Selling Elvis' back catalogue to RCA

[harris497]

Hi I've tried searching but struggled to find exactly what I'm looking for. I'm re-reading Careless Love (to anyone who doesn't know this is like an Elvis Bible for years 1960 to 1977)

It's very well known than the colonel and RCA came up with this deal as often there were 'conflicts' regarding royalty payments and use of the catalogue.

They came up with a figure of $5.4 million. I've worked it out and that's around $32 million today (£23 million)
Does anyone know/estimate how much RCA would make from this deal? I know it's probably really hard to come up with a figure! Do you think they've made millions from this? Was this almost a scam? An unfair deal?

[harris497]

Also Elvis only got half....not even a years salary

[EPA4368]

When Elvis died is when Elvis' records/tapes sales went through the roof! I read RCA made over $200m. I believe this is why RCA gave the estate $10m because of all the poor publicity RCA was getting.

[harris497]

When Elvis died is when Elvis' records/tapes sales went through the roof! I read RCA made over $200m.

Just read he got $600000 a year from royalties. But I guess because he died 5 years later it didn't effect him as much as Lisa?

[EPA4368]

$600,000 a year from royalties from RCA or it's a combo of everything?

[harris497]

$600,000 a year from royalties from RCA or it's a combo of everything?

From the book - "“Ilberman had a schedule of royalty payments over the past seven years drawn up which showed that Elvis had received, on average, somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 a year in domestic royalties, with an estimated 33 percent additional in foreign payments—in other words, roughly $600,000 in a good average year.”

Excerpt From: Guralnick, Peter. “Careless Love.” Little, Brown and Company, 2012-01-01. iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.

[EPA4368]

going back to your questions... Was this almost a scam? An unfair deal? No & No imo. If Elvis and Parker didn't do any researching before approaching RCA, then I'd say, it's their fault. Keeping in mind, Elvis and Parker didn't have any long term planning concerns and/or thinking... Elvis spent his money as fast as it came in and Parker left his, at the casinos.


pic from http://elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=88023

[brian]

A misconception Elvis sold his singer's royalty rights on his pre-1973 recordings he didn't sell his recordings or publishing. In fact he never owned his recordings. It's fair to say that RCA got the better end of the deal as Elvis gave away his singers royalty rights for not really that much. Although at the time it seemed like a lot. He could have had a steady income for four more years and then his daughter more steady income following his death. RCA saved a lot of money not having to pay royalties it's gotta be somewhere in the millions. It's hard to give an exact figure. That will never be accurately known by us. Find out how much Elvis was being paid yearly for his singer royalty rights per year up until he sold them and then multiply it by 44. That's your answer. That would give you an idea.

[brian]

Just read he got $600000 a year from royalties. But I guess because he died 5 years later it didn't effect him as much as Lisa?

Some of that was probably for publishing royalties as well. That wasn't part of the buyout deal.

[MRM]

Even Parker had reservations about this deal, knowing that RCA would be free to release compilations of old material without even consulting with him or Elvis. But Elvis needed money badly and no one foresaw that his death a few years later would make the already difficult task of getting Elvis to record new material impossible.

With the CD reissue boom more than a decade away, I don't think anyone realized just how much money RCA would make in the years to come.

[EPA4368]

Wasn't the first sign something was wrong with this deal, is when the Rock N' Roll Revival peaked with the release of the George Lucas film, American Graffiti? Although Elvis' songs, wasn't in the movie or on the Graffiti's soundtrack album, Elvis' back catalogue saw a spike in sales.

[brian]

Wasn't the first sign something was wrong with this deal, is when the Rock N' Roll Revival peaked with the release of the George Lucas film, American Graffiti? Although Elvis' songs, wasn't in the movie or on the Graffiti's soundtrack album, Elvis' back catalogue saw a spike in sales.

Brookville records had a couple of albums that were advertised on television and you had to order them. They both sold like hotcakes. Elvis' greatest hits package and Elvis in Hollywood. RCA had an agreement with them.

[harris497]

A misconception Elvis sold his singer's royalty rights on his pre-1973 recordings he didn't sell his recordings or publishing. In fact he never owned his recordings. It's fair to say that RCA got the better end of the deal as Elvis gave away his singers royalty rights for not really that much. Although at the time it seemed like a lot. He could have had a steady income for four more years and then his daughter more steady income following his death. RCA saved a lot of money not having to pay royalties it's gotta be somewhere in the millions. It's hard to give an exact figure. That will never be accurately known by us

. Find out how much Elvis was being paid yearly for his singer royalty rights per year up until he sold them and then multiply it by 44. That's your answer. That would give you an idea

Yeah I mention that. RCA owned it - they sold their right for the shares....