I remember seeing the band perform this on 'Top of the Pops' as well, but it seemed to be doomed. At that time the 'this is a European group who won Eurovision with a freak single and are therefore beneath contempt' school of thought seemed to prevail in the British media. If I remember rightly it got pretty savage, hipper-than-thou reviews in the music press and never even made the Radio 1 playlist.
Yes, who knows what position this got to. I would still think that the 'breakers' would be no higher than 76 so I am completely open to all criticism and suggestions here! I do still hope that maybe one day we can find out for sure just where this got to.
Mickey Dread - thanks for this info. 'I've been waiting for you" is indeed one of ABBA's most beautiful and I think it would have fared better. I have never seen the video you uploaded of this before. Thanks so much. Perfect stuff. And isn't Agnetha just wonderful here? I still say, (and I might get some stick for this!) she has always had so much more class and finesse than Frida, which is so clearly obvious here. That aside, absolutely beautiful stuff.........
It was thought by Stig Anderson that "So Long" was the wrong track to release so near to Christmas in the U.K.He wanted "I've Been Waiting For You" to be the next release as he thought that not only was it a superior track,but had a better chance of charting with it's Christmassy feel.Maybe it was one of the reasons why "So Long" flopped even though it was given a slot on "Top Of The Pops".
I would have expected it to have gone higher than that as it was on Top of the Pops and to be in the breakers it would surely have had to be higher than 91 ? Of course there could have been 32 previous top 50 singles between 51-90 but I think that's statistically very unlikely and the 91st best selling single would hardly be listed in the breakers.
Malice-Cooper, I absolutely agree with you. Maybe my assumption was a little over zealous because I notice Wikipedia have now removed the 91 and left it blank. However I do think it reasonable to assume it got to a position somewhere in that region. The Music Week chart came from the BMRB and the single reached the breakers for two weeks. That is fact. But as a chart nut myself I'd still love to know it's true highest position in the top 100.
Catagna45 - thanks for doing that. I'll keep my eyes peeled. I just hope they do actually keep such statistics after such a long time. We can but hope!! Cheers.
ZebedyZak I think position 91 is probably correct. In those days the chart was compiled by the British Market Research Bureau (BMRB). I am quite sure they must have made a list of the top 100 but decided only to publish a top 50, presumably they thought very few people would be interested in anything not in the top 50 (except for people like me and you!!). So anything outside the top 50 which was new and climbing between (I would guess) 75 and 51 were called star breakers and anything new and climbing (again I would guess) between 100 and 76 were called breakers. Please note I am only surmising here but it would make sense to assume they made a top 100 else how could they know which records were breakers and star breakers? Therefore I do believe position 91 is correct as it only made the breakers and, if my memory serves me correctly, just for 2 weeks. Quite where to find past details of the top 100 I am not sure. The BMRB no longer exists. In 1987 it was absorbed into the WPP Group. The chart was published in Music Week magazine each week so you could try writing to them. In fact Top of the Pops mentioned BMRB and Music Week in their end credits..... "Top 30 specially prepared for the BBC and Music Week by the British Market Research Bureau"...... I, like you, would love to find out the full top 100 especially for the 70s. If you have any success, please let me know!! Thinking about it, Wikipedia found out somehow. Maybe from the WPP Group. Maybe we should write to them?? Anyway, hope this helps!!
"PS the number for this record as shown in the browser is wrong. It says 2484 there, when the label clearly shows that the correct number is 2848."
When the record was originally entered, the submitter used the wrong cat#. This was later corrected, but the URL of the page can't be changed from the original submussion because it would mess up links with the database (or so OC says).
I find these kind of chart figures somewhat hard to believe. Fans often fabricate statistics to try and prove they know more than another fan. Anyone can write anything on Wikipedia so I take that sort of thing with a large pinch of salt !
CBS 2484 was not released in the UK and was used for a cover version of "Sugar Baby Love" by the Dutch born singer, "Dave" (Wouter Otto Levenbach) who recorded mainly for the French language market. CBS 2470 was the French version of the song "Trop beau"
How the dickens do they know that, since the UK charts in 1974 were only a Top 50? Where do they get chart statistics for records that fell outside the Top 50, and how can I access them myself? I would like to know the details about every single that made the Top 100 in the UK, especially in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. Can anybody here help?
PS the number for this record as shown in the browser is wrong. It says 2484 there, when the label clearly shows that the correct number is 2848. What was the real 2484 on the Epic label? I don't remember seeing it. Was that number even used for an Epic release? Or was it a CBS release (or one of the other CBS-affiliated labels)?