Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:31 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:33 am
lvs4evr wrote:I think from the start ELVIS and his parents knew exactly what to expect with the colonel
Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:40 am
Simon1 wrote:Made a big mistake with the song rights sell out in 1974?
Prevented Elvis from touring abroad
Had Elvis stay in Vegas too long
Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:41 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:46 am
midnightx wrote:From a creative and artistic standpoint, Tom Parker was an ineffective manager from 1962 onward. His management of Elvis Presley from 1964-1968 was appalling. And from 1973-1977, he lowered the bar to appalling standards.
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:09 am
midnightx wrote:From a creative and artistic standpoint, Tom Parker was an ineffective manager from 1962 onward. His management of Elvis Presley from 1964-1968 was appalling. And from 1973-1977, he lowered the bar to atrocious standards.
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:10 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:16 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:22 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:33 am
promiseland wrote:not another Parker thread ,,
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:43 am
scottngeorgia wrote:It's almost as if Elvis had ' sold his soul to the Devil (Parker)'
Scott n Georgia
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:51 am
promiseland wrote:not another Parker thread ,,
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:59 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:38 am
promiseland wrote:scottngeorgia wrote:It's almost as if Elvis had ' sold his soul to the Devil (Parker)'
Scott n Georgia
The is the best answer ever to a Parker Thread!
Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:17 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:26 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:28 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:31 am
KiwiAlan wrote:If Parker never existed what would have become of Elvis.
Would be among the hundreds of southern rockabilly artists who never made it above the Mason/Dixieline?
Can anyone name another manager who could establish an entertainer so powerful that remains so prominent 34 years after his death?
Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:13 am
Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:24 am
midnightx wrote:From a creative and artistic standpoint, Tom Parker was an ineffective manager from 1962 onward. His management of Elvis Presley from 1964-1968 was appalling. And from 1973-1977, he lowered the bar to atrocious standards.
Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:47 am
stevelecher wrote:It's hard to really know because we're looking in from the outside and we can only go by what others have written. I believe the way Col. Parker shafted Hank Snow at the very beginning of his association with Elvis tells me all I need to know. He could be a ruthless person. Gladys knew it and had more brains than Vernon and Elvis combined.
He did a great job of promoting Elvis at the beginning but it's probable any great AR man in the business could have done as much or more. Parker always ran Elvis' career as if he had to make a quick kill today because his client wouldn't last. Some of his schemes seemed smart at first but cost his client plenty in the long run. Saving money on good scripts and good songs seemed like a great idea until people stopped paying for dreck. After the heady first few years, Elvis' artistic integrity should have been as big a consideration as the short term remuneration. Elvis would have been better off selling twice as many records of good songs with no publishing cut than he was owning all of the substandard stuff.
The mystery to me will always be Elvis' acquiescence to Parker's domination. The idea that Parker could stop Lieber and Stoller from influencing Elvis or that Steve Binder could never get to him again. I would like to think that I wouldn't have stood for something like that. Elvis should have been a partner in mapping out his career. It appears he was little more than (as someone else once stated) a highly paid shift worker. The idea he couldn't do a Laugh In episode or try to get a decent movie part because his manager said no. I'll never understand it unless we're to accept that Elvis was easily manipulated and forced into a shell by his manager's preying on his insecurities. It's been said that is exactly what Parker did and that makes him a bad guy in my book.
It appears to me, overall, that Colonel Parker may have been the worst thing that could have happened to Elvis
Mon Sep 05, 2011 11:39 am
Alexander wrote:1. Parker had Elvis making money with mediocre films for too long
2. Parker cancelled a 42 city tour in 1962 because RCA would not sponsor the tour.
3. Parker had Elvis always cut the bare minumum in the recording studio because he wanted RCA to be desparate for new material.
4. Parker put his artist in a position to give up any artistic ambition over profits which was very short sighted.
5. Parker held Elvis from touring the world.
6. Parker insisted RCA should not include hit singles on Elvis' albums so people were forced to buy more 'product'. In reality album sales were lower than could have been.
7. It was Parker who proposed Elvis stronger studio work should end up as bonus material on low quality and short running soundtracks.
8. It was Parker who agreed upon the rediculous idea of smashing Elvis catalogue onto Camden budget albums. Another blow for an recording artist to be taken seriously (Burning Love & Hits From His Movies).
9.It was Parker who did agree with a rediculous 3 albums a year record deal.
10. Parker insisted on continuing the Hill & Range deal making money for Elvis by receiving part of the copyrights of songs. In reality it prevented Elvis from getting quality material.
11. From 1973 it was Parker who lowered the bar for new tour venues continously and made Elvis perform in small cities in the US while he could tour the world.
