|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 17, 2012 13:59:48 GMT -5
I agree it definitely was a risky thing for the guy to do. However, it's clear that Elvis did get along with those guys, since they "jammed" on "I'll Hold You In My Heart" (with Elvis on piano), and on "Stranger In My Home Town", much like what happened on the NBC special. I think the reason there was no blow-up on Elvis' part was probably due to him being too enthusiastic about the sessions to feel insulted. There are many moments on those recordings where you can tell he was just really involved in the recording process in ways he had not been since perhaps 1961. The enthusiasm he shows on "Stranger" is so infectious, it's unreal. Elvis knew that the Colonel's practices of swindling from outside songwriters was a debilitating thing to both the songwriters and to himself, but unfortunately Elvis felt too beholden to the man, and for far too long. I agree that if Elvis had been able to complete that late summer '77 tour of his, he would probably have given the Colonel his walking papers, and taken a year off to detox and rest. He sure didn't need to tour as much as he did during those last seven years of his life; he could have just done one big national tour over a period of two months per year, and had the rest of the time either to rest or to record. And he didn't need to do Vegas all the time; that was every bit as debilitating to Elvis' reputation in the 70s as the movies had been in the 60s, and it was all the Colonel's doing. The Memphis sessions at American Studios were one of the best and certainly one of the most productive, Parker's shoddy and shady business practices notwithstanding. It's interesting that much is made about Parker's attempt to grab part of the publishing on "Suspicious Minds," yet it's rarely mentioned he also tried to get part of the publishing on "Mama Liked the Roses," which was also published by Press. He had part of the publishing on several of the other songs recorded at American and two or three on which he (through Elvis Presley Music) had 100% of the publishing. One song he didn't have the publishing on at the time but would have 100% of the publishing later on was "You'll Think of Me," the B-side to "Suspicious Minds." Because things were going so well for Elvis for the most part, I also think he was willing to overlook any insults as to his musicianship coming from the other musicians. But he had in the past never been one to criticize the musicians when they flubbed up a take, taking on the blame himself for the screw up. If a musician flubbed a take, they'd just start from scratch and have another go, with the musician catching and correcting his mistake. Another angle to the story regarding what Parker's relationship with Elvis post-September 1977 said Parker had nothing planned for Elvis the rest of the year and for part of 1978 beyond a recording session that was to be scheduled sometime between January and March of 1978. Not even any touring. Something did seem to be going on, maybe a new way of doing things. Songs were already being considered and chosen for the next recording session, including "Rainy Night in Georgia," which had long been one of Elvis's personal favorite songs and a song he had expressed interest in recording. Several new songs were also in the line up, including some from songwriter Paul Evans, who had written for Elvis in the past. And at least two new songs from Jody Reynolds, who had cowritten his 1958 hit "Endless Sleep." Perhaps Parker had at long last recognized that Elvis wasn't a well man and that keeping him constantly on the road was putting his health at great risk. The sad part about that scenario is, if that's what happened, the realization came far too late to save Elvis from dying. Taking Elvis off the road a year or two before might have made all the difference in the world.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 17, 2012 14:39:48 GMT -5
I can certainly conceive of Elvis doing "Rainy Night In Georgia", not just because Tony Joe White wrote it (his "I've Got A Thing About You Baby" was a #39 hit for Elvis in March 1974), but also because Brook Benton, always one of Elvis' favorites dating back to the early 1950s, had the definitive recording and the big hit with it back in 1970. Such R&B-based material was always a strong suit of Elvis' from start to finish, so if he had gotten himself straightened out in time, I wouldn't have been surprised to see him record that. I think a lot of it would have had to be predicated on the usual publishing rights; and on that, it would have meant canning the Colonel. I knew about the publishing dispute on "Mama Liked The Roses" too--a brutal one (the song was released as the B-side of his live Vegas hit "The Wonder Of You" in April 1970). Moman really had the worst time of it having to deal with Colonel over publishing rights to songs that he himself owned; and on this point, he was supported by both Elvis and RCA president Harry Jenkins, who said that this was about cutting hits regardless of publishing. It was the second time the Colonel lost (after his Christmas idea for the NBC special was nixed by Steve Binder in favor of what Elvis himself wanted), and Elvis' career was enhanced by it. Besides everything else, the Colonel didn't even know how to lose gracefully.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 17, 2012 23:38:19 GMT -5
One thing about Elvis was that when it came to him covering a song - hit or otherwise - he'd only record the song if he believed his version would be better than the original. Many of Elvis's associates wanted him to record a version of the Dobie Gray song, "We Had It All," but Elvis believed Dobie had the best version, so an Elvis version wasn't going to happen on that song. Elvis, however, did choose to record a version of "Loving Arms," which featured on the same album as "I've Got a Thing About You Baby" and "My Boy." Dobie's version of the same song - which was the follow up to "Drift Away," I think, missed out on the Top 40 altogether, which was strange. RCA apparently planned for Elvis's version to be a single in 1974 or 1975 (with "Talk About the Good Times" as the B-side), going so far as to print up a pictureless picture sleeve, but reconsidered the idea, I think in part because singer Petula Clark also had recorded a very good version of the song and released it as a single and it too didn't do so well in the charts. RCA would eventually release Elvis's version of "My Boy" in 1975, which was odd as it came after Elvis's more recently recorded hit "T-R-O-U-B-L-E." But, "My Boy" was from the same 1973 session as "I've Got a Thing About You Baby" and "Loving Arms," making it at least a couple of years old when it made the Top 20.
