Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:20 pm
Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:50 pm
Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:28 pm
Alexander wrote:Unfortunately you are - just like Parker - only focusing on the money side. Parker did not have an artistic view nor a long term vision and Elvis just did not seem to care. Parker IS the worst thing that could happen to a careless guy like Elvis.
Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:29 pm
Alexander wrote:Unfortunately you are - just like Parker - only focusing on the money side. Parker did not have an artistic view nor a long term vision and Elvis just did not seem to care. Parker IS the worst thing that could happen to a careless guy like Elvis.
Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:35 pm
TCB-FAN wrote:On the other hand, Parkers' greed and stubborness ultimately destroyed Elvis's career & life by having him go through a gruelling schedule of doing 2 shows a day without a considerable period of rest.
TCB-FAN wrote:On top of that, Parker would not allow Elvis to diversify and re-invent his career by agreeing to do serious movie roles.
TCB-FAN wrote:....as well as overseas concerts.(Australia, Japan, U.K.).
Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:36 pm
Joe Car wrote:Some excellent responses gang! What bothered me the most about the Colonel, was the lack of respect he had for Elvis' talent. I could never understand that!
Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:37 pm
promiseland wrote: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
Could you add just one more paragraph?
Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:46 pm
Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:51 pm
Good Time Charlie wrote:Some people should re-read Peter Guralnick's epic "The Last Train to Memphis". It's a book which fully illustrates that without Colonel Parker, Elvis would never have been the Elvis we saw in the 1950s. I don't think there possibly could've been a greater manager for those formative years of his career. Almost every move Parker was making throughout the 50's was ahead of his time and perfect for Elvis.
stevelecher wrote:Ultimately, it does come down to why didn't Elvis take better charge of his own life and career?
Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:32 pm
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 8:27 pm
The Welz wrote:Joe Car wrote:Some excellent responses gang! What bothered me the most about the Colonel, was the lack of respect he had for Elvis' talent. I could never understand that!
It's not the job of the manager to adore his client's talent. It's his job to sell the product of the artist. And by making him the highest paid movie star, the highest paid entertainer and the biggest selling recording artist of all time I don't think the old man failed.
Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:01 am
lvs4evr wrote:most fans and people say that PARKER was a rude and heartless man , some even blame him for ELVIS demise. I feel differntly and want to know how many think the same , and of course those that don't are welcome as well. Ithink from the start ELVIS and his parents knew exactly what to expect with the colonel , his job was to make ELVIS a star , and very wealthy , so it seems he kept his part of the promise he made him, he wasn't going to be his daddy , or finacial adviser , only his manager at whatever the rate they agreed on . I think many a celeb would love to have bin managed by PARKER , but then again there was no one like ELVIS PRESLEY. I think of all the great deals the colonel did and then i also think of some of the bad ones and ask was he a bad manager?
Following Presley's death, Parker set up a licensing operation with Factors Etc. Inc, to control Presley merchandise and keep a steady income supporting his estate. It was later revealed that Presley owned 22% of the company, Parker owned 56%, and the final 22% was made up of various business associates.
In January 1979, it was discovered that Presley had lost out on royalties for songs he had been listed as a composer on, due to Parker advising him not to sign up to Broadcast Music Incorporated. Experts in the field at the time summarized that it had potentially cost Presley millions of dollars.
By 1980 the cost of running the estate was estimated to be as much as $500,000 a year. Priscilla and the Trust were prepared to let Parker continue to handle Presley's business affairs, and petitioned the court to that end. However, Judge Joseph Evans, aware that Lisa Marie Presley was still a minor, appointed attorney Blanchard E. Tual to investigate Parker's management. His preliminary finding was that Parker's management deal of 50% was extortionate compared to the industry average of 15–20%. He also noted that Parker's handling of Presley's business affairs during his lifetime, including the decision to sell off past royalties to RCA for $5.4 million in 1973, was "unethical" and poorly handled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Tom_Parker#Surviving_Elvis
Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:03 am
Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:39 am
drjohncarpenter wrote:lvs4evr wrote:most fans and people say that PARKER was a rude and heartless man , some even blame him for ELVIS demise. I feel differntly and want to know how many think the same , and of course those that don't are welcome as well. Ithink from the start ELVIS and his parents knew exactly what to expect with the colonel , his job was to make ELVIS a star , and very wealthy , so it seems he kept his part of the promise he made him, he wasn't going to be his daddy , or finacial adviser , only his manager at whatever the rate they agreed on . I think many a celeb would love to have bin managed by PARKER , but then again there was no one like ELVIS PRESLEY. I think of all the great deals the colonel did and then i also think of some of the bad ones and ask was he a bad manager?
