All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:33 am

Then again, call it his duty, a reward or a thank you for the fans, call it anything you like, but he did fail his UK fans in not touring here. Thousands of UK fans travelled to the US in the 70`s to see him live in Vegas, went to all the films in the 60`s, bought the so so soundtracks, joined the fan clubs, kept his singles charting throught the 70`s etc .....a tour in return is`nt that much to ask for, so maybe he did have a duty to perform here.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:18 am

Yep all those fans who earn't their hard earned dosh - gave a mighty big lump of it to Elvis and yet he gave them nothing in return, yet maybe they expected at least a tour for all that money.

Geez...that is tough when it's put like that.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:33 am

Well, there is a flaw in the premise here DelBoy. This was the post Orville and Wilbur Wright era, after all. Elvis made himself available on a fixed schedule at a fixed point in space every year.......Vegas. And before you reply that not everyone could afford to go to Vegas, let me ask you this.....If he was to get one million pounds sterling per show at Wembley, or in Japan, or Australia, how many of the fans who could not afford to travel to Vegas would have been able to afford the ticket prices necessitated by such huge paydays?? And if he did indeed accept these offers, would those of you over the pond still be griping to this day that after waiting so long to see Elvis, after supporting even his most mediocre efforts over the years, after joining the fan clubs, when he finally arrives in Britain the only people who could afford to see him were the elite, the very people who supported him the least???

Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:37 am

Scatter wrote:Well, there is a flaw in the premise here DelBoy. This was the post Orville and Wilbur Wright era, after all. Elvis made himself available on a fixed schedule at a fixed point in space every year.......Vegas. And before you reply that not everyone could afford to go to Vegas, let me ask you this.....If he was to get one million pounds sterling per show at Wembley, or in Japan, or Australia, how many of the fans who could not afford to travel to Vegas would have been able to afford the ticket prices necessitated by such huge paydays?? And if he did indeed accept these offers, would those of you over the pond still be griping to this day that after waiting so long to see Elvis, after supporting even his most mediocre efforts over the years, after joining the fan clubs, when he finally arrives in Britain the only people who could afford to see him were the elite, the very people who supported him the least???


I don´t think he would just give a single concert in each country. He could have sung in soccer stadiums (ok, we all know he didn´t like open-air arenas) or places like those. Your argument is poor, in the 70´s travelling was really expensive, moreover just to watch a singer perform.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:42 am

Soccer stadiums in the 70's ??? In the UK ?????

Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:49 am

What?

Old-Trafford, Anfield, Wembley?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:49 am

Spanish_Eyes wrote:
Scatter wrote:Well, there is a flaw in the premise here DelBoy. This was the post Orville and Wilbur Wright era, after all. Elvis made himself available on a fixed schedule at a fixed point in space every year.......Vegas. And before you reply that not everyone could afford to go to Vegas, let me ask you this.....If he was to get one million pounds sterling per show at Wembley, or in Japan, or Australia, how many of the fans who could not afford to travel to Vegas would have been able to afford the ticket prices necessitated by such huge paydays?? And if he did indeed accept these offers, would those of you over the pond still be griping to this day that after waiting so long to see Elvis, after supporting even his most mediocre efforts over the years, after joining the fan clubs, when he finally arrives in Britain the only people who could afford to see him were the elite, the very people who supported him the least???


I don´t think he would just give a single concert in each country. He could have sung in soccer stadiums (ok, we all know he didn´t like open-air arenas) or places like those. Your argument is poor, in the 70´s travelling was really expensive, moreover just to watch a singer perform.


And, as usual, you make an argument out of thin air based upon facts not in evidence. I referenced ACTUAL offers made to Elvis to perform. You base your retort on guesses and hopes and wishes instead of facts. Typical.

Your other point is useless as well, since the thousands who actually DID travel to Vegas from overseas belie your point. And from what I have seen, these folks were not wealthy, simply dedicated. Here's 2 minutes the MB will never get back...... :roll: .

Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:37 am

Sean Ryan wrote:Parker was good for Elvis at the start of his career but he should have got rid of him in the 70's and took control of his music career.If only........ :cry:

Sean


Should have ditched him in the early 60's.
The things EP "could" have done . . .

Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:59 am

Ezz wrote:Then again, call it his duty, a reward or a thank you for the fans, call it anything you like, but he did fail his UK fans in not touring here. Thousands of UK fans travelled to the US in the 70`s to see him live in Vegas, went to all the films in the 60`s, bought the so so soundtracks, joined the fan clubs, kept his singles charting throught the 70`s etc .....a tour in return is`nt that much to ask for, so maybe he did have a duty to perform here.


Good point.
But then, there were many things he could have, should have done - not only for the fans, but for himself and for the sheer challenge of the art . . .

Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:31 am

If the consistent purchasing of Elvis records makes someone 'worthy" of a concert...

then the UK and Europe did deserve a live show by 1966 at least.

In the Sixties, the US did not I'm sorry to say.

EJ has pointed out in the DBD book that US sales were dismal (300,000 units) a far cry from a million each like he achieved in 1956-57...etc.

OK, so only 300,000 fans deserved a show here in the states in the Sixties.

Even tho I think Las Vegas is a fascinating backdrop for movies and dramas, Elvis routinely playing to those same damn drunks at the Hilton he must've got sick and tired of that.

F___ the Hiltons.

Are those tacky guests and gamblers really "worthy" of Elvis Live?
So much as he played there????
Are they more worthy than a packed stadium at Wembley? Packed with super fans and fan club members who maintained monthly devotion to him, year after year, release after release.
UK fans who gather to see him in this once-in-a-lifetime event.

As opposed to the casino cocktail tripe who gather to see him in this twice-in-an-evening event.
(see him at 8pm, following the jugglers, or see him again at midnight, following the magician and the showgirls)


IMO, London was worthy. After 1970, Vegas wasn't.

I think Elvis should've played London and Paris and Tokyo etc.

globally the world invested in him since '56 -- records, films, magazines....and made him a superstar.

To ignore those fans....to lie to those fans...is unthinkable.

But alas his tightly-controlling mgmt did.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:31 am

And at what point, in these types of discussions, do people step up and say, hey, we cannot continue to blame Parker or anyone else? At what point, does everyone acknowledge that EP was a grown man with a mind and that HE should have taken control of HIS career and HIS life?

Or do the "true" fans prefer to view him as a mere puppet on a string . . . thus preserving the golden image of a king? It just doesn't wash . . .

Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:36 am

Quasar,

study for example the 1960s Hawaii interview between Elvis and Peter Noone.

Noone asks him when he's going to play England.

Elvis replies that he'd love to. (and I bet he did like that idea)

but Elvis also says well, the Colonel has a bad back.


so in answering the question, is Elvis perpetuating a falsehood?

Does he really believe a trip to England is impossible due to the Colonel's backache?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:44 am

Steve_M wrote:
Pete Dube wrote:At the very least I feel that Elvis did owe the fiercely loyal U.K. fans a tour of some type.


Pete, why ?

The loyal UK fans paid more money out and got more records in return, or whatever Elvis commodity they were buying.

Why did Elvis owe the UK fans more ?

Sure, it would have been nice if.......

It would be nice if I win the lottery, but I don't feel anyone owes me the money if I don't.


Steve -
Call it a debt of gratitude. While the majority of Elvis fans are fiercely loyal (it just seems to go hand in hand with being an Elvis fan) the U.K. fans have consistently gone above & beyond the call of duty so to speak. You guys have played a major part in keeping this whole thing going for as long as it has, and I commend you for it. I don't mean to sell short the other great international fans, but you Brits really amaze me with your level of dedication to Elvis! Especially considering that he wasn't one of you. But then again, though Elvis was a product of America he in a sense belonged to the world!

Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:57 am

Geographic success often equates into a performance obligation.

Metallica, of all bands to cite here, discovered they had a hit single in Hong Kong, and their mgmt said that means we need to go play there.
So they did.

Other bands and stars do that too. If they're big right now in Amsterdam, then hell yeh, let's go play Amsterdam.

That's how it is in this day and age with artists and tours.

So, to apply Elvis' career to that model:
if the "Speedway" LP ain't selling squat in the states, but it sells a million copies in Brazil, then Elvis should get his fanny down to Brazil and do a live show.

It's a form of thanks.

And by not playing other countries, it's technically as if he's not thanking those countries.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:03 am

Steve_M wrote:
Ezz wrote:If I wrote a book and it sold a few million copies in the US and everyone got a copy of the book and everyone paid for it, why should I feel obliged or feel that I have a duty to go over there on the back of that and give more of my time ?


