Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Ultimate Averaged Chart - The BBC Chart Re-Imagined

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • kingofskiffle
    commented on 's reply
    I like stories like that

  • Robbie
    replied
    ^
    I remember when I started to buy Record Mirror each week in the mid 70s the newsagent would sometimes have the paper on a Thursday morning which I would buy on my way to school. Sometimes though it would be the Friday when it came in. Notably, one issue in January 1979 took well over a week to get to the newsagents because the whole of the country was hit by severe snowstorms (what a brilliant month that was!). As I'd bought every issue since September 1975 I thought it was going to be the first one I hadn't been able to get but the newsagent went the extra mile to get a copy sent to the shop just for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    replied
    Originally posted by Robbie View Post
    We did have a much better postal system back then of course with Sunday collections so I imagine everything would be received back at MM HQ on a Monday morning.

    What day did all the music papers go to press / be on sale back then? I know Music Week went to press on a Tuesday afternoon in the 70s with the BMRB charts being the final part of the magazine to be prepared for printing. I think most of the magazine was ready to print the previous Friday unless there was a massive breaking story. Elvis Presley did on a Tuesdsay evening UK time and it didn't make that week's Music Week. Record Mirror did carry the news in the 20/08/77 issue but that is because Record Mirror went to press overnight on a Tuesday evening / Wednesday morning. I think the news of his death was reported in the UK around 10.30pm (I remember it being a late news item on News At Ten).
    The publication day was always Thursday for the papers, but they carried the Saturday day. The reason being that paper would be sent out to the printers Wednesday to be intime for delivery to the news stands by Thursday. The Charts page in Record Mirror would have laid out Tuesday afternoon. When there was a bank holiday they were so busy doing the rest of the paper on Tuesday they couldn't do the charts and so reprinted last weeks charts.
    Even in the 60's Disc on the new singles page would say a record was out Tomorrow - Friday, because they knew it would being read by Thursday.
    It was always possible to fit quickly some paste ups in the copy, by removing something that could wait and using scissors to fit the typed text into the cleared space - for the deaths etc.

    It wasn't uncommon to print many papers in the night.

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    replied
    The Network Chart was always revealed on Sunday on ILR and was always ahead of the of the other chart broadcast at the same time on Radio One. Most of the Local Radio stations that broadcast an actual local sales chart, were also ahead of the Official Chart.
    The catch up chart came on Tuesday afterwards.
    When you looked in the Number One paper for the Network chart that was always the previous Sunday Chart. But when you looked in Record Mirror that was the top 40 that would be broadcast by Radio One on Sunday.
    It wasn't till much later when Gallup made the chart ready to be broadcast for the Sunday top 40. However this would lead to the decline in Top of The Pops, it was no longer was revealing the top 30 or 40 on Thursday, just what had been on Radio One the previous Sunday. Plus Record Mirror was doing the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    commented on 's reply
    Full information on them is on the Real Chart site, under the title "what is the Real Chart".

  • Splodj
    replied
    There was an embarrassing period for Radio 1 in the 80s when its Sunday chart show had a survey week well behind Independent Radio's Sunday chart show broadcast at the same time but using a survey week end of the previous day. I seem to recall a charity record (Band Aid?) that made number one on 2 days sales in the latter but was nowhere at all in the former.

    Leave a comment:


  • Robbie
    replied
    Originally posted by brian05 View Post

    These compilers must have been very clever people to get actual sales figures from every shop in the UK.

    Can you reveal their identity?
    There's an entire thread about this, from back in 2010!

    Leave a comment:


  • brian05
    replied
    Originally posted by Graham76man View Post
    And I have just got the figures from the compilers for the two Beatles tracks that week.
    651,000
    220,000
    So that solves that!
    These compilers must have been very clever people to get actual sales figures from every shop in the UK.

    Can you reveal their identity?

    Leave a comment:


  • Robbie
    replied
    Originally posted by Splodj View Post
    MM used primarily postal returns. See post #1968 for Daily Mirror report of when 'I feel fine' went straight in at number one on two days sales.
    We did have a much better postal system back then of course with Sunday collections so I imagine everything would be received back at MM HQ on a Monday morning.

