what will Elvis's legacy be like in 10 years?

[Sweet_One_E.]

I wonder about this? Lisa has little interest, and her children seem pretty removed from it as well.

[riley]

the fans will keep his legacy alive i guess but with generations to come it will slowly be errasen. I wonder if Priscilla will stop her appearences related to Elvis that Lisa will carry on. I doubt that very much.

[rocknroll]

No worries. You can't deny the greatness in the music and his influence on all who followed.

[Polk-Salad-Annie]

the fans will keep his legacy alive
That is true(y)(y)


but with generations to come it will slowly be errasen.
I don't think so.
I think it will stay as long as there are Elvis fans in the world.
And once you are a Elvis Fan, it's for life:lol::lol:


I wonder if Priscilla will stop her appearences related to Elvis that Lisa will carry on.
I doubt that very much.
I think that when Priscilla will stop her appearances related to Elvis that Lisa will take over.
Too keep the memory of her father alive.

[epmoodyblue]

elvis legacy will be just fine...will live on for another gazillion years... the world will eternaly love this great great man:..i bow down only to god and elvis:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy(y) http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/selenauno/smiley-gen101.gifhttp://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f137/bellaselena/th_elvis-071.gif

[italianfan]

The way i see it, is aslong as EPE keep reaching out to new fans, there will always be Elvis.

Like myself for example, im 21 i have 60 years + of being an Elvis fan.

[riley]

that is true too italianfan. I grant myself at least still 40 years of full time elvis fan. I'm 43.

[monk37]

the problem with the Elvis legacy is that Sony owns his recordings - at least the ones that aren't public domain

and the estate owns his image and some works - but they don't seem to care overmuch about quality packages

if you look at the shop on the official site - movies, music and dvds are lumped into one category - and largely lost in the listings for clothes, pictures, knickknacks and the other crap they sell


Sony is interested in compliations and greatest hits - little thought to Elvis' vast recordings or fan interest


so, I rely on companies like www.memphisrecordingservice.com and other bootleggers to put together quality packages

[debtdbruno]

the fans will keep his legacy alive i guess but with generations to come it will slowly be errasen. I wonder if Priscilla will stop her appearences related to Elvis that Lisa will carry on. I doubt that very much.



I agree. The problem is when the generation of fans which are (about) Elvis' age die off. I don't think there are enough younger fans to replace them.......I hope I am wrong!!!!:'(:'(:'(

[debtdbruno]

That is true(y)(y)


I don't think so.
I think it will stay as long as there are Elvis fans in the world.
And once you are a Elvis Fan, it's for life:lol::lol:


I think that when Priscilla will stop her appearances related to Elvis that Lisa will take over.
Too keep the memory of her father alive.

I'm not too sure of that myself.............:hmm::hmm:

[debtdbruno]

the problem with the Elvis legacy is that Sony owns his recordings - at least the ones that aren't public domain

and the estate owns his image and some works - but they don't seem to care overmuch about quality packages

if you look at the shop on the official site - movies, music and dvds are lumped into one category - and largely lost in the listings for clothes, pictures, knickknacks and the other crap they sell


Sony is interested in compliations and greatest hits - little thought to Elvis' vast recordings or fan interest


so, I rely on companies like www.memphisrecordingservice.com and other bootleggers to put together quality packages


Absolutely:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy

[riley]

not sure either that Lisa will replace her mom in that fuction and certainly i see not do the grandkids that job either. They never even met him, and don't seem to be told a lot about him either.

When the generation dies that were kids of fans , i think his name will keep lingering on ofcourse and the life (his life) they will come to know will be a partly truth partly fictive but the BIG intrest will diminish.

Like we are not all that intrested anymore in great actors and singers who died around WWII and before

The names still ring a bell with us but we are not really into them anymore, you know what i mean....

[debtdbruno]

not sure either that Lisa will replace her mom in that fuction and certainly i see not do the grandkids that job either. They never even met him, and don't seem to be told a lot about him either.

When the generation dies that were kids of fans , i think his name will keep lingering on ofcourse and the life (his life) they will come to know will be a partly truth partly fictive but the BIG intrest will diminish.

Like we are not all that intrested anymore in great actors and singers who died around WWII and before

The names still ring a bell with us but we are not really into them anymore, you know what i mean....