Elvis was lucky in having RCA back him and Moman on the music publishing issue of "Suspicious Minds." I never quite understood why RCA didn't throw more support behind Elvis in the recording studio when it came to Parker's publishing hassles. The hassles were detrimental to the sessions and were forcing RCA to release numerous live albums on Elvis or concert recordings as individual album tracks or put a new album together made up of old album tracks. Elvis was the only artist in the 70s still obligated by a record company to release three or four new albums per year and given the publishing hassles were driving him away from the recording studio, one would've thought RCA would've done their best to have kept Parker and his associates out of the recording studio. But, I think RCA was afraid of offending Parker; they also had various side deals with Parker that didn't directly involve Elvis but involved RCA providing things like office space, refrigerators, TVs, free food, secretaries for Parker's personal use. And even paying money to Parker for technical advice on Elvis's album jackets. I also recall reading somewhere that RCA couldn't talk directly to Elvis; they had to obtain permission from Parker and that permission usually included greasing Parker's palms with money or the gratuities mentioned above. Parker didn't know how to lose gracefully because he had the one thing in the world everyone wanted and he used Elvis to get what he personally wanted. And everyone seemed afraid that if they offended Parker, they'd lose access to Elvis. No one was truly prepared to call Parker's bluff and that worked against Elvis's interests in the end.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 18, 2012 9:52:03 GMT -5
Quote by sliderocker:
Actually, "My Boy" was the hit first, getting to #20 on the Hot 100 in March 1975 (and #1 on the Adult Contemporary Chart). And yes, it was from those sessions at Stax in Memphis in December '73 that yielded "I've Got A Thing About You Baby", "If You Talk In Your Sleep", "Promised Land", and "It's Midnight."
"T-R-O-U-B-L-E", which was recorded at RCA's L.A. studios with Elvis' Usual Suspects (including James Burton) in March 1975, was undoubtedly one of the King's best latter-day straight rock and roll offerings, but it only got up to #33 in June (and, strangely, #11 on the country chart). Given that he was clearly out of shape by that time, getting ripped in the media for mediocre onstage performances, and so on, it's not so surprising that his chart performance was subdued. But it was still a sorry state of affairs, because he did keep trying.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 18, 2012 10:48:45 GMT -5
Actually, "My Boy" was the hit first, getting to #20 on the Hot 100 in March 1975 (and #1 on the Adult Contemporary Chart). And yes, it was from those sessions at Stax in Memphis in December '73 that yielded "I've Got A Thing About You Baby", "If You Talk In Your Sleep", "Promised Land", and "It's Midnight." "T-R-O-U-B-L-E", which was recorded at RCA's L.A. studios with Elvis' Usual Suspects (including James Burton) in March 1975, was undoubtedly one of the King's best latter-day straight rock and roll offerings, but it only got up to #33 in June (and, strangely, #11 on the country chart). Given that he was clearly out of shape by that time, getting ripped in the media for mediocre onstage performances, and so on, it's not so surprising that his chart performance was subdued. But it was still a sorry state of affairs, because he did keep trying. Geez, I'm getting so forgetful about stuff! Am I getting old or what? (Question doesn't require an answer.) It's been so long since I looked at Elvis's records that charted but I actually remembered "My Boy" as coming after "T-R-O-U-B-L-E" instead of being released first. I was never sure why Elvis didn't do as well on the Top 40 pop charts with "T-R-O-U-B-L-E" as he should have. I don't know if mediocre onstage performances and being out of shape would've contributed to lack of radio airplay or sales so much as much as what was happening with radio at the time (the rise of disco) being a possible cause. Another possible, more uglier cause was that at 40, some Top 40 rock radio stations may have considered Elvis too old to be on their playlist. Never mind that some of Elvis's slightly younger contemporaries born in the early 40s were in their mid-30s and would be approaching 40 themselves in just a few short years. But, for some strange reason, radio has always favored younger acts and more inclined to write off older acts even though the acts were still actively recording. I suspect the rason "T-R-O-U-B-L-E" did so well on the country charts was because the song was written by a country songwriter, Jerry Chesnut. He was having a hot streak in country with his songs and those songs were very much in demand, although "T-R-O-U-B-L-E" was clearly a spirited rocker that wouldn't have