    What day did all the music papers go to press / be on sale back then? I know Music Week went to press on a Tuesday afternoon in the 70s with the BMRB charts being the final part of the magazine to be prepared for printing. I think most of the magazine was ready to print the previous Friday unless there was a massive breaking story. Elvis Presley did on a Tuesdsay evening UK time and it didn't make that week's Music Week. Record Mirror did carry the news in the 20/08/77 issue but that is because Record Mirror went to press overnight on a Tuesday evening / Wednesday morning. I think the news of his death was reported in the UK around 10.30pm (I remember it being a late news item on News At Ten).

    Leave a comment:


  • Robbie
    replied
    Originally posted by Graham76man View Post
    Well of course they are right, since the Beatles single went in at number one the December 1 Real Chart. Which did add all the records up from ALL shops!
    Here's the top ten for that week:
    1 new The Beatles - I Want To Hold Your Hand / This Boy
    2 (2) The Beatles - She Loves You
    3 Freddie and The Dreamers - You Were Made For Me
    4 (1) Billy J Kramer And The Dakotas - I'll Keep You Satisfied
    5 The Beatles - The Beatles No 1 EP
    6 Kathy Kirby - Secret Love
    7 Cliff Richard and the Shadows - Don't Talk To Him
    8 The Rolling Stones - I Wanna Be Your Man
    9 Dave Clark Five - Glad All Over
    10 Dusty Springfield - I Only Want To Be With You

    Record Retailer must have cut of it's sales period at Friday, since it had a publication date of Thursday. Getting all the returns back by post would have put a tight deadline on the paper if including Saturday sales. Whereas the other papers were using the phone method and didn't have to wait to get the results back.
    It's clearly another case of misleading information telling people that Record Retailer final day of calculation was Saturday. It might have been at some point, but the low new Friday releases shows that it can't have been. It's a bit like saying the same when BMRB took over saying that Saturday was always the last day. Since for a while in 1976 they couldn't get the returns in due to the post office cancelling Sunday deliveries.
    For a point in 1976 it looks like the chart week ran from a Friday to a Thursday. I had forgotten that the chart sales week for 1974 to September 1978 was a Saturday to Friday and from May to September 1976 (and February 1977) it moved by a day which means Friday to Thursday.

    Dave Taylor once posted that even when the chart week moved back to Monday to Saturday many chart return shops sent their diaries back Saturday midday to ensure that the diaries were received by BMRB first post on a Monday morning. That means even Saturday afternoon sales would therefore be missing from many returns. I don't know whether the shops affected where the ones that didn't have a courier collect them or whether they were the shops where a courier called to get them. Given that by 1982 there were 800 or so shops on the chart panel it seems likely that a courier would just call at some random point on a Saturday, probably starting from noon. I wonder if the affected shops would then start filling in the new diary straight away or whether they would wait until the Monday, potentially meaning a number of sales were not recorded.

    Leave a comment:


  • Splodj
    replied
    MM used primarily postal returns. See post #1968 for Daily Mirror report of when 'I feel fine' went straight in at number one on two days sales.

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    replied
    And I have just got the figures from the compilers for the two Beatles tracks that week.
    651,000
    220,000
    So that solves that!

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    replied
    Well of course they are right, since the Beatles single went in at number one the December 1 Real Chart. Which did add all the records up from ALL shops!
    Here's the top ten for that week:
    1 new The Beatles - I Want To Hold Your Hand / This Boy
    2 (2) The Beatles - She Loves You
    3 Freddie and The Dreamers - You Were Made For Me
    4 (1) Billy J Kramer And The Dakotas - I'll Keep You Satisfied
    5 The Beatles - The Beatles No 1 EP
    6 Kathy Kirby - Secret Love
    7 Cliff Richard and the Shadows - Don't Talk To Him
    8 The Rolling Stones - I Wanna Be Your Man
    9 Dave Clark Five - Glad All Over
    10 Dusty Springfield - I Only Want To Be With You

    Record Retailer must have cut of it's sales period at Friday, since it had a publication date of Thursday. Getting all the returns back by post would have put a tight deadline on the paper if including Saturday sales. Whereas the other papers were using the phone method and didn't have to wait to get the results back.
    It's clearly another case of misleading information telling people that Record Retailer final day of calculation was Saturday. It might have been at some point, but the low new Friday releases shows that it can't have been. It's a bit like saying the same when BMRB took over saying that Saturday was always the last day. Since for a while in 1976 they couldn't get the returns in due to the post office cancelling Sunday deliveries.

