M, yet his album is only at 700k so far (and that's the highest-selling album of the year). Bruno's album is also at 950K after 2 Top 5 hits, Uptown Funk!, and his previous two albums doing 2.4 million.

 

Sales have really changed a lot since 2015 even if it doesn't seem like it. 

[Jackson]

Just now, iHype. said:

Ed has the biggest song of the entire year and his last album sold 2M, yet his album is only at 700k so far (and that's the highest-selling album of the year). Bruno's album is also at 950K after 2 Top 5 hits, Uptown Funk!, and his previous two albums doing 2.4 million.

 

Sales have really changed a lot since 2015 even if it doesn't seem like it. 

Bruno's last album was in 2012, not really the same as 2015. Imagine Dragons also released an album in 2012 which sold well over 2 million.

 

If Believer follows the trajectory of their past singles, it'll stay near the top of the chart for months which should shift a lot of copies. And rock audiences still buy albums more than Ed and Bruno's. I don't think they're gonna sell the 2 million + they did with their last smash album, but 500k should be no problem 

[Fetish for MiMi]

[Unbreakable Heaven]

23 minutes ago, samseacrest said:

Come through ID!

[zoldyck]

there is so much wrong with SPS system. DJ Khaled albums is not even doing good on streams, it just two songs by Justin and Rihanna. I understand artists like Lamar, Drake getting benefit from it, Because people actually stream their album in case of Khaled people are just interested in two songs not the album as whole. And to top it off it is much easier to cheat (Playlists, Multiple Singles, Hot Features, Discounts).

[FanOfPop]

Pull through Imagine Dragons!! Really close race for #1 

[Amaryllis]

I hope talent aka ID wins

[Green]

Imagine Dragons won't drop like a rock because they have a current hit which it's doing great on itunes and Spotify. (If fact they have more songs in the top 200 of Spotify than DJ Khaled, despite of Khaled's 23 tracks, but Khaled's SEA/TEA will be much bigger because of I'm The One/Wa Wa Thoughts are bigger than Believer).

 

DJ Khaled will rank higher in the following weeks based mostly on 2 songs (I'm the one and Wild thoughts) while probably selling 1k-2k pure sales weekly at best. A Mark Ronson tea.

Edited June 28, 2017 by Green

[eli's_rhythm]

7 hours ago, iHype. said:

Ed has the biggest song of the entire year and his last album sold 2M, yet his album is only at 700k so far (and that's the highest-selling album of the year). Bruno's album is also at 950K after 2 Top 5 hits, Uptown Funk!, and his previous two albums doing 2.4 million.

 

Sales have really changed a lot since 2015 even if it doesn't seem like it. 

21P were selling huge last year and they aren't nearly as pop relevant as the guys you mentioned, so I think ID can sell at least 400K.

 

Khaled will be lucky to scrape 150K.

[Blue Rose]

8 hours ago, samseacrest said:

Cmon Dragons 

 

[MANUELF]

12 hours ago, rihsus said:

omg Katy

she's getting another - 80% or?

 

Im not surprised, no one wants that album

[Ichinaru19]

Imagine Dragons will have longevity. They have two secured hits on their album, with easy choices for a third one as well.

[Adonis]

Albums that flop will flop harder. 

[Kings.]

ID are for sure doing 500k when it's said and done and over 300k by years end.

 

Anyway let me stream the album for the next two days

[Cap10Planet]

2 hours ago, Green said:

Imagine Dragons won't drop like a rock because they have a current hit which it's doing great on itunes and Spotify. (If fact they have more songs in the top 200 of Spotify than DJ Khaled, despite of Khaled's 23 tracks, but Khaled's SEA/TEA will be much bigger because of I'm The One/Wa Wa Thoughts are bigger than Believer).

 

DJ Khaled will rank higher in the following weeks based mostly on 2 songs (I'm the one and Wild thoughts) while probably selling 1k-2k pure sales weekly at best. A Mark Ronson tea.

Only "long" post that sums it all up on this page.

Edited June 28, 2017 by Cap10Planet

[IVY]

They better snatch the top spot.

[pabloanxiety]

Prince  

[alexanderao]

Good hold for 2 Chainz.

 

[Gaia]

They should limit it so your SPS total can't being more than double that of your pure sales. That or make it so streaming decreases in weight every week after an album releases to account for recurrent streams by the same people.

[alexanderao]

26 minutes ago, Kkamjong said:

They should limit it so your SPS total can't being more than double that of your pure sales. That or make it so streaming decreases in weight every week after an album releases to account for recurrent streams by the same people.

Such a policy is entirely arbitrary and simply serves to unfairly punish artists whose artists predominantly stream. It would completely undermine the accuracy of the chart. If you haven't realized, 90% or more of many albums' units (including almost all rap & R&B albums) come from SEA after the first or second week. Why should these albums be punished for the way that they're being consumed?

 

Moreover, the fact that we can measure recurrent streams is exactly what makes streaming so much more accurate than sales for judging popularity. With sales, we completely lacked the ability to track post-purchase consumption. With streaming, we can know exactly how many times an album is listened to for any given period of time, not just the amount of people who decided to purchase it.

[Raver]

Rooting for ID. They better pull through 

[Gaia]

9 minutes ago, alexanderao said:

Such a policy is entirely arbitrary and simply serves to unfairly punish artists whose artists predominantly stream. It would completely undermine the accuracy of the chart. If you haven't realized, 90% or more of many albums' units (including almost all rap & R&B albums) come from SEA after the first or second week. Why should these albums be punished for the way that they're being consumed?