worked as a country song at the time with a traditional country artist. The song had Elvis's name written all over it. Going by my maybe faulty memory, I believe that Elvis did record the song with his usual gang of suspects although as I recall, the usual gang included members of his stage band, many of whom actually hadn't played with Elvis on a recording. I recall seeing Duke Bardwell's name listed on bass for the album. He was playing bass for Elvis briefly in 1975 but Elvis questioned his comptency on the bass and slung some barbs and arrows his way on stage about his bass playing. And most of his bass work was wiped from the sessions that produced the "Today" and replaced with overdubbed bass parts from either by Jerry Scheff or Norbert Putman, or possibly some other bass player whose name escapes me. The "Today" album was interesting for being the only album to exclude J.D. Sumner and the Stamps on backing vocals, even though they had been a regular fixture on many of Elvis's recordings from 1972 up to his last session in 1976. Elvis used his own vocal group, Voice, and I think that they, along with Mary and Ginger Holladay, made for a more pleasing sound. I don't think J.D.'s deep in the well voice would've worked so well for some of the songs and would've marred the feeling behind songs like "Pieces of My Life" and "Green, Green Grass of Home," songs which Elvis connected strongly to.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 18, 2012 14:10:22 GMT -5
Well for a lot of Elvis fans, the 70s were kind of a blur anyway, much like the 60s.
The other thing that perplexes a lot of people about that phase of the King's career is the number of live albums he did, and how many times the song selections were duplicated from one album to the other. Since neither the Colonel nor even his own producer Felton Jarvis could always get him into a real studio to cut songs, this was what they were left with. Fans, however, still steamed from this duplication.
However, it has to be said that five such albums did provide solid record sales. From Memphis To Vegas/From Vegas To Memphis's first LP, which scanned various songs from Elvis month-long run in Vegas during August 1969 (including a seven minute-long "Suspicious Minds"), was a solid one. On Stage, recorded in Vegas in February 1970, yielded "The Wonder Of You", which got up to #9 in June. As Recorded Live At Madison Square Garden was released as an album just ten days after those shows, and sold ridiculously well, containing, among other things, an admittedly bombastic but still ground-shattering version of Mickey Newbury's "American Trilogy." And Aloha From Hawaii, which actually got to #1 on the LP chart, gave us a scintillating version of James Taylor's "Steamroller Blues" that peaked at #17.
Then there's Elvis Live In Concert, which was released posthumously in late 1977, and had his version of "My Way", which got to #21 on the Hot 100. His parting words were: "We'll meet you again soon, adios." Unfortunately, those turned out to be famous last words.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 19, 2012 0:32:21 GMT -5
The number of live albums RCA issued on Elvis in the 70s was totally ridiculous, given the numerous song duplications. Parker didn't care if Elvis entered the recording studio because Elvis had forbidded him and/or Parker's associates from hassling music publishers for a one-quarter interest to one-half interest in the songs. Elvis owned several music publishing companies that could've supplied him with previously unheard songs, but because Parker ran those publishing companies and they seemed to generate so few songs, I've always wondered if Parker had some other publishing companies for himself and was routing the songs to those companies. From 1956 through 1972, Elvis's main publishing companies included Elvis Presley Music and Gladys Music but I don't know if he still owned those companies or retained an interest in them after 1972, as by 1973, he had three new music publishing companies that was handling the publishing: Elvis Music (no Presley in the company name), Whitehaven Music and Mr. Songman Music. I don't believe the last publishing company ever published anything Elvis recorded; it may have been a Parker-only company or maybe a publishing company set up by Elvis for Donnie Sumner, who wrote a couple of songs for Elvis in 1973 and who was a member of Voice and a member of the Stamps. The last original song on an Elvis album published by one of his companies was "It's Easy for You," which was written exclusively for Elvis by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice. It wasn't 100% of the publishing but I don't know if Parker got 50% of the publishing or settled for 25% but as Webber and Rice were well known name songwriters by that time and quite successful, I rather imagine he couldn't have bullied them into surrendering almost all of their songwriting royalties.