    Leave a comment:


  • Splodj
    replied
    On the specific issue of 'I want to hold your hand' though, I would say that it sold more in 2 days than any other record that week. After 'She loves you' there was a massive demand for the follow up and EMI had plenty of time since it had been recorded to build up supplies. So I think it is accurate to say that the non-RR charts were right. It is a pity that we still have not ascertained if RRs survey week end was Friday which, if it was, would explain the discrepancy (since probably more bought it on the Saturday) and not make RR 'wrong' in itself.​​​​​​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    replied
    Sorry I wasn't singling out the RR chart, saying it was crap. All the 60's charts were crap, simply because they didn't add up the records. It's not too difficult thing to have 50 or 60 shops to tell you what they had sold. It's common sense that no two shops were alike in what they sold and to treat any sample, especially a large sample as though the shops were all equal is plain stupid.

    Much of how the charts were compiled is either based on speculation or from people doing general research on the charts. Giving overall results. Yet most of the speculation on here is down at the weekly level or at least on the year in question. In a field that I'm interested in - history. Their are lots of academic historians and they would dismiss much of the so called facts on here straight away. They would point out that a great deal of research would need to be done. It's not that hard, though limited in the current situation, to track the research down. Much of it would come from people still alive that worked on the publications. When Alan Smith did his research he wasn't interested too much in the day to day running of producing a chart, I don't think he asked about the problems that cropped up from time to time. Plus there should be lots of evidence of what shops took part. Though Alan Smith said that the different papers didn't use the same shops, I think that would be highly unlikely. It might have been true at certain times, but were the 300 shops of the BMRB also not doing returns on the others?
    Due to the similarity presented on here of the charts when Mr Tibbs was doing the 70's charts, some of the stores must have been supplying the BMRB as well as the papers. Otherwise the tyin's would not be the same.
    Much of the information will not have vanished as many believe it has. It might not be accessible, due to it containing personal information. But it will be out there. It's just a question of knowing where to look and who to ask.

    Leave a comment:


  • braindeadpj
    replied
    Originally posted by brian05 View Post
    From the OCC today.

    1963 was the year The Beatles truly hit their stride, landing their first three of their overall 17 Number 1s. Advance orders of I Want To Hold Your Hand reportedly exceeded 1 million and would have debuted at the top on the day of its release, had it not been blocked by their first million-seller She Loves You. No matter, though, as it soared to Number 1 the following week.

    Are they suggesting She Loves You sold a million copies to block I Want To Hold Your Hand entering at number one? As MrTibbs has shown it was RR that had SLY at no. 1 and IWTHYH at no. 10, while NME, MM and DISC all had IWTHYH a new entry at no. 1.
    The so-called "official chart" got it wrong.
    This is what the OCC should've said if they wanted to be accurate:
    1963 was the year The Beatles truly hit their stride, landing their first four of their overall 18 Number 1s. Advance orders of I Want To Hold Your Hand reportedly exceeded 1 million and it did debut at the top on the day of its release, in every chart but our 'official' one where it was blocked by their first million-seller She Loves You and 8 other songs..... No matter, though, as it soared to Number 1 the following week.

    Interesting that they say "would have debuted at the top on the day of its release" - does this mean RR was only including Friday's sales? Or is this just further example of their bull**** (or hyperbole) as the points system ranking only showed for the week and not daily sales (or did it give daily updates?)
    Last edited by braindeadpj; Fri September 17, 2021, 23:26.

    Leave a comment:


  • braindeadpj
    replied
    Originally posted by Graham76man View Post
    The OCC talk and produce crap all the time. Their current charts are as crap as the old Record Retailer chart.
    Advanced orders mean one of two things. The public are asking the shops for a record that has NOT been issued yet. Or the record shops themselves are asking (in this case EMI) for the record that has not been issued.
    In this case I suspect the advanced orders are the record shops saying we want this many copies, which amounts to over a million copies. What was selling to the public the week the single was available to buy doesn't mean the public snapped up all the million copies.
    I was thinking of it from a consumer perspective, but you're almost certainly right, the million preorders is from stores with the intent to sell and not because people have already ordered them (though some may have), so they're not saying 1 million copies were sold (shipped yes, sold no).

