Official Charts Thread

[27monster27 12,288]

You know, people on here were getting attacked for saying that Lady Gaga lost the battle with the GP in terms of generic winning over camp, but look who ended up being right in the end? Abracadabra not being a top 10 proves it. (I understand that poor release promo played a role, but still.)

[Gaby15 11,117]

Spotify monthly listeners:

1 Bruno Mars 142,775,931 (-265,099)

2 Lady Gaga 122,428,195 (-234,435)

3 The Weeknd 119,313,750 (-350,146)

4 Kendrick Lamar 110,114,078 (-723,950)

5 Billie Eilish 104,697,455 (-242,063)

[JustTea 5,088]

8 minutes ago, 27monster27 said:

You know, people on here were getting attacked for saying that Lady Gaga lost the battle with the GP in terms of generic winning over camp, but look who ended up being right in the end? Abracadabra not being a top 10 proves it. (I understand that poor release promo played a role, but still.)

That's just the US GP 

[andy232000 10,679]

If you think about it, her team and Interscope Records are comfortable where Gaga as a brand is. 

The truth is promoting a song and getting it to chart high these days requires a LOT of money. Billboards, performances, radio deals, interviews, brand activations, Fan events, etc. And most of that money wont return based on a #1 song alone. 

A song like Die With A Smile, with the average pay rate per stream, has only generated about 7.2 Million dollars from Spotify and maybe a bit more off other streaming platforms.  That is a fraction of the cost it takes to pull out all that promo. Before streaming, this song would have generated over 20 million alone so it made sense to push it cause the profit margins were a lot more, and 20 - 30 Million is a comfortable budget for big popstars. But now Record labels don't get that kind of money from a single anymore. 

Abra has sold about 500k equivalent units in the US, and has about 180M on Spotify, I'm only guessing numbers, but this song is barely pulling in 1M dollars in profit. That money would be all spent in further radio deals and physical sales if they tried, meaning there would not be a profit off of this single If they chased the chart position. Imagine paying 1M more to get abra to a TOP 10, and for it to only get like 200k in profit from that boost. It just doesn't make sense If we are talking money, and that's with the risk that the song does not reach a decent peak.

The only real value that a high chart position gives the artist is prestige and status. It might influence the sentiment around them, but monetarily speaking, It doesn't actually add much to the Record label. 

Given this era already has a hit with DWAS, and will be a #1 album, I'm betting my money on Interscope deciding that's enough for them and will now concentrate on the live shows. I mean, The Chromatica ball grossed over 112M. Thats over 5.6M per show. She easily recovers the marketing costs and production costs with only touring. 

We all want to see Gaga high on the charts, but the people running the show care more about their own profit, and chasing the charts would mean they get less of that. Also, Gaga's image is the healthiest it has been in years, so its not imperative to get a #1 hit to "clean her image". If anything I feel Mayhem on its own is getting her way much more praise through reviews and producers really loving the record. They were able to feed into Gaga's positive perception without much money, so the chart run just really isn't adding that much value, all things considered. 

It can be frustrating for us chartsters, but teh truth is we are the only ones getting a kick out of the #1 single. We just use it as bragging rights to fight other stans, when everyone that is  actually being affected by a songs performance (producers, record lables, gaga), don't really benefit from it being high or low. As long as streaming exists, touring is where the money is for them. 

Edited March 13 by andy232000

[Noah 26,876]

6 minutes ago, 27monster27 said:

You know, people on here were getting attacked for saying that Lady Gaga lost the battle with the GP in terms of generic winning over camp, but look who ended up being right in the end? Abracadabra not being a top 10 proves it. (I understand that poor release promo played a role, but still.)

I think this is just an USA problem tbh

She's breaking her own records from decades ago with this Album everywhere else. It sucks that the Billboard charts so heavily rely on radio and that it takes ages for Songs to reach a peak over there.I mean, if the GP didn't care for Gaga - Abracadabra wouldn't have 500k sound uses on Tiktok, the Album would get even less streams than Chromatica (which had peak Blackpink and Ariana on it) etc. 

The big problem is legit just a lack of promotion, but I also don't know if pushing out another single now (when Abra is still rising on Radio) would be smart. Maybe its best to focus on the March Madness Ad, hope for an iHeart performance and put out physicals next week? 

[JustTea 5,088]

3 hours ago, lastpopicon said:

 

No, I didn't. 