12. It was Parker who continously increased his management share and in the end basically robbed Elvis from his hard earned money.
13. It was Parker who in the end sold Elvis' entire back catalogue for a bargain. A case that even today is still the subject of legal action.
14. It was Parker who did not have any other long term policy with Elvis than selling Elvis like the first circus clown that kept the money coming in.
15. It was Parker who could prevent Elvis from agreeing with a CBS deal because of being in terrible shape in 1977.!
Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:59 pm
The Welz wrote:Alexander wrote:1. Parker had Elvis making money with mediocre films for too long
2. Parker cancelled a 42 city tour in 1962 because RCA would not sponsor the tour.
3. Parker had Elvis always cut the bare minumum in the recording studio because he wanted RCA to be desparate for new material.
4. Parker put his artist in a position to give up any artistic ambition over profits which was very short sighted.
5. Parker held Elvis from touring the world.
6. Parker insisted RCA should not include hit singles on Elvis' albums so people were forced to buy more 'product'. In reality album sales were lower than could have been.
7. It was Parker who proposed Elvis stronger studio work should end up as bonus material on low quality and short running soundtracks.
8. It was Parker who agreed upon the rediculous idea of smashing Elvis catalogue onto Camden budget albums. Another blow for an recording artist to be taken seriously (Burning Love & Hits From His Movies).
9.It was Parker who did agree with a rediculous 3 albums a year record deal.
10. Parker insisted on continuing the Hill & Range deal making money for Elvis by receiving part of the copyrights of songs. In reality it prevented Elvis from getting quality material.
11. From 1973 it was Parker who lowered the bar for new tour venues continously and made Elvis perform in small cities in the US while he could tour the world.
12. It was Parker who continously increased his management share and in the end basically robbed Elvis from his hard earned money.
13. It was Parker who in the end sold Elvis' entire back catalogue for a bargain. A case that even today is still the subject of legal action.
14. It was Parker who did not have any other long term policy with Elvis than selling Elvis like the first circus clown that kept the money coming in.
15. It was Parker who could prevent Elvis from agreeing with a CBS deal because of being in terrible shape in 1977.!
01.Elvis signed some long-term contracts, which made him the best paid actor in Hollywood. There are a lot of worse things, that can happen in your life. As far as I know Elvis signed a contract with MGM in 1964/65, so if he was so fed up with all those movies, why did he sign this contract?
02. If Elvis had wanted to go on tour in 1962, he would have done so. But the truth is, that he earned a lot more money by doing another movie, than by going on tour.
03) What's the problem with not overfeeding your employer?
04) Elvis gave up his artistic ambitions himself when he started with SUN RECORDS. He wanted to be a ballad singer, but Sam Phillips had him do uptempo songs. If Elvis had to chose between art and money, he always took the money.
05) If Elvis would have done a world tour, he would have done so. And by the way, why go abroad when one is able to earn the same amount of money in the US? It just generates more costs and therefore reduces the earnings.
06) No artist had sold more records than Elvis Presley. So the decision wasn't the worst one.
07) By the time this decision was made, the soundtracks sold better than the regular studio albums.
08) The CAMDEN albums earned Elvis a lot of money -many are certified Platinum- without having to do anything. Of course he could have said "no way, I'm an artist", but once again he took the money.
09) It was Elvis, who signed that 3 albums per year record deal.
10) The H&R deal earned Elvis a lot of additional money. And by the way, he still could have recorded any song he wanted to. It's not the fault of Parker or H&R that he didn't do so more often.
11) I don't think, the venues Elvis played from 1973 onwards got smaller.
12) That's right, but Elvis could have refused to sign such contracts, if he hadn't considered the Colonel to be worth the money.
13) As far as I know it was Vernon Presley, who told the Colonel that his son was in desperate need of cash. Of course this business decision is downright stupid, but Elvis wanted the deal and gladly took the money. If the artist wants to sell his rights to royalties, what should the manager do? But Elvis still received royalties for these recordings, because they were published by the companies he had shares in.
14) Parker sold Elvis' output. That's the job of a manager. For my taste his way of selling him was too cheap, but it obviously worked. And if Elvis wouldn't have liked it, he could have changed it. Maybe Elvis didn't like it too, but if that was the case, he obviously decided to take the money.
15) Elvis wanted the CBS deal, because it made him 750,000 bucks without having to do anything he didn't do anyway. For him it was easy money and I guess at the time Parker didn't think Elvis would survive the airing anyway. In 1977 Elvis was a dead man walking and the Colonel knew.
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:33 pm
Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm
Hosted by ElviCities