I've long had an unproven suspicion that the number of live albums were the result of Elvis waging war with Parker in the only way he could. Parker still wanted to hassle the music publishers in the studio and Elvis forbid the practice. Parker seemingly retaliated by having RCA issue the numerous live albums, yet it was said Parker pleaded with Elvis to add some new songs to the concert setlist so they could cut the duplicated songs and focus on previously unreleased live recordings. Again, Elvis didn't seem to be in the mood to accomodate Parker and it seemed like his not adding many new songs were an intentional way of getting back at Parker.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 19, 2012 10:07:53 GMT -5
Quote by sliderocker:
It wouldn't surprise me. If it was a publishing war that Elvis and the Colonel were engaged in, then I think the opening shot may have been with "If I Can Dream." Not only didn't the Colonel and his boys have publishing rights on it, the Colonel just didn't agree with the "message" of the song; and furthermore, he didn't want Elvis to do it on the NBC special. But Elvis, still reeling in his mind over both Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy being assassinated, did the song with full-bore commitment, in essence telling the Colonel to go f**k himself. Would that he could have done that sooner.
And besides the dispute with Chips Moman over "Suspicious Minds" and "Mama Liked The Roses", in which Moman was backed up by Elvis, there was also a dispute about "In The Ghetto"; again, as with "If I Can Dream", it was over the "message" of the song (inner city blight resulting in kids turning to crime and being gunned down). These all became signature songs for Elvis; and he did them all by going over the Colonel. The trouble was, of course, again, he was so beholden to the Colonel in the end that he never did it enough (IMHO).
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 19, 2012 12:21:38 GMT -5
There was some irony in Parker's being so hostile to "If I Can Dream." Still smarting from the lost battle over the idea that Elvis would sing 26 Christmas songs on his TV special, Parker had ruled out Elvis singing any original song as "over my dead body!" (Pity he couldn't be accomodated on that.) But, in fact, "If I Can Dream" wasn't the only original song featured in the special. Mac Davis and Billy Strange had contributed "Nothingville," which was a bridge piece during the production for the "Guitar Man" medley. Elvis's publishing company had the publishing rights on the song and as it exlusive to that special and was never recorded and released by Elvis before the special, it was an original song. Elvis also did "Baby, What Do You Want Me to Do" and "Tiger Man," two further songs unique to the TV special, but they were covers rather than original songs.
"Baby, What Do You Want Me to Do" wasn't without some controversy,as Elvis covering the song ticked off singer Ray Charles. Charles thought that by failing to acknowledge Jimmy Reed as the writer and artist of the song originally, Elvis was trying to claim he either came up with the song or was the one that did it originally. I had to wonder what was Ray on about as did he ever himself acknowledge that he didn't write "I Can't Stop Loving You" or "You Don't Know Me" or any of the other songs he covered? He may have at some of his concerts but as to any TV appearances, I can't say I recall him mentioning Don Gibson as the writer and artist of ICSLY and Eddy Arnold and Cindy Walker as the writers (and Arnold the artist) on YDKM. Charles seemed to have a bad case of very sour grapes where Elvis was concerned.
Getting back to Col. Parker - or Col. Greed as I've called him for some time - I think Elvis was beholden to him initially but many of Elvis's friends who worked for him said he was discontented with Parker and wanted him out. Parker had given him some reasons for termination but how many of those reasons would've held up in court? Elvis wanted to be in the movies? Bam! He was in the movies. Parker could've argued that even though Elvis wanted to do serious movies, that it wasn't his decision to put him in the movie musicals but Hollywood's decision and he couldn't get them to offer something more substantial. Likewise with the publishing, he could've argued he was looking out for Elvis's best interests in getting the publishing because that meant more money coming in. And in fact, Elvis Presley Music and Gladys Music had the copyrights on more than 2000 songs. Parker had acquired other publishing companies and acquired their songs. Parker acquired American Music, which published "Long, Black Limousine," which Elvis recorded in 1969. And Parker also bought singer Marty Robbins's two publishing companies, which included his hits "El Paso" and "You Gave Me a Mountain." Those companies still operated eevn though they were owned by Elvis's publishing companies.
