hts midweek

courtesy of steven brotherstone & his amazing collection of photos on the ceremony list under alternate guise is a highly commendable & very surprising number 8!

perhaps it will get some airplay then?

I'd expect a fall to about 14. It's only really us sad bastards buying all three formats on Monday that have got it as high as 8. Saturday shoppers count for a huge percentage of the weeks sales which I reckon will ruin any hopes of a top 10 placing. Shame.

If this is the case, why hasn't any New Order fan twigged the bleeding obvious then? I mean, it's SO SIMPLE ISN'T IT??

Wait until FRIDAY OR SATURDAY to buy the damn thing - that way, the relative surge would GUARANTEE A HIGHER PLACING IN THE CHART WOULDN'T IT? It's THAT obvious to everyone surely!?!?!?!?!? Jeezus!!

Sometimes, when you honestly think about it, rushing out to buy your heroes records ON THE DAY OF RELEASE would have a detrimental effect on its placing as the week passes due obviously to the fact that the die-hards have already got it and for the remainder of the week no one else would need to purchase it...

SO WHY DIDN'T YOU PEOPLE DO THIS THEN?? WHY COULDN'T YOU ALL WAIT TILL FRIDAY THEN??? It's just a simple act of suppressing your desire until a few days later - to yield better results. We all know about the "peaking too early" syndrome bloody well enough don't we??!! Yeah??

It's now ALL YOUR COLLECTIVE FAULT for ensuring that the single will now in all likelihood stall outside the top twenty come weekend...simply cuz of all the fooking pre-teens and townies who'll be thronging the fooking HMV to lay their sweaty mitts on every other piece of manufactured garage/boy band/nu-metal pap they can get hold of....IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT...PIGGIES!!!.

DUUUHHHHH!!...
.....HELLO?? WAKE UP BACK THERE!! ANY ONE AT HOME???!!

Um, yeah but Marty the charts are made up of the whole weeks sales aint they? so it dont matter what day of the week you buy it?

Had a look at NME's website, and noticed that the Doves were challenging eyebrow and his mob for number 1. How did they manage that when its only been on sale for one day - Moonday?

The point I was making Sebsy was - by the end of the week - probably tomorrow Thursday at a guess - all those who've snapped up the New Order single in the first two days will have been included in the total all week sales, and no further sales for the rest of the week (save a few more at the weekend) are likely. Now with the "teenybopper" shite that ALWAYS shifts serious truckloads, these usually happen at their most frenetic come Saturday's Mall-rat ritual, even though the whole week usually shows strong sales for these. Result: more combined sales for the "teenybopper" shite by close of business, less overall New Order sales = lower chart debut.

The Oasis/Doves thing is frankly bizarre, unless this one-day-sale only ruse is a clever ploy by Heavenly Records to give Doves the top 10 breakthru they've been waiting for - or rather the NME have been campaiging for in their desperate search for a new guitar saviour like Radiohead, now the "original" Radiohead have gone all oblique electronic art-rock on us (and for the better, me thinks, being a casual Radiohead admirer anyways)

That's the way I see it anyway... :)

Still don't see what your trying to say Marty, cuz record sales are taken up to close of play Saturday evening. Sebsy is right it don't matter what bloody day you buy it on, the whole week evens itself out. "Law of averages" as the mecca Mr. Hansen would say.

Please explain more cuz I'd love to hear your logic on this one.

Yeah sure - maybe it was a bit garbled and got lost in the translation.....but I'll try and elucidate: If, hypothetically, ALL the diehard New Order fans rushed out to buy it on MONDAY, then it's likely there would be very few New Order fans left or other punters who'd bother to buy the single for the remaining few days of the week - hence it's relatively high mid-week chart placing. Now, say, if the other teenybop shite releases were being purchased in respectable numbers EVERY DAY of the week but peaking spectacularly on Saturday (as most of the little shites swarm our high streets then don't they?), this would boost the already higher accumulated sales of their crappy bands' singles, whilst the NEW ORDER one would have already run out of steam sales-wise by mid week, hence slip down the total combined sales rankings..... ergo, come Sunday, it's chart position would be lower. Have I explained it clearer there?

I'm telling ya - I know how it works, I was proved right about "60mph" not going top 20 and the 98% correct theory that subsequent New Order singles lifted off albums always perform poorer in the charts than the first introductory single... (that is indeed true of their last three albums - including "Get Ready")...That's not to say of course "HTS" is an album track, but then again, the pedantic part of me says that it's already featured on the "24Hr PP" Soundtrack album and most Manchester/New Order fans may well have got that already, so why bother rushing out to buy the single? Know what I'm getting at?

Marty, sorry to contradict you but fans buying singles the day they come out can have an indirect effect on chart positions. I used to work in a record shop and I was often asked to do things usually done by the singles buyer. Here's how it would work:

Midweek charts are produced for the benefit of, amongst others, record shops. Singles buyers should study the midweek charts and the sales figures from their own stores and decide what they need to re-order in time to arrive for the weekend (which is the peak sales period). If a single buyer doesn't bother to study the midweek charts or their own sales figures, decides not to re-order a single that is selling or tries to re-order a single that is selling but finds that it is out of stock (which happens surprisingly often) if they sell out of that single before the weekend they miss out on potential weekend sales.