Absolutely(y)(y)(y)

[spanish eyes]

IMO Lisa is a private person she'll have her own special memories of her time with her Father and I'm sure she will pass those memories onto her children. Lisa loved her Father so much that's why she respects his memory this way.

Lisa keeps his memory alive in her songs and also her charity work and I'm sure her Dad would be very proud of her.

I first heard his voice when I was 5 years old, I didn't see him I just heard him and that's all it took for me to want to hear more from him. So IMO as long as the record companies keep producing his music, there will be fans.

[Brian]

IMO Lisa is a private person she'll have her own special memories of her time with her Father and I'm sure she will pass those memories onto her children. Lisa loved her Father so much that's why she respects his memory this way.

Lisa keeps his memory alive in her songs and also her charity work and I'm sure her Dad would be very proud of her.

I first heard his voice when I was 5 years old, I didn't see him I just heard him and that's all it took for me to want to hear more from him. So IMO as long as the record companies keep producing his music, there will be fans.

I think a lot of Lisa Marie telling fans of special memories of her father are just her telling fans what they want to hear.

I think it's possible Elvis might not be proud of Lisa and if he were alive they might not be close

[Brian]

not sure either that Lisa will replace her mom in that fuction and certainly i see not do the grandkids that job either. They never even met him, and don't seem to be told a lot about him either.

When the generation dies that were kids of fans , i think his name will keep lingering on ofcourse and the life (his life) they will come to know will be a partly truth partly fictive but the BIG intrest will diminish.

Like we are not all that intrested anymore in great actors and singers who died around WWII and before

The names still ring a bell with us but we are not really into them anymore, you know what i mean....


Yes, I agree with every word you said

I think you are 100% right

[debtdbruno]

he might have somthing to say about 4 marriages............

[Sweet_One_E.]

bruno put it best. I think those who were around for it all feel like we know him intimately. we are die hards, so to speak. I don't see Lisa as becoming a person representing him like Priscilla has, like it or not, she seems to like being visually there.

[Genie]

The way i see it, is aslong as EPE keep reaching out to new fans, there will always be Elvis.

Like myself for example, im 21 i have 60 years + of being an Elvis fan.


:D Excellent post.
Consider that I fell in love (really!) with Elvis when I was 8 years old!
I had a horrible childhood and life anyhow, so when Mom didn't like it, I soon had her in love with him too! LOL
I am going on 63 and I haven't changed my mind one bit.
Elvis is the only man who can still make my knees weak...many a handsome movie star such as Clint Walker and all his charming 6'7 was of course noticed by me. I'm human, but there is no one on this earth like Elvis Presley.
There will never be one who can replace him, however talented and good looking.
Josh Groban is a darling..very talented youngman...
I can dismiss anyone who has ever been "Good and likable" except for ELVIS!:notworthy
Sooooooooo having rambled on and on, I doubt the young fans will ever let him die. So to speak. And his young family members may take over where 'Cilla" leaves off, and/or Lisa Marie....those new twin baby girls may grow up to be in love with their Granfather more than anyone could guess!

[Trelane P]

What has been the trend up to now? That might point to where it's going.

[Elvis and Johnny]

I am 20 years old, and have been an Elvis fan since I was 3. :)

Elvis' Legacy will live on forever. He will always be Number 1. :king: (y)

[KPM]

I wonder about this? Lisa has little interest, and her children seem pretty removed from it as well.

I think Lisa has an interest-but his legacy is what it is... from what he did and the music he made.

[Unchained Melody]

Thats hard to answer because as time goes by it could make Elvis just that more distant from modern music, and kids today.
But he has stood the test of time so far, and I know I will have the passion for his music so to me, that is all that matters.

[debtdbruno]

This is the point, most of the cr*p music around today, nobody will remember in a few years. Elvis is still going strong 32 years on...........

[Donut]

Elvis is part of music history and there will always be people interested in quality music so maybe it will get to a point when people will forget about the Elvis rubber ducks and all that stuff but his music will keep selling forever.

[debtdbruno]

Nice to think Donut, but with EPE carrying on selling them, not likely!!!!!!!

I suppose there's not much they can do 'musically' when they don't own the rights

[Donut]

Sure, that's why I don't care much for them anyway. To me Elvis and EPE are two different things.