 

Moreover, the fact that we can measure recurrent streams is exactly what makes streaming so much more accurate than sales for judging popularity. With sales, we completely lacked the ability to track post-purchase consumption. With streaming, we can know exactly how many times an album is listened to for any given period of time, not just the amount of people who decided to purchase it.

How does it make the chart inaccurate? At the moment, having one huge streaming hit can get you thousands of extra "albums" to your SPS total which is completely bogus. Streaming one song does not mean people listened to the album or should be counted as such. 

 

Recurrent streams should ONLY be counted for Hot 100 because it uses multiple criteria to measure most popular songs of the week. BB200 was based on sales and sales only. 

[iHype.]

1 hour ago, Kkamjong said:

They should limit it so your SPS total can't being more than double that of your pure sales. That or make it so streaming decreases in weight every week after an album releases to account for recurrent streams by the same people.

That's the worst suggestion I have seen since streaming got big. Using that logic, an album with 10,000 sales and 100 million streams would be ranked below an album with 10,001 sales and 15 million streams. 

 

And taking away "recurrent streams" literally makes no sense when Billboard themselves said the great thing about streaming is it finally tracks popularity more accurately as in what the public continually listens to whereas sales counts 1 purchase and doesn't tell whether they listen to it once or 100 times. Consumption doesn't just end after 1 week, so there's no use in making a fake rule pretending everyone stopped listening to an album after 1 week. That's literally inaccurately depicting popularity if they just pretended people stopped listening to stuff after one week. Why would anyone encourage that? 

[alexanderao]

24 minutes ago, Kkamjong said:

How does it make the chart inaccurate? At the moment, having one huge streaming hit can get you thousands of extra "albums" to your SPS total which is completely bogus. Streaming one song does not mean people listened to the album or should be counted as such. 

 

Recurrent streams should ONLY be counted for Hot 100 because it uses multiple criteria to measure most popular songs of the week. BB200 was based on sales and sales only. 

It makes the chart inaccurate by disadvantaging artists whose audiences predominantly stream! We have observed countless albums this year–More Life, CTRL, American Teen, True To Self, I Decided., FUTURE, just to give a few high-profile examples–have more than half of their units come from SEA for the entirety of their chart runs. Under your policy, these albums would have their unit totals artificially altered simply because of the way they obtained their units, which is asinine. It problematically implies that units gained from SEA are illegitimate and inferior to units gained from TEA and album sales.

 

I would like to know what you want to do about the problem that you think exists with hit singles boosting the performances of albums (which is something that has occurred for as long as the industry has existed). Would you want to implement a system where your streams only count if you listen to the full album, uninterrupted? Then you're going to miss people who listen to half the album, or three-quarters of the album, or even seven-eighths of the album. Would you want to not count streams of any singles? Then no one's going to release any singles anymore because they'd kill their parent albums on the chart. If you really think you have a proposal that would increase the accuracy of the chart, I want to hear it.

 

Just as the Hot 100 uses multiple criteria to measure the most popular songs of the week, the Billboard 200 now uses multiple criteria to measure the most popular albums of the week. This has been the case for two and a half years now. Billboard still compiles a Top Album Sales chart which only takes sales into account, and you can look at that chart if you want to. But the BB200 evolved because BB recognized that incorporating streaming into the chart was imperative to maintaining the chart's accuracy in today's music industry.

[Gaia]

46 minutes ago, alexanderao said:

It makes the chart inaccurate by disadvantaging artists whose audiences predominantly stream! We have observed countless albums this year–More Life, CTRL, American Teen, True To Self, I Decided., FUTURE, just to give a few high-profile examples–have more than half of their units come from SEA for the entirety of their chart runs. Under your policy, these albums would have their unit totals artificially altered simply because of the way they obtained their units, which is asinine. It problematically implies that units gained from SEA are illegitimate and inferior to units gained from TEA and album sales.

 

I would like to know what you want to do about the problem that you think exists with hit singles boosting the performances of albums (which is something that has occurred for as long as the industry has existed). Would you want to implement a system where your streams only count if you listen to the full album, uninterrupted? Then you're going to miss people who listen to half the album, or three-quarters of the album, or even seven-eighths of the album. Would you want to not count streams of any singles? Then no one's going to release any singles anymore because they'd kill their parent albums on the chart. If you really think you have a proposal that would increase the accuracy of the chart, I want to hear it.

 

Just as the Hot 100 uses multiple criteria to measure the most popular songs of the week, the Billboard 200 now uses multiple criteria to measure the most popular albums of the week. This has been the case for two and a half years now. Billboard still compiles a Top Album Sales chart which only takes sales into account, and you can look at that chart if you want to. But the BB200 evolved because BB recognized that incorporating streaming into the chart was imperative to maintaining the chart's accuracy in today's music industry.

... are you comparing a single causing to BUY an album to streaming a single counting as an album sale? Those are no where near the same scenario  

 

A person should be required to stream at least 50% of an album in one tracking week for any of those streams to count towards BB200. It literally makes no sense that streaming a single contributes to someone's album sales even if the person streaming the single didn't listen to anymore than that one track. It's an extremely flawed system. 

 

If someone simply streams one song is should only contribute to the Hot 100. Why have two charts based on the same criteria? It makes no sense. That's like adding airplay to billboard 200.