about the charts with input from JK
--------------------------------------------

LONDON (Variety) - In the first seven weeks of this year, there were
seven No. 1 songs on the U.K. singles chart -- six of which entered the
list in the top spot. But rather than celebrating, the industry is
expressing concern over the chart, which some say is being so manipulated
by record companies that it is pointless.
The Spice Girls and Blur may have had their latest hits debut at No.
1, but that has much to do with loss leader marketing and exclusively
sales-derived statistics.
Many singles fall out of the chart nearly as quickly as they rise. Of
the seven No. 1 hits, only No Doubt's Don't Speak has remained there for
more than a week.
Some industry players are calling for a rethink of how the U.K. chart
works. One idea is to remodel it along the lines of the U.S. chart, a
complicated (and sometimes controversial) formula based on sales and
airplay -- reflecting not just what people are buying, but also what they
are listening to.
So what accounts for the U.K. chart's volatility?
Record companies in Britain typically sell a CD single to retailers
for 2.43 sterling ($3.89), the minimum price needed to qualify for the
chart. But the price to the consumer can be as low as 99 pence ($1.58) in
the first week of release.
The reason a single can be sold below cost is because record companies
often offer an enticement to retailers: buy one single and get another one
(or even two) free.
Giveaways boost a single's entry position on the chart, prompt more
radio and TV play, and are intended to whet the consumer appetite for an
artist's album, because that is where the real money is. (In 1996, single
sales in the U.K. hit 78.3 million units, up 10.7% over 1995; album sales
rose 6.2% to 208.4 million units sold.)
U2's single Discotheque, for example, was reportedly offered on a
three-for-the-price-of-one deal to some stores, as was Blur's Beetlebum and
the Spice Girls' worldwide hit Wannabe, which has sold 1.175 million units
in the U.K.
This loss-leader marketing practice may be good news for fans, but
some observers argue that it is a smash-and-grab approach geared toward the
short term.
"The U.K. chart is such an anomaly to anywhere else in the world
because it is 100% sales-based," says MTV Europe's Harriett Brand, senior
VP for talent and music programming. "In other countries, going straight to
No. 1 would be really impressive because it's so hard to do.
"The problem is that initial sales in the U.K. are fan-based. You hype
a song to No. 1, then it could disappear, and you may have lost people who
wouldn't normally like that artist. When you allow a song to build over
time, it allows (a) career to develop. You can give CDs away if you want to
grow market share, but that does not grow your business."
Another contentious issue is that only the majors can afford
significant loss-leader sacrifices. As a consequence, smaller indie labels
must either be satisfied with a considerably less-than-level playing field,
or go to the majors to maximize an artist's potential. Loss leaders can
also discriminate against acts the majors are less interested in investing
in.
"A lot of good music is being made that doesn't see the light of day,"
says veteran U.K. music entrepreneur Jonathan King. "A huge amount of top
hits are not wanted by the public, and the only acts that happen are the
ones that have instant appeal."
King has launched a U.K. chart to rival the one from CIN, the official
British chart compiler. King's Real Hits chart averages three weeks of
sales, includes radio and TV airplay, and even Internet voting. He says he
set up the alternative chart because this year the chart has become so
completely manipulated.
But the U.K. chart system has its supporters.
John Preston, the chairman of the British Phonographic Industry, the
music business' lobbying body, pulls no punches. Preston, who is also
chairman of BMG Entertainment Intl. U.K. & Ireland, says "the U.K. chart is
absolutely real -- airplay is subject to decisions made by a small group of
people. And it's only the people who are not doing well in the chart (who)
are bitching."
Preston notes that loss leaders are standard across the record
industry, including the independents, and that gambling on big first-week
sales is a very targeted decision determined by the product being sold.
What is also overlooked is that many singles never reach No. 1 but
perform well over a sustained period. In BMG's case, Preston cites, No
Mercy's Where Do You Go has placed well in successive weekly charts.
Intriguingly, Where Do You Go is No. 1 in King's chart.
The biggest hype machine for singles in the U.K. is the BBC's
venerable music show, Top of the Pops. MTV and other music TV programming
also plays an important role. But radio is still the backbone.
The chart machine machinations crystallized last year with the
much-ballyhooed battle for the No. 1 spot between Britpop rivals Oasis with
Roll With It and Blur with Country House. Both singles are said to have
gone to retailers on some sort of loss-leader basis, but EMI offered the
better deal on Blur. Country House won the No. 1 designation.
And pity poor Blur now. After Beetlebum debuted at the top of the U.K.
chart at the end of January, it dropped to seven and then 29 in the
subsequent weeks. A good single it may be, but not a particularly
commercial one.
Reuters/V