    I think saying the current charts are as crap as the old Record Retailer chart is actually doing the Record Retailer charts a disservice! We know that the current chart is essentially a fabrication with numerous fake number no1s (and hence frequently fake records being set) due to ACR (including the current no.1). Apart from the small sample size we don't know why the Record Retailer charts are so out of sync with the rest.

    Leave a comment:


  • Graham76man
    replied
    The OCC talk and produce crap all the time. Their current charts are as crap as the old Record Retailer chart.
    Advanced orders mean one of two things. The public are asking the shops for a record that has NOT been issued yet. Or the record shops themselves are asking (in this case EMI) for the record that has not been issued.
    In this case I suspect the advanced orders are the record shops saying we want this many copies, which amounts to over a million copies. What was selling to the public the week the single was available to buy doesn't mean the public snapped up all the million copies.
    The record would have only been available for two days, Friday and Saturday, so it's unlikely the shops shifted the entire stock of one million! It would mean that EMI by Monday would have to have the record plants working flat out to bring out at least another million to cover the complete selling out of the record. Plus the sales of the current number one from the Beatles would have to be selling more than a million too! I doubt EMI had the capacity to chuck out 3 million Beatles singles a week plus all the other records they had out that week!
    As for the charts of the time. They were not asking them the figures of records they sold. For example one Beatles single could have sold 500K the other 499K. All that the chart compilers knew at that time is that most were reporting one record to be the top seller and the Record Retailer shop sample showed the new record was not reported as being the biggest seller by the vast majority of them.
    Had all of them gone on counting records, the new record on some charts, might NOT have been top, whereas on the RR it might have been.
    It all depends which shops were taking part. Some stores might have outsold nearly all the stores in the sample. One thing is certain the million copies sent out were not evenly distributed among the shops.

    Leave a comment:


  • braindeadpj
    replied
    Originally posted by brian05 View Post
    3 charts to 1 says IWTHYH was no. 1 but RR was the odd one out. (and hence the OCC)
    I'm not disagreeing with that. We know that RR was always the odd-one out when it came to the Beatles (and everyone else for that matter). I'm just saying that a preorder of over 1 million does not necessarily lead to sales of 1 million in the first week. We know RR screwed up as usual. We know everyone else had it at no.1, but if they'd been recording sales rather than points I doubt it would have been a million that first week, as it is possible that not everyone picked it up in the first week; probably the majority but not all.
    That of course also highlights the problem with using points. If RR used stores that didn't do preorder, it's possible that there wasn't a lot of stock available for these stores hence the low position.
    Of course we can speculate 'til the cow jumps over the moon, we'll probably never know for sure why RR appears to have been the odd-one out at least 99.9 times out of 100!

    Leave a comment:


  • brian05
    replied
    3 charts to 1 says IWTHYH was no. 1 but RR was the odd one out. (and hence the OCC)

    Leave a comment:


  • braindeadpj
    replied
    Maybe not everyone picked their order up in the 1st week? With preorders, they probably only counted it if the single left the store with the customer.

    Leave a comment:


  • brian05
    replied
    From the OCC today.

    1963 was the year The Beatles truly hit their stride, landing their first three of their overall 17 Number 1s. Advance orders of I Want To Hold Your Hand reportedly exceeded 1 million and would have debuted at the top on the day of its release, had it not been blocked by their first million-seller She Loves You. No matter, though, as it soared to Number 1 the following week.

    Are they suggesting She Loves You sold a million copies to block I Want To Hold Your Hand entering at number one? As MrTibbs has shown it was RR that had SLY at no. 1 and IWTHYH at no. 10, while NME, MM and DISC all had IWTHYH a new entry at no. 1.
    The so-called "official chart" got it wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • braindeadpj
    replied
    Have a great time and I look forward to seeing the continuation of the UAC when you return.

    Leave a comment:


  • membranemusic
    replied
    Have a great break Mr Tibbs. We shall wait to see how the UAC progresses with great anticipation.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrTibbs
    replied
    Originally posted by Splodj View Post

    Let me guess ... 60 apiece?
    Not quite Splodj, RM is going to 60 as it is now established and this is in keeping with Alan's research which I have always followed. NME going to 65 on the basis that they are now compiling a Top 30 so a realistic increase makes sense to me.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X