[TCE]

As long as there are fans Elvis legacy is safe. So I guess it's up to us to keep it that way. We should come up with things to keep Elvis in the pic and to teach others about the good sides of Elvis. Up to now mostly the bad parts are known to outsiders. Once they get to learn Elvis in a different way they'll appriciate him just as much as we do. Especially the youngsters are important to keep his legacy alive. They never knew the man as we do and only hear the contoversial stories, so it's up to us to teach them about the real Elvis and what he stands for.



Christel (tce)

[KPM]

Nice to think Donut, but with EPE carrying on selling them, not likely!!!!!!!

I suppose there's not much they can do 'musically' when they don't own the rights
Unfortunatly they sell them because someone is buying them-if the fans quit buying the stuff it would solve the problem.;)

[Donut]

Unfortunatly they sell them because someone is buying them-if the fans quit buying the stuff it would solve the problem.;)

It would be intereting to know what is the average age of the buyers. Do you think there are many young people that buy that Elvis stuff? I'm not sure those products will be attractive for new fans in 10 or 20 years :hmm: I think they'll need to think of new ways to exploit his name.

[Sweet_One_E.]

and I'm sure they will. but if his popularity wanes, you can't sell things related to him. sure there will always be a certain amount of fans. just like there are people who still collect Shirley Temple things. but what the quality of his legacy is what I wonder about the most. also there are fewer and fewer people around who spent a lot of time with him. many people go to events to talk to them. they are a draw. and eventually they will be few and far between as they age or die off.

[May]

Sure, that's why I don't care much for them anyway. To me Elvis and EPE are two different things.

To me too Donut, to me too.(y)

[KPM]

It would be intereting to know what is the average age of the buyers. Do you think there are many young people that buy that Elvis stuff? I'm not sure those products will be attractive for new fans in 10 or 20 years :hmm: I think they'll need to think of new ways to exploit his name.
I do not think it is young people (or any certain age)who buy most of this stuff-I actually think its the fans who think they must have everything with Elvis's name on it-so it may be a cross section of people who buy it.
Exploiting Elvis's name has been the name of the game since 1956-so EPE did not invent it......... I actually saw something interesting at a flea market the other day it was an emply pint cardboard ice cream container-with Bing Crosbys picture and name on it-for Valley Farms Ice Cream:D ......Now I know old Bing was into a lot of things but I'm sure he knew nothing about Ice cream (except what flavors he liked)-yet his likeness was plastered all over 1000s of things during and after his career.
Its just the nature of how a celebritites likeness gets used.. good or bad.
Now if old Bing could still attract enought interest for such things as are marketed in Elvis's name-he just might have a rubber duckie with his name on it.
So it is a measure of the celebrity in a way-I know it can be tasteless-but its just the way of it.:doh:

[Donut]

I do not think it is young people (or any certain age)who buy most of this stuff-I actually think its the fans who think they must have everything with Elvis's name on it-so it may be a cross section of people who buy it.
Exploiting Elvis's name has been the name of the game since 1956-so EPE did not invent it......... I actually saw something interesting at a flea market the other day it was an emply pint cardboard ice cream container-with Bing Crosbys picture and name on it-for Valley Farms Ice Cream:D ......Now I know old Bing was into a lot of things but I'm sure he knew nothing about Ice cream (except what flavors he liked)-yet his likeness was plastered all over 1000s of things during and after his career.
Its just the nature of how a celebritites likeness gets used.. good or bad.
Now if old Bing could still attract enought interest for such things as are marketed in Elvis's name-he just might have a rubber duckie with his name on it.
So it is a measure of the celebrity in a way-I know it can be tasteless-but its just the way of it.:doh:

I know they didn't invent it but times change and there will come a day when fans from the time when Elvis was alive won't be here any more. As for the tasteless stuff it doesn't have to necessarily be that way, you just have to visit Frank Sinatra's official website for example and see the difference. They don't present him like a "clown".

[SleepyJack]

As long as there are people with ears there will always be Elvis Presley fans.

