Off Topic Messages

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:51 pm

Elvis DEFINITELY could NOT have filled up Shea in the fifties. There was no such stadium, yet. (The AFL football Titans, later known as The Jets, played the Polo Grounds in the early days.)


Who knows if he'd have filled up such a stadium several years earlier; it's silly to compare it like like this because of one essential factor: by the mid-sixties, the baby boom had come of (teen)age. There were more a lot more boomers than war babies, and they had more money.

But Parker didn't really make all the right moves, especially coordinated moves, using radio, Sullivan, and all of that in perfect synergy. He didn't have that kind of imagination.

So, Elvis did very well for himself, I think, under the circumstances, especially when many parents were actively against letting their kids go out to see him. And we get to see and HEAR almost none of what he did, because it wasn't filmed. And that non-filming would continue in the future, especially if an event was worth filming.

rjm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 1:20 pm

rjm wrote:Elvis DEFINITELY could NOT have filled up Shea in the fifties. There was no such stadium, yet. (The AFL football Titans, later known as The Jets, played the Polo Grounds in the early days.)


Who knows if he'd have filled up such a stadium several years earlier; it's silly to compare it like like this because of one essential factor: by the mid-sixties, the baby boom had come of (teen)age. There were more a lot more boomers than war babies, and they had more money.

But Parker didn't really make all the right moves, especially coordinated moves, using radio, Sullivan, and all of that in perfect synergy. He didn't have that kind of imagination.

So, Elvis did very well for himself, I think, under the circumstances, especially when many parents were actively against letting their kids go out to see him. And we get to see and HEAR almost none of what he did, because it wasn't filmed. And that non-filming would continue in the future, especially if an event was worth filming.

rjm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I WAS NOT comparing, just stating that Elvis could have pkayed a lot larger venues. Ok, so the Shea Studium hadn't been built, yet, that was a silly thing to say, but there were similar venues like it, that's what i was saying.

I agree with most of your post, rjm. I don't think parents not letting there kids going would be a factor...mojarity of the time kids will rebel against there parents and will go regardless.

As for The Colonel, i agree, he didn't have that imagination. He was an out dated manager and his way of thinking was always a bit bizzare.
If the Colonel had've booked a 50,000 seat venue in '57, i'm sure it would have been filled or nearly filled. Elvis in 1957 was the biggest thing in America.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:06 pm

mysterytrainrideson wrote:I WAS NOT comparing, just stating that Elvis could have pkayed a lot larger venues. Ok, so the Shea Studium hadn't been built, yet, that was a silly thing to say, but there were similar venues like it, that's what i was saying.

I agree with most of your post, rjm. I don't think parents not letting there kids going would be a factor...mojarity of the time kids will rebel against there parents and will go regardless.

As for The Colonel, i agree, he didn't have that imagination. He was an out dated manager and his way of thinking was always a bit bizzare.
If the Colonel had've booked a 50,000 seat venue in '57, i'm sure it would have been filled or nearly filled. Elvis in 1957 was the biggest thing in America.


Definitely maybe on that. But the point is that such grand ambition was considered and achieved in 1965, by the Beatles and their management team.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:01 am

mysterytrainrideson wrote:
rjm wrote:Elvis DEFINITELY could NOT have filled up Shea in the fifties. There was no such stadium, yet. (The AFL football Titans, later known as The Jets, played the Polo Grounds in the early days.)


Who knows if he'd have filled up such a stadium several years earlier; it's silly to compare it like like this because of one essential factor: by the mid-sixties, the baby boom had come of (teen)age. There were more a lot more boomers than war babies, and they had more money.

But Parker didn't really make all the right moves, especially coordinated moves, using radio, Sullivan, and all of that in perfect synergy. He didn't have that kind of imagination.

So, Elvis did very well for himself, I think, under the circumstances, especially when many parents were actively against letting their kids go out to see him. And we get to see and HEAR almost none of what he did, because it wasn't filmed. And that non-filming would continue in the future, especially if an event was worth filming.

rjm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I WAS NOT comparing, just stating that Elvis could have pkayed a lot larger venues. Ok, so the Shea Studium hadn't been built, yet, that was a silly thing to say, but there were similar venues like it, that's what i was saying.

I agree with most of your post, rjm. I don't think parents not letting there kids going would be a factor...mojarity of the time kids will rebel against there parents and will go regardless.

As for The Colonel, i agree, he didn't have that imagination. He was an out dated manager and his way of thinking was always a bit bizzare.
If the Colonel had've booked a 50,000 seat venue in '57, i'm sure it would have been filled or nearly filled. Elvis in 1957 was the biggest thing in America.


I'm sorry, Mystery; that was kind of a cheap shot 'cause I'm a MAJOR Jets fan (or I have been . . .), so it hit me right away. My apologies. @mysterytrainrideson :sosorry:

As for a 50,000 seat stadium show, I would say that only in NY would it have even been possible, but for the reasons stated above, not probable. Elvis was the biggest thing in America, but America was about to get a lot bigger. And the kids were about to start calling the shots in that bigger America.

And it wasn't just Shea that was part of the initial synergy you see on stage, but a fully realized vision as to how to present such an act with maximum positive impact. It was so well-executed that the band had to feel almost obliged to live up to it! When you think about it, it had to be very exciting for them at the time. With Ed up there and the whole series of events.