It wasn't that Elvis was beholden to Parker, just that he would've needed valid reasons in court to justify terminating Parker, had Parker decided to sue for his right to remain. Recall that when Elvis's estate in 1981 sued Parker and RCA on Lisa's behalf to break the ties with Parker, Parker countersued, claiming he was still owed money and that he had a contract with the estate which entitled him to 50% of every dollar they took in. What was incredible wasn't that the court found in favor of the estate but that the court awarded Parker some money and didn't invalidate RCA's 1973 buyout agreement with Elvis and Parker. The court ruled that RCA and Parker had conspired against Elvis on that deal and one would've thouht the court would've invalidated the deal. No such luck! But, before any of that had ever taken place, Elvis's estate through Priscilla, was prepared to continue giving Parker 50% of the income Elvis still took in, even though Parker performed no service to justify a 50% commission at that point. The estate was in essence giving Parker an extravagant retirement pension. Had it not been for the attorney who sued on Lisa's behalf, her mom would've given away half of the millions Elvis was still earning to Parker.
But, Elvis, rather than beholden to Parker, was probably like many of us when it comes to court matters, in that he would rather have gone along than fight it out with Parker in court. He had been through some lawsuits during his career, lawsuits which had cost him money to fight, even when he won. Parker may have wanted two million to bow out even if he wasn't honestly owed the money but a court trial could've ended up spending more of Elvis's money than that. And what if Parker prevailed? Elvis was in a catch-22 situation. Even if he had won, he could've lost financially. It was a gamble, one which Elvis wasn't prepared to make.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 19, 2012 13:24:36 GMT -5
And to add to all this, it was then found out that the Colonel wasn't who he said he was. The birthdate that he always gave, as June 26, 1909, which meant that he was a quarter century older than the guy he managed from 1955 to 1977, was correct, but that was about it. The Colonel's real name was Andreas Cornelis van Kuijk (last name pronounced "von Kick"); and after coming to America from his birthplace in Holland, he enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1929--and never applied for citizenship. In simpler language, he was an illegal immigrant. He never had a visa. He was a man without a country.
Many people feel that, if the government ever found out that "Colonel" was a "wetback" and in America under false pretenses, he would have been deported back to Europe, and that he used that to keep Elvis from ever touring overseas, especially in England, where he would have made a guaranteed killing. Instead, he either kept his only client touring in America, as much as five tours per year, or kept him in Vegas from 1969 to 1976, with virtually no time off for resting and/or recording, but plenty of time to get addicted to the stuff that eventually ended up killing him. The only dates Elvis ever did outside America were three shows in Canada, and that was at the height of Presleymania in 1957.
The Presley estate basically forced the Colonel's hand, and he just left that whole crazy scene in the 80s. Shockingly, he outlived his client by twenty years, dying only in 1997.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 21, 2012 0:53:20 GMT -5
The worst part about Parker's secret identity was that he could've applied for citizenship and probably granted amnesty for all the years he'd been in the country illegally, all because of Elvis. The only way I couldn't have seen him being granted amnesty and citizenship was if he had - as Alanna Nash alleged in her book on Parker - committed a murder while still in Holland. He served in the US Army but as far as having committed any crimes in the US (aside from mismanaging Elvis and being in the US illegally), he stayed out of trouble. And as much money as what Elvis generated in his 21 years as the King of Rocker and Roll (reported in the news media in 1979 as $43 billion), that Parker could claim as having been due to his management, would the government have dared risk deporting Parker? That was a lot of income even if Elvis and Parker only got a small fraction of that income. Another terrible example of Parker's mismangement and incompetence: the $43 billion figure covered everything associated with Elvis that brought in money: it wasn't just the music and the movies, but the publishing and Elvis-related memorabilia. At the minimum, Elvis should've been collecting a 25% royalty on the memorabilia but if Parker scored any royalties at all from that, it wasn't very much, given the little Elvis had in his bank account when he died. You had to wonder why Elvis didn't get royalties on all the products bearing his likeness or endorsement (via Parker) and who did get paid. Presley should've been a multi-billionaire when he died rather than just a millionaire.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 21, 2012 12:45:05 GMT -5
Quote by sliderocker:
I'm not sure about the $43 billion; but given that Elvis' record sales (albums; singles; EPs, etc.) crossed the one-billion mark some time back, and they keep selling at the rate of thousands of copies per day, a total in the billions going to his estate is certainly an accurate guess when the memorabilia is factored in. Elvis did pay such an obscene amount in taxes, as in obscenely high, however, because the Colonel warned him not to venture into any kinds of tax shelters, even though it was perfectly legal to do so (it may have stemmed from his father getting caught paper-hanging in Mississippi when Elvis was growing up; the fear of the tax gods was drummed into him and his old man, first by the law and then by the Colonel). He still would have had to pay upwards of 25-30%--but it would have been better to pay that amount to the Internal Revenue Service than the 50% commission he actually did pay to the Colonel's Infernal[/b][/color] Revenue Service.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 22, 2012 1:19:19 GMT -5
I'm not sure about the $43 billion; but given that Elvis' record sales (albums; singles; EPs, etc.) crossed the one-billion mark some time back, and they keep selling at the rate of thousands of copies per day, a total in the billions going to his estate is certainly an accurate guess when the memorabilia is factored in. Elvis did pay such an obscene amount in taxes, as in obscenely high, however, because the Colonel warned him not to venture into any kinds of tax shelters, even though it was perfectly legal to do so (it may have stemmed from his father getting caught paper-hanging in Mississippi when Elvis was growing up; the fear of the tax gods was drummed into him and his old man, first by the law and then by the Colonel). He still would have had to pay upwards of 25-30%--but it would have been better to pay that amount to the Internal Revenue Service than the 50% commission he actually did pay to the Colonel's Infernal[/b][/color] Revenue Service.[/quote] There were a few people who had trouble with the $43 billion figure; some inserted a decimal point between the 4 and 3, thinking that had to be a lot more reasonable figure. I was never sure of its accuracy but given Elvis's record sales at the time of his death were said to be over 600 million with his worldwide sales reported as being some 100-200 million copies per year, even if the price of the albums between 1956 and 1977 averaged, say, $4.50 minimum for each of those 21 years, that would've added up to $2.7 billion. And that's just on the albums and not the singles! Elvis was first reported at having passed a billion albums around 1980, and I believe BMG/Sony now says the sales exceed two billion! Given that RCA-cum-BMG-cum Sony only has to pay artist royalties to Elvis's estate on recordings recorded after April 1, 1973, they don't have to worry about the estate suing for unpaid back royalties on recordings before that date, so they can be open about actual sales. Although, I don't put it past them to exaggerate the sales. And there remains the possibility that if the estate discovered RCA didn't pay royalties to Elvis that were owed at the time of the 1973 buyout, such a discovery would allow the estate to sue to have the '73 buyout overturned. I still can't figure why the court allowed RCA to keep the rights on Elvis's recordings, especially after the court ruled RCA and Parker had conspired together against Elvis in the buyout. As for the movies, I believe it was said that Hollywood said in 1965 that the movies he had made up to that time (less than 20, I think) had earned something like $125 million at the box office and from broadcast rights. I don't know how much money they were making from the broadcast rights but as Elvis and Parker were owed 50% of the broadcast fees from the TV stations, that figure probably was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year at the minimum. Conceivably, it could've been in the millions per year. The money made from music publishing was quoted in Jerry Hopkins's 1970 book on Elvis as being some $400,000 per year, yet Hopkins never specified whether that figure was based on income generated from Elvis's recordings alone or from all of the publishing rights his publishing compaines owned. In fact, given he was estimated as having owned at least 2000 songs, $400,000 seems a very conservative figure. Where the income gets harder to track down or speculate on is the memorabilia market, which would've included anything which was endorsed by Elvis (or by Parker on behalf of Elvis) or featured his likeness. Autographed photo cards, regular photos, books with photos, bubblegum trading cards, keychains, songbooks, record players with Elvis's likeness or endorsement, junior or regular sized guitars, anything else Elvis related that was sold required that royalties be paid to Elvis and Parker. Parker even sent one of Elvis's personal cars out on tour in the 60s!. One could probably make a case for $4.3 billion easier than they could for $43 billion, yet it remains conceivable the memorabilia market sales could've been in the tens of billions because Parker licensed hundreds of items either bearing Elvis's signature and/or his likelness. About the only thing Parker didn't license was toilet paper. And someone did try to get Parker to okay that idea. it was one of the few ideas he rejected without any further reconsiderations. But, whether it was $4.3 billion or $43 billion, it's clear only a fraction of that money did go to Elvis if it was accurate, and given his annual yearly tax income was between five and seven million per year. Given Parker's greed, Elvis's take home should've been much more than five to seven million per year. Either Parker had to be the most incompetent when it came to collectuing the royalties or he collected the royalties but only passed off a very small percentage to Elvis.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 22, 2012 13:55:48 GMT -5
Quote by sliderocker: Given what is known about him, I think it was the latter. He was a carny and a con-man by nature, so incompetence, to my mind, doesn't figure into the equation. Greed, however, and unfortunately, does.