[debtdbruno]

That was very simple, but elequently put SJ...........wonderful

[KPM]

I know they didn't invent it but times change and there will come a day when fans from the time when Elvis was alive won't be here any more. As for the tasteless stuff it doesn't have to necessarily be that way, you just have to visit Frank Sinatra's official website for example and see the difference. They don't present him like a "clown".
Frank never let his managers-present him in anyway shape or form which Frank himself did not approve-unlike Elvis who turned all business over to Parker who could care less what Elvis's name was used to promote-my point is Elvis did not tell Parker to stop no matter what the product or promotion.............the precedent was set by Parker and Elvis.
I can not assume that Elvis today would be upset-when he was not upset about these things when alive especially since his daughter and grandkids are the ones getting the benefit.
If Elvis had actually told Parker I do not want "Teddy Bear Perfume" sold or ashtrays, or cheap guitars, cheap jewelry, or lamps, etc which Parker had deals for in the 50s-I would see it as you do-but Parker had deals with hundreds of vendors for product which was just as tasteless.
I agree I do not like the tasteless but its not like it Elvis was not involved with such products while alive and reaped profit himself (althought not as much as his family is getting since Parker is not getting a good chunk)

[torpor97]

Elvis will always be here. He is in history books and being studied in colleges everywhere. Every day there are new fans. And Ive never known anyone who after becoming a fan ever stoped, and if so they always come back. He is still the whole package, and always will be.

[Hominuk]

The way i see it, is aslong as EPE keep reaching out to new fans, there will always be Elvis.

Like myself for example, im 21 i have 60 years + of being an Elvis fan.

Nice post! Happy to see someone so young loving Elvis! I agree with you....there will always be Elvis!

[monk37]

my niece is 16 and she's an Elvis fan

[david72]

I am 20 years old and i have been a elvis fan for 7 yrs. I will always be a elvis fan

[Donut]

Frank never let his managers-present him in anyway shape or form which Frank himself did not approve-unlike Elvis who turned all business over to Parker who could care less what Elvis's name was used to promote-my point is Elvis did not tell Parker to stop no matter what the product or promotion.............the precedent was set by Parker and Elvis.
I can not assume that Elvis today would be upset-when he was not upset about these things when alive especially since his daughter and grandkids are the ones getting the benefit.
If Elvis had actually told Parker I do not want "Teddy Bear Perfume" sold or ashtrays, or cheap guitars, cheap jewelry, or lamps, etc which Parker had deals for in the 50s-I would see it as you do-but Parker had deals with hundreds of vendors for product which was just as tasteless.
I agree I do not like the tasteless but its not like it Elvis was not involved with such products while alive and reaped profit himself (althought not as much as his family is getting since Parker is not getting a good chunk)

KPM, I think we are not understanding each other (as usual :P)
It's not a matter of what was done 50 or 40 years ago, my point is I don't think that stuff will appeal to new Elvis fans in the future so they'll have to look for new ways to keep their business working and generating money once the older fans are not here anymore. From the point of view of a 30 something (me) the image they have presented of Elvis in general is quite tacky and I wouldn't even have taken Elvis into consideration had I not discovered his music first. There has to be a reason why the majority of young people see Elvis as something old-fashioned when we know he was the coolest thing for most of his life and ahead of his time...

[Sweet_One_E.]

Frank never let his managers-present him in anyway shape or form which Frank himself did not approve-unlike Elvis who turned all business over to Parker who could care less what Elvis's name was used to promote-my point is Elvis did not tell Parker to stop no matter what the product or promotion.............the precedent was set by Parker and Elvis.
I can not assume that Elvis today would be upset-when he was not upset about these things when alive especially since his daughter and grandkids are the ones getting the benefit.
If Elvis had actually told Parker I do not want "Teddy Bear Perfume" sold or ashtrays, or cheap guitars, cheap jewelry, or lamps, etc which Parker had deals for in the 50s-I would see it as you do-but Parker had deals with hundreds of vendors for product which was just as tasteless.
I agree I do not like the tasteless but its not like it Elvis was not involved with such products while alive and reaped profit himself (althought not as much as his family is getting since Parker is not getting a good chunk)

Elvis was in control of matters, thru proxy, by allowing Parker to handle things yes, but the difference is, he needed the money and therefore he was motived to make it to sustain his life, taking care of others, and his loved ones. Priscilla and Lisa, and then EPE has gone way past needing the money for that end. I always wonder, just how much money does one need so badly that they have to compromise his image. and it's not just that. it is their vulgar protest of others who have done so, (and minimally in comparision to them) , and they crying on the worlds shoulders that Elvis has not been done right by..by others. it is the hypocrisy that is ridiculous. They care about his image? in what way, shape or form. please!! it was his image and he owes no one any justification of what he did in his lifetime. if it was their own image then they have to right to do what they choose with theirs. but they were gifted his, and they should not say they are so honorable when so much proves they are not.