Whilst the final chart positions are based upon a whole week's sales when lots of fans of a particular band buy a single early in the week they make it more likely that singles buyers will buy in more copies of the single in time for the weekend, thus increasing the potential number of sales for the week. If, as Marty suggested, fans waited until Friday or Saturday before rushing out en masse to buy the single the ones who leave it until last are more likely to find that the single has already sold out because the singles buyer is less likely to have ordered more copies during the week and they will not be able to buy it until the following Monday at the earliest (or not at all if the singles buyer doesn't bother to re-order it). Therefore whilst a midweek chart position for a single by a band with eager fans is often higher than its final chart position early sales make it possible for that single to maintain that position throughout the week.

I apologise if that is incomprehensible but there is a lot more to singles buying, and especially expert singles buying, than that and I won't bore you with it. However, if you want I will try to explain what has happened and what could happen with the Doves single.

Yeah - please do, I can't help but be a complete cynic when it comes to the charts and how the "market" (spit!) operates now. But like I said I do hope you all prove me wrong when "Here To Stay" goes Top Ten come Sunday because I think it'll be very lucky to land inside of the Top 15 at any rate.

As for the new Doves single - so will it go Top Three then? I suspect it will actually. But please eleaborate if you feel the need to address my ignorance!!

Marty, you're right to be cynical about the charts because the record companies have worked out what to do to maximise chart positions and revenue. I didn't say that fans buying a single early would help a single such as Here To Stay get a good chart position on Sunday evening - if they didn't it would have a lower chance of getting the best possible chart position it could achieve than if they waited until the weekend. However, I won't go into this any further because the case of the new Doves single is much more interesting.

I was tempted to start a thread for predictions and preferences for new entries on this week's chart but I'm glad I didn't because if I had I would have predicted that the Doves single would go in at No.1 which I don't think is going to happen now because apparently Oasis are a long way ahead. Anyway, when I saw that an advert for the single saying it was to be available at "a very special price" I expected it to be £1.99. When I saw it was only 99p for the CD I was amazed.

The price of a new release CD single depends upon how many copies of the single the record company gives to shops for free when shops buy some in. If a record company is sure a single is going to sell well regardless of the price they don't give any for free so shops will price it up at £3.99. If a record company isn't sure a single is going to sell well they may give shops a few free copies when they buy some so that the shops will price it up at £2.99 and that will persuade more people to buy the single. If a record company doubts a single is going to chart they give shops some free copies when they buy some so that the shops will price it up at £1.99 and that will generate sufficient sales to get it into the chart. If shops prices up a new release CD single at 99p that means that most, if not all, of the copies of the single the shops have were given to them for free by the record company.

So the Doves' record company has spent its money on pressing and distributing "There Goes The Fear" and has taken little or nothing in return. Why have they done this? The NME described the band as "the new Radiohead" but I think their record company is hoping that they are the new Verve. After limited success in the early years the Verve's career took off after "Bittersweet Symphony" and "The Drugs Don't Work" became huge hits and "Urban Hymns" sold spectacularly well and they managed to do this whilst maintaining their credibility. Heavenly are hoping that something similar will happen with the Doves and their new album "The Last Broadcast". They have decided that giving the new single away is the best form of marketing because they want people to hear the band's music rather than just their name.

isn't it just cheaper cos its only one track? (bit like I want Candy by bow-wow-wow was cheaper as it only had one side...)

the doves one was deleted after monday but shops just ordered loads of them & will keep selling til they run out, knowing they cant get any more.

hence sales will continue after monday.

Fingers, I worked for an independent record shop for 8 years and second what your saying. The record companies are manipulative shites, but in the case of Doves it can only be good for the record buying public. Loss leader is what it boils down to. By operating in this manner they don't have to fill the single with 'b-sides' but keep them for future singles (possibly full price) and hope to maximise the return on the LP with then a greater fanbase.

Back to NO, IMHO I think HTS will obtain a chart spot of about 14. Just a hunch though ;)

Cheers for the info guys. I think HTS will scrape top ten but then I'm an optimist. It was a clever bit of marketing to sell the DOves single for a quid, the bloke I went to HMV with when I bought HTS bought the Doves single solely coz I told him it was decent, it was a quid, and would be deleted at the end of the day. He hadnt even heard the track before .

Originally posted by Seb Briggs Um, yeah but Marty the charts are made up of the whole weeks sales aint they? so it dont matter what day of the week you buy it?Had a look at NME's website, and noticed that the Doves were challenging eyebrow and his mob for number 1. How did they manage that when its only been on sale for one day - Moonday?

They pressed enough copies to last all week. Its not being removed from shelves on monday, just made unavailable to order by record stores.