Elvis was never presented quite that way, especially in the early days. I don't think he ever got the feeling, then, that everybody was rooting for him, and that he was part of something that both excited and delighted the nation. It was only at the end of the three Sullivan shows that Ed gave his stamp of approval. Elvis may have been an American, but he was an outsider.

Maybe it's better that way, when you think about it.

rjm

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:39 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
jungleroombear wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Actually, Elvis' concert craziness came 7 years before the Beatles, so the Shea Stadium show is similar to the clip you provide from the 4-02-1957 ES in Toronto (NOT from either 3-31-1957 Detroit show, despite what is written on the video).

However, Toronto's Maple Leaf Gardens has a capacity of 15,700, while the 8-15-1965 Shea Stadium gig was sold out to the tune of 55,700 people, more than triple the audience. The hysteria, just by sheer numbers, is clearly greater in New York, and a clear-cut reason why it is still seen today as a benchmark.


It wasn't a benchmark according to Red Robinson, emcee for Elvis' show at Empire Stadium... 'That was the first time there was ever a performer in front of 26,000 people in a rented stadium'.


Robinson is not speaking of Shea Stadium in that quote, it hadn't happened yet, but only of the 1957 Presley show. Certainly if asked now about Shea he would agree with historians about the significance of the Beatles landmark appearance in New York.

And his facts from back then are incorrect, as Elvis played to about 16,500 that night in Vancouver. From 1957 Elvis concert scholar Alan Hanson's blog:

In 1957 Elvis performed 28 live stage shows in 18 cities and on one military post. It broke down like this: one show each in Chicago, St. Louis, Fort Wayne, Buffalo, Spokane, Vancouver B.C., Tacoma, Seattle, Portland, Tupelo, Oakland, and Schofield Barracks (Hawaii); two shows each in Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Honolulu; and four shows in Philadelphia. The biggest crowd he played to that year was in Vancouver, B.C., (16,500) and the smallest was in Philadelphia (3,200). The combined paid attendance for the 28 concerts was a little over 250,000. Although that represented unparalleled drawing power for those days, it didn’t satisfy Colonel Parker, who repeatedly exaggerated the crowd sizes in each city. His phony numbers are still being quoted today, but I tried to set the record straight in my book.

http://www.elvis-history-blog.com/interview.html



Hope this helps.


I know Red Robinson didn't say that, i was simply stating that he was saying the Elvis show was a benchmark which it obviously was. Now Doc you been a little naughty by this-time using the term landmark instead! The Beatles Shea stadium show certainly was... but it wasn't a benchmark. :smt002

Re the attendance figure.. according to a respected web-site, Red Robinson was at Empire Stadium, and he was given records by the promoter Hugh Picket which showed 25,898 paid admissions, grossing $61,099.86. Should we believe it as fact, of course not. Alan Hanson was a little boy when Elvis played Vancover and no matter where he got his information it's open to as much scrutiny as Red Robinsons account. At the end of the day it was still a stadium show, just like the one in Dallas was and that certainly wasn't a sellout.
That's All Right Mama wasn't a huge hit but it was still a benchmark as far as most people are concerned. :smt006

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Fri Aug 02, 2013 7:31 am

jungleroombear wrote:I know Red Robinson didn't say that, i was simply stating that he was saying the Elvis show was a benchmark which it obviously was. Now Doc you been a little naughty by this-time using the term landmark instead! The Beatles Shea stadium show certainly was... but it wasn't a benchmark. :smt002

Re the attendance figure.. according to a respected web-site, Red Robinson was at Empire Stadium, and he was given records by the promoter Hugh Picket which showed 25,898 paid admissions, grossing $61,099.86. Should we believe it as fact, of course not. Alan Hanson was a little boy when Elvis played Vancover and no matter where he got his information it's open to as much scrutiny as Red Robinsons account. At the end of the day it was still a stadium show, just like the one in Dallas was and that certainly wasn't a sellout.
That's All Right Mama wasn't a huge hit but it was still a benchmark as far as most people are concerned. :smt006


You can follow and appreciate the historical record I have presented in detail on this topic, or you can believe the stuff you just wrote.

I've done my part. The choice is yours. ;-)

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:24 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
jungleroombear wrote:I know Red Robinson didn't say that, i was simply stating that he was saying the Elvis show was a benchmark which it obviously was. Now Doc you been a little naughty by this-time using the term landmark instead! The Beatles Shea stadium show certainly was... but it wasn't a benchmark. :smt002

Re the attendance figure.. according to a respected web-site, Red Robinson was at Empire Stadium, and he was given records by the promoter Hugh Picket which showed 25,898 paid admissions, grossing $61,099.86. Should we believe it as fact, of course not. Alan Hanson was a little boy when Elvis played Vancover and no matter where he got his information it's open to as much scrutiny as Red Robinsons account. At the end of the day it was still a stadium show, just like the one in Dallas was and that certainly wasn't a sellout.
That's All Right Mama wasn't a huge hit but it was still a benchmark as far as most people are concerned. :smt006


You can follow and appreciate the historical record I have presented in detail on this topic, or you can believe the stuff you just wrote.

I've done my part. The choice is yours. ;-)


So we agree Elvis' was the benchmark.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:21 am

jungleroombear wrote:So we agree Elvis' was the benchmark.


No. As noted, one may follow and appreciate the historical record, such as how I have presented it in detail on this topic, or one may live in fantasy-land.

Have fun! ;-)