[debtdbruno]

KPM, I think we are not understanding each other (as usual :P)
It's not a matter of what was done 50 or 40 years ago, my point is I don't think that stuff will appeal to new Elvis fans in the future so they'll have to look for new ways to keep their business working and generating money once the older fans are not here anymore. From the point of view of a 30 something (me) the image they have presented of Elvis in general is quite tacky and I wouldn't even have taken Elvis into consideration had I not discovered his music first. There has to be a reason why the majority of young people see Elvis as something old-fashioned when we know he was the coolest thing for most of his life and ahead of his time...

Well said Donut(y)(y)(y)(y)

[KPM]

KPM, I think we are not understanding each other (as usual :P)
It's not a matter of what was done 50 or 40 years ago, my point is I don't think that stuff will appeal to new Elvis fans in the future so they'll have to look for new ways to keep their business working and generating money once the older fans are not here anymore. From the point of view of a 30 something (me) the image they have presented of Elvis in general is quite tacky and I wouldn't even have taken Elvis into consideration had I not discovered his music first. There has to be a reason why the majority of young people see Elvis as something old-fashioned when we know he was the coolest thing for most of his life and ahead of his time...
Well my point is that the stuff marketed to fans, casual fans, visitors etc...whether in 1956 or in 2009.....will only change when these individuals quit buying those items..........regardless of who is selling the items.
You only produce things you can sell in enough quantity to make a good profit-obviously these things sell well.
In the future, if the sales slip-I'm sure the strategy will change-the products will change-the emphasis of the items will change-it s just smart.
So that is my take on this question.:D

[KPM]

Elvis was in control of matters, thru proxy, by allowing Parker to handle things yes, but the difference is, he needed the money and therefore he was motived to make it to sustain his life, taking care of others, and his loved ones. Priscilla and Lisa, and then EPE has gone way past needing the money for that end. I always wonder, just how much money does one need so badly that they have to compromise his image. and it's not just that. it is their vulgar protest of others who have done so, (and minimally in comparision to them) , and they crying on the worlds shoulders that Elvis has not been done right by..by others. it is the hypocrisy that is ridiculous. They care about his image? in what way, shape or form. please!! it was his image and he owes no one any justification of what he did in his lifetime. if it was their own image then they have to right to do what they choose with theirs. but they were gifted his, and they should not say they are so honorable when so much proves they are not.
Well in 1956 Elvis did let Parker make the deals and he signed off on them-he was making more money than he had ever seen and he never nixed a deal for any item that Parker marketed tasteless or otherwise.
In the 60s the marketing continued, but also the tasteless movies continued and the weak music continued-these things bothered Elvis I'm sure much more than the products which he did not personally produce for sale.
So part of his legacy-is in those years where his own production of music and film were just not the level he was capable of-those things have helped to lower his legacy in many peoples mind.
As far as how much money is enough-I have said this before-Elvis would have wanted all the money and security he could produce for his daughter and his grandkids-I can not envision him ever saying enough is enough.
As a father I feel the same about my kids and future grandkids-I want to leave them as well off as I humanly can (of course it will be a few notches below the bar Elvis has set;))
As far as the image of Elvis Presley-Elvis himself in his life, the way he lived, the young death and all the problems helped to craft the image that the general public has...IMO much more than any thing marketed or sold.
A life speaks volumes-it can be misunderstood, it can be viewed incorrectly but the basis for the image-is in the actual life lived. Elvis lived in his own way, in his own sense of values-I understand them many don't-and for those the negative becomes the image. That has hurt the legacy of Elvis.
I want to be clear I do not like all the things (starting in 1956) which have been marketed in his name-sure much is tasteless, much is gaudy, much is nothing remotely associated with music-but it sells and it always did sell.
My own kids are welcome to market an outhouse in my name-if they can sell it-in order to help them.

[KPM]

Actually the thing I would do if I was marketing Elvis-would be to convince Sony/RCA/BMG to sell every single tape with Elvis's voice on it from all the sessions, all the soundboards all the outtakes-
I would bet it has been discussed at EPE and they know the reality of that-it will never happen.
Sony could not even put a value on this-it is priceless.
So without the recordings, without the films, EPE can not do a single thing on its own to shape the recorded legacy of Elvis. They can not even reap profit from the pre 73 recordings and we all know Elvis did not record much new material after 74.

