Home Videos Photos Shop
PerezHilton CocoPerez Khloé Selena G. Meghan Markle T. Swift PerezTV

Billboard Charts Will No Longer Count Albums That Sell For Less Than $3.49

| Filed under: Music MinuteBusiness Blitz

billboard makes new policy

Guess we probably won't be seeing any more epic 99 cent sales any time soon…

Billboard has announced that beginning the week of Nov. 21, albums selling for less than $3.49 within the first four weeks of release will NOT count on charts.

Also, individual tracks that sell for less than $0.39 won't count on charts either!

Here's Billboard editor Bill Werde on WHY these specific prices were chosen:

"We ultimately chose $3.49 for two reasons. One, it's roughly half of wholesale in the digital world, where albums cost retailers about $7.50 on average. And two, this price point wouldn't interfere with any regular or semi-regular pricing currently in effect at any of the five biggest retailers - Walmart, Amazon, iTunes, Best Buy and Target. As I noted in my earlier essay, Billboard doesn't want to control the marketplace. We just want to count it. But free or almost-free albums don't represent a marketplace."

What do U think? Do U agree with Billboard's new policy???

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

All The TV Shows Canceled In 2018 (So Far)!
Stars We Lost In 2018
Glee: Where Are They Now?
All Of Taylor Swift's Exes And The Songs About Them!
Ripoff Artists! Stars Accused Of Plagiarism!
9 Songs That Are Totally About Masturbation!

16 comments to “Billboard Charts Will No Longer Count Albums That Sell For Less Than $3.49”

  1. 1

    Lmao, Gaga is screwed. Her cheating has backfired, her sales figures were a joke and Billboard has rightly put her in her place. Your wifey is a fraud who manipulated the system to position herself into the #1 spot. The public has spoken, her album and singles have flopped, let's see sanfran1 and Tellall spin their way out of this. She has poisoned the music industry with her self-obsessed marketing and gimmicks, this news is retribution to the real musical talent out there. She's done. Good riddance.

  2. 2

    "Free or almost-free albums don't represent a marketplace." Fair enough.

  3. 3

    Re: Lady Who?
    And you're poisoning these blogs with your pseudo-intellectual babbling. How was GaGa put in her place? You do know the majority of her sales for BTW come from OUTSIDE the US–sales of which Billboard do not count. There's nothing to spin here. You're just ranting for the sake of ranting.

  4. 4

    Bye Gaga you had a nice run..

  5. 5

    "But free or almost-free albums don't represent a marketplace."
    Well, in a way, it does. When Amazon released Born This Way for 99c, the demand crashed their servers. Obviously people were willing to buy it at that price, although it also should be stated that over half of those first week sales came from physical CDs and other digital sites not offering the 99c deal, so I don't see how the major retailer's operations were interfered with. If the record companies and Billboard are so interested in a fair playing field, then why are mp3 downloads still sold for almost to even the same price as a CD, especially when there's not as much overhead or inventory costs in hosting mp3s as there are in stocking CDs? I think the powers that be are still forgetting that today's music consumers still have the attitude that they shouldn't have to pay for music and ARE much more willing to bypass the marketplace & get music for free rather than pay for it.

  6. 6

    They also need to stop counting digital sales towards songs that are not OFFICIAL singles. Let's make the Hot 100 a SINGLES chart again for songs released as official singles.

  7. 7

    Re: hangook

  8. 8

    we could have used this about 5 months ago…also it's a huge FUCK YOU to lady gaga, obviously. she spit in the face of record sales.

  9. 9

    also people are acting as if 500,000 albums sold for 99 cents doesn't matter…..it does matter. it means that 500,000 of those albums were damn near pirated. i got one of those albums for 99 cents….and i hate her. but it was 99 cents….she would have had a 400,000-500,000 album sale debut that first work. everyone knows that. shutup, gaga fans. just get over it. this is being done because of gaga….billboard doesn't like being cheated.

  10. 10

    LMFAO! Lady GaGa was the only person in recent memory to sell albums for $0.99. Taylor Swift sold hers for $3.99 for a couple days on Amazon, so they still would've counted! In reality, Lady GaGa's "Born This Way" would've sold around 600,000 rather than 1.1 million. Back to the story, Billboard is full of shit. They let Lady GaGa get her $0.99 sales in, just like they counted FREE DIGITAL DOWNLOADS OF REMIXES FOR ONE WEEK, which allowed We Belong Together to stay at the top longer than it should have and blocked Rihanna's "Pon de Replay" from reaching the top spot on the Hot 100. Looks like Rihanna's going to get the last laugh because her momentum hasn't slowed at all and she is steadily claiming hit after #1 hit on the Hot 100.

  11. 11

    lady gaga would sale less in 1st week fake sales for gagasshole

  12. 12

    @Adele's Chair Steeze
    They also did a last minute policy change that prevented Britney's Blackout from debuting at #1. Policy changes aren't a bad thing, but to do it because a bunch of fans get irritated over certain policies that doesn't affect them any is quite silly.

  13. 13

    but Gagas figures still stand in the record books? Yes they fucking do. Which is a disgrace. It was outrageous that those 99c sales were allowed to count in the first place. Made a mockery of the chart rules about fair competition. And we all know that her little teeny gay cult followers(ie SHEEP) bought several copies of those 99c albums to hype up her sales. CHEATING WHORE.

  14. 14

    no more cheating for gaga.She couldnt even pass rihanna and adele's album sales by selling for .99$

  15. 15

    I wonder why they waited so long to make this decision, not that it's going to affect her past sales. Back in the 90s, people were accusing Mariah Carey's label of discounting her singles to 99c (back when the cost of a single was much higher than it is today) to get her her multiple #1s, but they didn't seem bow to the pressure of those accusations. Are they going to discount indie labels who sell their albums for less than $3.49? Seems all political to me. An album sold is an album sold.

  16. 16

    Sounds more like a plan or an excuse to keep music prices high.