Both Chromatica and MAYHEM are the unfiltered numbers.

Yea I noticed right after I posted and edited, it's just that you excluded partial day for Mayhem, not sure if the same for Chromatica, but saw that Mayhem got 46M+ unfiltered first day 

[Fizzy 2,217]

I do think despite the losses, sometimes its good to spend on promotion as thats how you build a bigger fanbase and they buy your physicals and what not. 
 

I do think Disease should have come with its music video directly.

Abracadabra should have been a Friday release with a Grammy performance (ala SNL)

[Auralegends 5,501]

13 minutes ago, andy232000 said:

If you think about it, her team and Interscope Records are comfortable where Gaga as a brand is. 

The truth is promoting a song and getting it to chart high these days requires a LOT of money. Billboards, performances, radio deals, interviews, brand activations, Fan events, etc. And most of that money wont return based on a #1 song alone. 

A song like Die With A Smile, with the average pay rate per stream, has only generated about 7.2 Million dollars from Spotify and maybe a bit more off other streaming platforms.  That is a fraction of the cost it takes to pull out all that promo. Before streaming, this song would have generated over 20 million alone so it made sense to push it cause the profit margins were a lot more, and 20 - 30 Million is a comfortable budget for big popstars. But now Record labels don't get that kind of money from a single anymore. 

Abra has sold about 500k equivalent units in the US, and has about 180M on Spotify, I'm only guessing numbers, but this song is barely pulling in 1M dollars in profit. That money would be all spent in further radio deals and physical sales if they tried, meaning there would not be a profit off of this single If they chased the chart position. Imagine paying 1M more to get abra to a TOP 10, and for it to only get like 200k in profit from that boost. It just doesn't make sense If we are talking money, and that's with the risk that the song does not reach a decent peak.

The only real value that a high chart position gives the artist is prestige and status. It might influence the sentiment around them, but monetarily speaking, It doesn't actually add much to the Record label. 

Given this era already has a hit with DWAS, and will be a #1 album, I'm betting my money on Interscope deciding that's enough for them and will now concentrate on the live shows. I mean, The Chromatica ball grossed over 112M. Thats over 5.6M per show. She easily recovers the marketing costs and production costs with only touring. 

We all want to see Gaga high on the charts, but the people running the show care more about their own profit, and chasing the charts would mean they get less of that. Also, Gaga's image is the healthiest it has been in years, so its not imperative to get a #1 hit to "clean her image". If anything I feel Mayhem on its own is getting her way much more praise through reviews and producers really loving the record. They were able to feed into Gaga's positive perception without much money, so the chart run just really isn't adding that much value, all things considered. 

It can be frustrating for us chartsters, but teh truth is we are the only ones getting a kick out of the #1 single. We just use it as bragging rights to fight other stans, when everyone that is  actually being affected by a songs performance (producers, record lables, gaga), don't really benefit from it being high or low. As long as streaming exists, touring is where the money is for them. 

The labels do have the rise of the Vinyls though. They are super popular and double the price of CDs , so I guess they can earn a lot of money with that.

[DesertWolf 45,519]

Abracadabra music video: 79M views 

[SevenWonder 4,189]

28 minutes ago, 27monster27 said:

(I understand that poor release promo played a role, but still.)

I hear you, but it didn't just play a role. It's the only reason Abra isn't a top ten song. That's it. Along with the bad luck of the Superbowl effect being the biggest ever (times ten) this year. 

[Hey Boy 1,033]

The only real reason Abra isn't top 10 hit yet is that it wasn't released on Friday Jan 31st. Every other factor was out of her team hands.

Edited March 13 by Hey Boy

[PinkJelly 1,748]

How are we looking album wise and song wise for the UK charts? 🫣

[Gaby15 11,117]

DWAS (Live in Las Vegas) surpassed 45 M views on YT

[Hey Boy 1,033]

Imo we should stop caring about Hot 100 atp, at least it had decent #13 peak. Maybe Coachella will bring it higher but as long as music is dope who cares and it's probably joining billions club anyway.

[Hey Boy 1,033]

10 minutes ago, PinkJelly said:

How are we looking album wise and song wise for the UK charts? 🫣

We'll see tommorow but doing great for sure, looking for #2 peak for Abra, two more top 20 entries and #1 album with about 50,000 units.