The thing I find funny about the debate is that everyone wants something different done with the image of Elvis-some are upset that Graceland is not all red furnished and decorated like it was right after Elvis died-wasn't that decor tacky????
So instead it has been decorated more like when Elvis's mom was alive and during the 60s when Priscilla had a hand in the decor-which is not so tacky???
Some want Elvis to be shown warts and all-no punches pulled, no explaination no reasoning for who Elvis was-who he became-yet others don't want to acknowledge any warts, or bit of info which reflects negative on Elvis???
Elvis spent money like it was air-with each breath...so he did not leave a financially secure situation (and I'm sure he wanted to, thought he could always tour could always make a quick couple million) yet 31 years later his estate is richer for his daughter, and grandkids than he could have ever left it (of you go buy his spending and financial planning while alive) I can not see he would be unhappy about this fact.
I guess I just see this way different than most-I see it as a father who will always want the most, for his kids and their kids.

[Donut]

Well my point is that the stuff marketed to fans, casual fans, visitors etc...whether in 1956 or in 2009.....will only change when these individuals quit buying those items..........regardless of who is selling the items.
You only produce things you can sell in enough quantity to make a good profit-obviously these things sell well.
In the future, if the sales slip-I'm sure the strategy will change-the products will change-the emphasis of the items will change-it s just smart.
So that is my take on this question.:D

OK (y)



The thing I find funny about the debate is that everyone wants something different done with the image of Elvis-some are upset that Graceland is not all red furnished and decorated like it was right after Elvis died-wasn't that decor tacky????
So instead it has been decorated more like when Elvis's mom was alive and during the 60s when Priscilla had a hand in the decor-which is not so tacky???

I think that's a different story, to me that was like trying to change Elvis personality and the way he lived probably because they were ashamed of it. I wouldn't expect to visit Salvador Dali's house, for instance, and find that they have removed the big eggs from the roof just because someone involved in his estate thought he had bad taste. Graceland looks like Elvis died just after Priscilla left and doing this they have erased 5 years of his life in the house, HIS house.

[Sweet_One_E.]

well said dounut

[GIORGIA]

I'm 21 Year's Old Elvis Fan from 2 Year's,and I Remain An Elvis Fan For All My Life:wub::wub::wub::wub::wub::wub::wub::wub::wub:
:wub:!

[GIORGIA]

Sure, that's why I don't care much for them anyway. To me Elvis and EPE are two different things.
True!Very True My Friend!

[KPM]

OK (y)



I think that's a different story, to me that was like trying to change Elvis personality and the way he lived probably because they were ashamed of it. I wouldn't expect to visit Salvador Dali's house, for instance, and find that they have removed the big eggs from the roof just because someone involved in his estate thought he had bad taste. Graceland looks like Elvis died just after Priscilla left and doing this they have erased 5 years of his life in the house, HIS house.
Well I see what you are saying-but the house does look like it did at one time during Elvis's life-so its not like he never saw it this way or did not approve of how it looked during this period. It does not erase 5 years we all know how it looked, and perhaps one day they will revisit this period-doubtful but possible.

[debtdbruno]

Actually the thing I would do if I was marketing Elvis-would be to convince Sony/RCA/BMG to sell every single tape with Elvis's voice on it from all the sessions, all the soundboards all the outtakes-
I would bet it has been discussed at EPE and they know the reality of that-it will never happen.
Sony could not even put a value on this-it is priceless.
So without the recordings, without the films, EPE can not do a single thing on its own to shape the recorded legacy of Elvis. They can not even reap profit from the pre 73 recordings and we all know Elvis did not record much new material after 74.

The thing I find funny about the debate is that everyone wants something different done with the image of Elvis-some are upset that Graceland is not all red furnished and decorated like it was right after Elvis died-wasn't that decor tacky????
So instead it has been decorated more like when Elvis's mom was alive and during the 60s when Priscilla had a hand in the decor-which is not so tacky???
Some want Elvis to be shown warts and all-no punches pulled, no explaination no reasoning for who Elvis was-who he became-yet others don't want to acknowledge any warts, or bit of info which reflects negative on Elvis???
Elvis spent money like it was air-with each breath...so he did not leave a financially secure situation (and I'm sure he wanted to, thought he could always tour could always make a quick couple million) yet 31 years later his estate is richer for his daughter, and grandkids than he could have ever left it (of you go buy his spending and financial planning while alive) I can not see he would be unhappy about this fact.
I guess I just see this way different than most-I see it as a father who will always want the most, for his kids and their kids.