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on Jan 29, 2012 21:05:45 GMT -5
garth brooks sold more records than Elvis for a period? how can that be? he has not had that many albums. if so it weird you don't hear him on the radio. i don't listen to country radio but stilll his songs would be on adult contemporary stations if he sold that many albums etc it is just puzzling to me. eddiejinnj
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 30, 2012 0:58:42 GMT -5
garth brooks sold more records than Elvis for a period? how can that be? he has not had that many albums. if so it weird you don't hear him on the radio. i don't listen to country radio but stilll his songs would be on adult contemporary stations if he sold that many albums etc it is just puzzling to me. eddiejinnj Girth Brooks hasn't had that many albums but many have sold in the tens of millions. He was ahead of Elvis very briefly with official recognition from the RIAA, until RCA-cum-BMG-cum-Sony got its corporate act together and started locating the order books needed to submit Elvis's uncertified albums and singles to the RIAA for certification and for the various gold, platinum and diamond awards. As things stand right now, Elvis is credited with 134.5 million in sales in the US alone, compared to Brooks's 128 million. (Michael Jackson btw is nowhere close.) The Beatles lead all other acts officially with 177 million but even their record wouldn't stand if the RIAA had an award and certification for sales under 500,000. There are over 220 Elvis albums, many of them reissues that are more than 200,000 in sales but below 500,000 sales, which could put Elvis's total between somewhere between 210 million and 245 million, if they could be certified. But, the RIAA has no award or cerification for albums selling less than 500,000. Elvis fans also have another issue with the RIAA over their certification process, that one being crediting double albums as two separate albums, but only if they meet certain standards, like exceed 90 minutes. Elvis had two double albums and two four-LP box sets in his lifetime and one posthumous double album that sold well enough to make gold or platinum status: "From Memphis to Vegas/From Vegas to Memphis" (double), "Elvis-50 Worldwide Gold Hits" and "Elvis: The Other Sides" (both four-LP box sets originally) and "Aloha from Hawaii via Satellite" (double), and "Elvis In Concert" (posthumous/double). Because the albums didn't exceed the RIAA's 90 minute rule (which I think took effect after Elvis's 1977 death), the albums basically received gold or platinum records for being a single album only. I don't know if it's true but it's been said the RIAA hasn't been as stingy with other artists who put out multiple album sets that didn't exceed 90 minutes when it came to doubling or tripling or multiplying by however many discs made up a multiple disc set. RCA set out to get more of Elvis's albums certified when Brooks took the lead on the sales, but the process over the years has been a difficult one because by their own admission, a lot of the sales books on Elvis are "lost." I find it difficult to believe the books could be lost, especially given that at the time RCA decided not to let Brooks go unchallenged, they said that Elvis had sold some 430 million albums in the US. That was a pretty steep figure and one would've thought RCA had their books to back up their claim, and would've submitted those books to have that figure officially certified. No such luck! I figured the truth of the matter was either RCA was blowing smoke or assuming they were telling the truth, perhaps had a erason not to have the albums certified. One possible reason being that if any of sales in question took place before March 31, 1973 (the time of RCA's buyout from Elvis of all of the recordings he had made for the label, between January 1, 1956 and March 31, 1973 - some 730 songs, which didn't include the Sun material) it's possible RCA didn't pay royalties to Elvis on those recordings. Royalties, which with accrued interest, could've wiped out the ten million RCA paid Elvis and Parker in 1973. Unpaid royalties which could've nullified the 1973 buyout agreement. Granted, sounds like a stretch but consider the 1971 budget album, "I Got Lucky" received platinum certification late last year or at the start of this year. The album was reissued to CD a year or so before that but I think the CD sales were only a fraction of the sales of the original LP. Could RCA/BMG/Sony have shown the Elvis estate that he was paid all of the royalties he was owed on the album when he was living? Artist and publishing royalties that would've added up to more than $600,000? Elvis and Parker never once in Elvis's professional relationship with RCA requested an audit of the books to verify RCA's honesty and integrity in their royalty payments to them. Even though the auditing of the books by the artists was and is an industry standard practice. One would think that RCA recognizing such faith in them coming from their number one artist wouldn't have gypped him. But, the industry standard practice of auditing the books is precisely because the record companies have a history of cheating their artists at almost every turn when it comes to the royalties. I think it quite conceivable that RCA could've owed Elvis much more money than the ten million RCA paid him and Parker in 1973 for the back catalog. (And even on that, Elvis got cheated as Parker took 60% of the ten million.)
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 31, 2012 10:46:33 GMT -5
All of the figures surrounding Elvis' album sales should be updated, really. His albums still sell at a clip of a couple of thousand per week, if not per day.