That's a little different Steve. A very important part of Elvis' appeal was his ability as a live performer, so in failing to tour overseas, countless of millions of loyal fans missed out greatly. If an author doesn't visit fans overseas, the fans still read the book, so who cares?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:09 am

Graceland Gardener wrote:Quasar,

study for example the 1960s Hawaii interview between Elvis and Peter Noone.

Noone asks him when he's going to play England.

Elvis replies that he'd love to. (and I bet he did like that idea)

but Elvis also says well, the Colonel has a bad back.


so in answering the question, is Elvis perpetuating a falsehood?

Does he really believe a trip to England is impossible due to the Colonel's backache?


GG -
If he was perpetuating a falsehood, was it done so through a guileless persona or through a systematically planned sort of rhetoric to evade any questions or issues that strayed from an existence that he "thought" was safe, yet was, in reality, merely unfulfilled?

Re: Did Elvis have a duty to perform overseas??

Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:44 am

Back to the original question:

Delboy wrote:Do Elvis fans throughout the world have the right to feel cheated that Elvis never performed outside the States? Did Elvis let his fans down or do fans have no right to demand such a thing as an overseas tour??


Yes.

imo, yes. plain and simple as that.

He often says he wants to play other countries.
Then get off your sequined arse and do it!

But oh no :( there's so many excuse not to.

Let's not burden the millionaire with any traveling expenses.

And of course no one would even attend a show in another country.
Those auditoriums would be empty! He would be so disappointed at the low turnouts.

And if they don't speak english, they won't understand his lyrics!


-------

As I said, a live appearance is a huge "thank you" for fans from an artist.

Too bad all his fans across the planet's surface couldn't afford to come to Nevada every few months to get that earned thank you.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:17 am

I still am not swayed at all that Elvis had further duty to provide for fans because they chose to be loyal to him.

Those fans did it without any further expectation so why should someone else later say that they deserved more ?

The demand for Elvis globally to perform was far above the ability to perform in as many countries as "deserved" Elvis to do so.

So they gave them Aloha. Sorted.

Yes, I'm a Brit, yes I do and have invested a lot of time in Elvis and his fans because I wanted to of my own free will and without anyone else feeling obliged to give me anything in return and that included Elvis when he was alive, that includes his estate now.

I like it the way it was. Elvis was not inaccessable, during the last 8 years of his life he averaged a performance once every three days.

If any fan who spent a small fortune on his records at the time had wanted to they could have flown over and seen Elvis in concert for a fraction of what they had spent on him already. The early 70's saw massive reductions in the cost of flights and bought flying as an option of travel into many homes in the UK.

The question should maybe have been did Elvis have a duty to perform, never mind then selecting where that duty should have been carried out in the world. Elvis performed and performed well overall, to suggest that we should be able to criticise his location for doing so seesm on par with saying RCA shouldn't have sold Elvis records in the UK if their artist wasn't going to agree to perform there.

What next ? Should Elvis have turned up in person to serve you at the counter for every 100th record you purchased of his ?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:29 am

The crazyness of it all, is that Elvis apparently felt obligated to always dye his hair jet black because "thats what fans want"

That's a trivial thing to rigidly devote time to doing.

But he does not tour overseas even tho THAT IS what fans want.

A large percentage of fans too. Millions everywhere on Earth.

Boo hoo the millionaire entertainer and his millionaire manager might have to spend some dough on traveling expenses.

SO what !- they'd come home from overseas with gobs and gobs of money from the shows.
Not to mention elation at the voyage and maybe even memories of meeting royalties or burgermeisters or whatever.

Well, Elvis would come home with about 30%, shrugging off attention to gross anyway, while Parker fanagled the other 70% in some insidious manner of his patented coloneleconomics.



- Priscilla whines that he was always gone and never home.
Huh! Deal with a world tour honey.

She's in Tennessee and he's out playing the tri-state area or seaboards or Midwest. Never farther than a day's drive or 2 hour flight
and as close as a landline call to any state of the continental 48.
Boo hoo too.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:41 am

"If any fan who spent a small fortune on his records at the time had wanted to they could have flown over and seen Elvis in concert for a fraction of what they had spent on him already. The early 70's saw massive reductions in the cost of flights and bought flying as an option of travel into many homes in the UK. "


Steve, you must be a big fan of Norman Tebbitt, the working-class man`s best friend.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:48 am

Steve_M wrote:So they gave them Aloha. Sorted.