I love how your post is filled with feelings, but not facts.
For instance, Gladys Presley HATED Parker from their first meeting, and recognized him for the con man that he was. But Elvis and Vernon fell hook, line and sinker for his act, so she was overruled. It's another reason her untimely death was regretful. Some of Parker's later dealings would have been difficult to accomplish with Gladys around, watching her son's happiness and well-being erode.
It might be best said that Parker did help propel Elvis to the top of the entertainment field in 1956-57, but after that he did far more harm than good. By 1970, they should have parted ways.
Otherwise, any attempt to justify Parker's management of Elvis leaves me cold. Although it's easy to judge with hindsight, it is beyond question that Parker's management of Presley in the second decade of their relationship was self-serving and short-sighted.
Facts are facts.Following Presley's death, Parker set up a licensing operation with Factors Etc. Inc, to control Presley merchandise and keep a steady income supporting his estate. It was later revealed that Presley owned 22% of the company, Parker owned 56%, and the final 22% was made up of various business associates.
In January 1979, it was discovered that Presley had lost out on royalties for songs he had been listed as a composer on, due to Parker advising him not to sign up to Broadcast Music Incorporated. Experts in the field at the time summarized that it had potentially cost Presley millions of dollars.
By 1980 the cost of running the estate was estimated to be as much as $500,000 a year. Priscilla and the Trust were prepared to let Parker continue to handle Presley's business affairs, and petitioned the court to that end. However, Judge Joseph Evans, aware that Lisa Marie Presley was still a minor, appointed attorney Blanchard E. Tual to investigate Parker's management. His preliminary finding was that Parker's management deal of 50% was extortionate compared to the industry average of 15–20%. He also noted that Parker's handling of Presley's business affairs during his lifetime, including the decision to sell off past royalties to RCA for $5.4 million in 1973, was "unethical" and poorly handled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Tom_Parker#Surviving_Elvis
Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:51 am
Bodie wrote: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?
If Elvis never existed what would have become of Parker, we would never of known about him.
Elvis achieved his fame cause of Elvis, not Parker.
To say that Elvis would have been remembered as just another southern rockabilly artist is totally underating Elvis' potential.
Even back in 54/55 is was quite obvious Elvis was one of a kind.
Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:30 am
KiwiAlan wrote:Parker found fame by managing Eddy Arnold and then Hank Snow. He was an expert in talent spotting and promotion before he met Elvis. His strong links with RCA created the massive $40,000 buyout.
Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:17 pm
drjohncarpenter wrote:...It might be best said that Parker did help propel Elvis to the top of the entertainment field in 1956-57, but after that he did far more harm than good. By 1970, they should have parted ways.
Otherwise, any attempt to justify Parker's management of Elvis leaves me cold. Although it's easy to judge with hindsight, it is beyond question that Parker's management of Presley in the second decade of their relationship was self-serving and short-sighted.
Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:46 pm
Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:48 pm
drjohncarpenter wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:Parker found fame by managing Eddy Arnold and then Hank Snow. He was an expert in talent spotting and promotion before he met Elvis. His strong links with RCA created the massive $40,000 buyout.
Parker did not manage Snow, and only became "famous" after the success of Presley.
The RCA buyout was not "created" because of his "strong links with RCA."
Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:27 am
Juan Luis wrote:I think the best thing Parker did with Elvis (for whatever reason) was keeping them (us fans) wanting more. No talk shows and being seen on tv alot etc.. When I saw Elvis in 1977,I remember he was in and out too fast. And his part of the show lasted an hour or so. One of the longest of his late 70's concerts. I remember thinking I will see him again. Not to be.
Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:44 am
Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:56 am
Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:01 am
drjohncarpenter wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:Parker found fame by managing Eddy Arnold and then Hank Snow. He was an expert in talent spotting and promotion before he met Elvis. His strong links with RCA created the massive $40,000 buyout.
Parker did not manage Snow, and only became "famous" after the success of Presley.
The RCA buyout was not "created" because of his "strong links with RCA."
Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:03 am
lvs4evr wrote:most fans and people say that PARKER was a rude and heartless man , some even blame him for ELVIS demise. I feel differntly and want to know how many think the same , and of course those that don't are welcome as well. Ithink from the start ELVIS and his parents knew exactly what to expect with the colonel , his job was to make ELVIS a star , and very wealthy , so it seems he kept his part of the promise he made him, he wasn't going to be his daddy , or finacial adviser , only his manager at whatever the rate they agreed on . I think many a celeb would love to have bin managed by PARKER , but then again there was no one like ELVIS PRESLEY. I think of all the great deals the colonel did and then i also think of some of the bad ones and ask was he a bad manager?
Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:27 am
Hosted by ElviCities