Originally posted by Major Tarantino > Originally posted by Seb Briggs> Um, yeah but Marty the charts are made up of the whole weeks sales aint they? so it dont matter what day of the week you buy it?> > Had a look at NME's website, and noticed that the Doves were challenging eyebrow and his mob for number 1. How did they manage that when its only been on sale for one day - Moonday?

They pressed enough copies to last all week. Its not being removed from shelves on monday, just made unavailable to order by record stores.

I have to say it would be amazingly funny if Doves beat Oasis to number 1. I suppose I'd rather have a Manc band at number 1 (Oasis even) than other bands but if there's two Manc bands I'd plump for Doves as it's unlikely New Order will get to number 1. I'd say we should all also fork out 99p for the Doves single. It'd be the next best thing to New Order bearing in mind Doves' Gretton past. I suspect if Factory were going today Doves would be their new top band. The single is just extraordinarily good as well; and you get the video on the CD as well which is worth pointing out.

Back to Fingers on this one - was there any truth in the old rumour/ruling that once singles were made available at less than a quid each they were ineligible for the charts? I'm sure this happened once in the past. However, the last time I recall buying a single sold at only 99p and having it chart respectably was in 1996 with The Boo Radleys (plug for a great underrated and now sadly deceased band) and their single "C'MON KIDS!" which came out in TWO CD formats each containg FOUR tracks. Each CD was 99p and the single actually - incredibly - went Top 20 at #18: only the band's second ever top 20 showing. Their label Creation admitted they would make a loss on this single (cue Doves similarity) but Martin Carr from the band insisted they [Creation] price it specially as he wanted more people to hear it. Fortunately things worked in his favour.

Dave, you asked the Doves single was cheaper because it contains only one track? Probably not because there will be little or difference in cost between pressing and distributing a one track CD single and a three or four track CD single (indeed, there is not that much difference in cost between pressing and distributing a CD single and a CD album - the most significant costs are the cost of studio time and promotion). What surprised me about the Doves single was the fact that the video is included on the CD (most videos cost a fortune) and that the single was released in a plastic case (which would have cost about 20-25p or possibly less depending on the discount for bulk buying) rather than in a minimal card sleeve.

But-tocks, you suggested that some B-sides will probably have been saved for future singles (which is probably the case) but the really significant thing is the price. If it had been released at £2.99 or £3.99 it wouldn't have sold well because many people would have waited for the album. (By the way, 8 years in a record shop - what did you do wrong in a former life?)

A few of you have suggested that sufficient copies will have been released prior to deletion to get a decent chart placing, something I think is almost certainly the case. When the Manic Street Preachers released "Masses Against The Classes" (which is slightly different because it was a three-track single costing £2.99 which was deleted after a week) they released enough copies to get it to number one if most of them sold in the first week. However, just because the record company deleted the Doves single on the day of release doesn't mean that record shops that run low or sell out won't be able to get more copies in.

As But-tocks should be able to confirm there are wholesale companies which buy products from a range of record companies so that they can sell them on to record shops, especially on Fridays Saturdays when most record companies are closed or won't deliver if orders are placed after a certain time. If these third parties wholesalers managed to get some copies of the Doves single from the record company when the single was deleted shops will not have been able to get more copies direct from the record company but they will have been able to buy them from those wholesalers. If this has happened those shops that sell out or re-order quickest will be able to get more copies (albeit at a price) but those who leave it too late will not. Any shops that managed to get hold of more copies from a wholesaler but had to pay for them may then decide to put the price up to £3.99 in the hope that if every other shop in the area sells out people will go to them and cough up more. So if you want the Doves single for 99p you may have to hurry (I suggest you pop to a record shop before lunchtime on Friday or before they close on Friday at the latest because prices may go up on Saturday morning).

Originally posted by Oh Look! There Goes The Laughing Martian Again!! Back to Fingers on this one - was there any truth in the old rumour/ruling that once singles were made available at less than a quid each they were ineligible for the charts? I'm sure this happened once in the past. However, the last time I recall buying a single sold at only 99p and having it chart respectably was in 1996 with The Boo Radleys (plug for a great underrated and now sadly deceased band) and their single "C'MON KIDS!" which came out in TWO CD formats each containg FOUR tracks. Each CD was 99p and the single actually - incredibly - went Top 20 at #18: only the band's second ever top 20 showing. Their label Creation admitted they would make a loss on this single (cue Doves similarity) but Martin Carr from the band insisted they [Creation] price it specially as he wanted more people to hear it. Fortunately things worked in his favour.

People in the music industry complain about falling single sales but most of the blame must lie with the music industry itself. Years ago record companies would put four songs or up to seven mixes on a CD single or give away free posters or stickers and people were happy to buy them. However, then the powers-that-be changed the rules and said that each format must contain no more than three songs or no more than 20 minutes of music in the case of remixes, banned certain free gifts and said that those singles or versions of singles that were too generous would be disqualified from the charts. After this sales of singles went down because some people came to the conclusion that singles weren't good value for money. What did the record companies expect?