Blue Hawaii, the soundtrack to his 1961 film (one of the few decent post-Army ones, especially because of "Can't Help Falling In Love"), stayed at #1 for something like 20 weeks in 1962, and, up until Fleetwood Mac's Rumors, was the longest-running #1 album of any rock act. The 1964 soundtrack album Roustabout actually dislodged the Beatles from the #1 spot on the album chart at the start of 1965. You also have his 1957 Christmas album, which, with reported sales of thirteen million, is still the biggest-selling holiday album in history.
And then you had the streak of big-selling albums from 1968 through 1973: the 1968 Comeback Special soundtrack (#8); From Elvis In Memphis (#13); From Memphis To Vegas/From Vegas To Memphis (#12); On Stage: February 1970 (#12); Elvis Country (#12); As Recorded At Madison Square Garden (#11); and Aloha! Live From Hawaii Via Satellite (#1; the King's last). All of these are rumored to have gone at least 2-Platinum, perhaps more, since their initial releases. And even though he didn't have another Top 10 hit after "Burning Love" in late 1972, several of his singles managed to sell a million, including "Way Down", which sadly was the last such million-seller he had during his lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Jan 31, 2012 15:00:31 GMT -5
Back in the day, "Blue Hawaii" did almost six million dollars' worth in album sales, which given the manufacturing and distribution cost of that time, possibly could've been read as having sold six million copies. It didn't cost a lot of money in those days to manufacture and distribute an album. It would've been surprising if the costs reached $1.50 per album. Even by 1977, the production and distribution costs on an album were generally under two dollars per disc.
It's said that album sales to date for "Blue Hawaii" exceed ten million copies, meaning if the powers that be at RCA/BMG/Sony got their corporate act together once more and submitted their books, Elvis's estate would be looking at another diamond award. But, the real question is how many other Elvis albums are possibly eligible for a diamond award, claims of which have yet to be submitted? The "Aloha" album is another album mentioned as being in the ten million plus range. The 1973 TV album "Elvis," which had the crappiest album jacket ever issued on Elvis (it literally fell apart the moment you took the albums out) sold by Brookville Records, sold more than ten million copies. Brookville wasn't a member of the RIAA back in the days when the album was released but they joined the organization at some point and their 1973 album is certified by the RIAA as a platinum seller on Elvis. But not for the diamond status, which is ironic given that when they offered the album for sale again via TV, they said at the time that the album had sold ten million copies the first time around.
It's a safe bet that any of Elvis's albums which made the top ten are likely candidates for multiplatinum status, if they haven't already been certified as such. Even some of the soundtracks to Elvis's crappiest movies generally did well on the charts even if the movies did not do so well. But, I always thought it strange that RCA deleted many of Elvis's soundtrack albums from his catalog, despite the fact they did fairly well saels wise. "Roustabout" is a case in point. It was a number one album, yet it was deleted from RCA's catalog of available albums on Elvis. Almost perversely, "Speedway," which in the 1960s had one of the worst showings of any Elvis album, remained active in the catalog and in the stores for almost a decade after its release. In fact, I believe that in 1976 - maybe 1977, RCA had only then just recently deleted the title. Following Elvis's death, the album was available again.
Another perverse irony is that RCA in the 70s, prior to Elvis's death, had deleted several of his post-March 31, 1973 albums, as well as most of the non-soundtrack albums of the 1960s. Not having the albums in the stores affected the oevrall sales total and seemed a strange thing to do, given RCA again claimed they sold well. And again, with Elvis's passing, the albums were available again in the stores but RCA again deleted some of the titles from their catalog on Elvis.
As for the singles released after "Burning Love," I think there were only a couple of singles that didn't reach the million mark, but I'm not sure I'd totally trust anything coming from RCA on the subject. Forer Monkee Michael Nesmith once had an independent audit of RCA's books on his album and single sales, and it was determined that his song "Joanne," had sold 1.25 million copies when it was released as a single in 1970. RCA counterclaimed the single only sold 325,000 copies amd refused to put in a claim with the RIAA have the single certified for a gold record. That's a very serious discrepency of 900,000 records, representing a loss or denial of sales amounting to 74%! Just think if RCA's same math formula was applied to Elvis's sales, or any of their other artists. If the same math formula was used on Elvis's recordings, it's quite possible Elvis sold three times as many recordings than what's officially claimed by RCA. And it's also quite possible RCA owed him (and now his estate) far more than the ten million they paid him and Parker in '73 for his back catalog. And the worst part of this scenario is that it's also a safe bet that RCA's practice is an industry wide practice, with many artists being ripped on what they are or were owed.
|
|