Agreed! Unless you happened to reside in the UK. :D

Steve_M wrote:Elvis was not inaccessable, during the last 8 years of his life he averaged a performance once every three days.

And it was this needlessly punishing schedule that was a major contributor to the events of 16th August 1977! So why did he do it? Because he loved it and he wanted his fans to see him? If so then he has an obligation to his fanbase outside North America.

Steve_M wrote:If any fan who spent a small fortune on his records at the time had wanted to they could have flown over and seen Elvis in concert for a fraction of what they had spent on him already. The early 70's saw massive reductions in the cost of flights and bought flying as an option of travel into many homes in the UK.

Transatlantic travel was still a huge expense in the early seventies and remember the Hilton were not too receptive of the foreign fans as they were fully aware they were only there to see Elvis and not spend money (as the trip cost so much) and discouraged organised trips. The logistics states it's got to be preferable for 1 man to fly to see 500,000 people than the other war around.

Steve_M wrote:The question should maybe have been did Elvis have a duty to perform, never mind then selecting where that duty should have been carried out in the world.

Okay! If the question is 'Did Elvis have a duty to perform?' and the answer is yes. Is it because of a duty to his fans? If so then he has to consider his total fanbase. Vegas satisfied Parker, not Elvis' fans worldwide. Also why was no attempt made to lower the asking price for Aloha when it was clear several TV companies could not afford the asking price and fans would miss out?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:21 pm

Aloha no good if you live in the UK ? Well I do and I've seen it a considerable amount of times.

As I have failed to see the foundation of the logic in your comment I cannot apply it to the rest of your post.

See GG's comments on any country that bought and supported Elvis - does that mean he had a duty to go to every country in the world that did so and if he misses one out is he sticking two fingers up to them ?

and nowhere is there one location where 500000 people are already residing for that one man to come to them. They still have to travel.

See Scatters post on the pecking order of who would get tickets in the UK in the 70's.
I'll bet many of the audience would have been from other parts of Europe and that the UK members of the audience would have been small.

So we'd still be griping about that to this day if it had happened.

It wasn't perfect and it wasn't deliberate but the way things were done were probably the fairest.

Elvis: "I can't perform in every country in the world to all the fans who've supported me. But, I will perform and I'm here in the US if you want to see me, rather than I don't perform at all."

That has to be the best compromise especially in hindsight for once.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:05 pm

Steve_M wrote:Aloha no good if you live in the UK ? Well I do and I've seen it a considerable amount of times. As I have failed to see the foundation of the logic in your comment I cannot apply it to the rest of your post.

Aloha wasn't shown in the UK until 1978 and had Elvis not died probably wouldn't have been shown then. The UK TV companies couldn't afford the asking price and there was no effort at negotiation. Hardly shows willingness to please the UK fans!


Steve_M wrote:See GG's comments on any country that bought and supported Elvis - does that mean he had a duty to go to every country in the world that did so and if he misses one out is he sticking two fingers up to them ?

That's like saying he should have played every town in the USA. You do what you can, major countries and cities.


Steve_M wrote:and nowhere is there one location where 500000 people are already residing for that one man to come to them. They still have to travel.

Parker: Elvis would love to tour overseas but what's the point? People still have to travel! :?


Steve_M wrote:Elvis: "I can't perform in every country in the world to all the fans who've supported me. But, I will perform and I'm here in the US if you want to see me, rather than I don't perform at all."

This could be the future of touring! Stones, Springsteen, U2, REM et al...take note. :D

Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:17 pm

Couldn't the man give enough?

Even the fans wanted more!

RCA wanted more music, the Colonel wanted more money and even though the fans had more concerts by any artist (over 1000) in an eight year period, it's the logistics of where they were performed that is argumentative.

UNBELIEVABLE!!

To be Elvis Presley must surely have been tiring by the mid-70's.

The 'what' ifs' of a great career just don't cut the mustard with this fan.

History can NEVER change.

Live with it and enjoy what we do have.

Andy

Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:53 pm

Yes but its the "what ifs" that help message boards like this one to thrive........for better or worse.

Chewing over all this is rather pointless though i have to agree.......though sometimes it can be entertaining.