(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)

[Donut]

They can not even reap profit from the pre 73 recordings and we all know Elvis did not record much new material after 74.


It's not my intention to prolong this conversation since we have already given our opinions on the legacy suject and I'm sure you know this ;) but sometimes we forget that Elvis and now EPE still get publisher royalties on sales of a great number of songs independent of the year he recorded them. The 73 deal with RCA had no effect on his publisher's royalties so apart from Graceland they have been getting a profit from this too.

[May]

Just to pick up on the bit about how Graceland is decorated. Personally I would prefer it to be in the red decor, as it was in August 77, because thats how it was lived in by Elvis at that time. I know there are debates as to whether Elvis liked it or didnt like it (as decorated by Linda), but I would like to have visited Graceland and seen it how it was when Elvis last lived there.

Priscilla has herself said she had it redecorated in the blue and white colour scheme, as that was the colour that was used when she lived there. What she also has stated is that only some of the furnishings that are used, are original.

so if you look at pictures (there arent many that I can find, but there are enough) from back in the early 60's of how the dining room was, including table/chairs, you see that how it is now is not like it was at all back in the earlier years. The colour scheme might be similar but thats about it. :hmm: so thats the reason I would have liked to have seen it in the red decor.(y)

[KPM]

It's not my intention to prolong this conversation since we have already given our opinions on the legacy suject and I'm sure you know this ;) but sometimes we forget that Elvis and now EPE still get publisher royalties on sales of a great number of songs independent of the year he recorded them. The 73 deal with RCA had no effect on his publisher's royalties so apart from Graceland they have been getting a profit from this too.
No I did not forget that, but it does take all his artist royalties.... which for most artists of Elvis's stature should be around 15-20% in todays world-considering the success of yearly album sales in total(such as the Christmas releases) that is substantial.
Sony said a few years back that The Elvis 30#1s had sold around 16 million worldwide, at.... lets say an average of 12$ an album.... total $192 million in sales.... if true-Elvis's estate lost 38.4 million in royaties at the 20% rate or 27 million at the 15% rate-for the one album.
Even at a conservative 10% rate that would be nearly 20 million lost.
His estate has lost untold millions in 31 years which go right into profit for RCA/BMG/SONY-the best deal a record label ever made.

[KPM]

Just to pick up on the bit about how Graceland is decorated. Personally I would prefer it to be in the red decor, as it was in August 77, because thats how it was lived in by Elvis at that time. I know there are debates as to whether Elvis liked it or didnt like it (as decorated by Linda), but I would like to have visited Graceland and seen it how it was when Elvis last lived there.

Priscilla has herself said she had it redecorated in the blue and white colour scheme, as that was the colour that was used when she lived there. What she also has stated is that only some of the furnishings that are used, are original.

so if you look at pictures (there arent many that I can find, but there are enough) from back in the early 60's of how the dining room was, including table/chairs, you see that how it is now is not like it was at all back in the earlier years. The colour scheme might be similar but thats about it. :hmm: so thats the reason I would have liked to have seen it in the red decor.(y)
Well remember that the few pictures which are seen-do not mean that is the only way the rooms were furnished and arranged during those years. It may only be one way the rooms looked for a period of time. But my point was not how the rooms were at his death or how they are displayed now-its the no-win of the whole argument.................you would like to see the red "somewhat tacky" look of 1977.............yet others see this as tasteless............and prefer the color and style that is "represented" (if not exactly in detail but perhaps close) at Graceland today. Many fans/visitors to Graceland buy the "tacky tasteless items" but.....others dislike, them think they should not be sold............no win. Some want Elvis's music to be promoted, packaged and sold in a better more insightful way by the record label-others are happy they spend as much time as they do promoting a dead artist who has no real new material in their vaults-no win.
If Lisa is not promoting Elvis with all her energy-she is uncaring-but if she records a duet with him like In the Ghetto-gives the profit to charity (in the Elvis spirit of helping)she is doing it to promote herself-no win.
I will not even mention Priscilla-because she is a triple no win:lmfao::lmfao:

[May]

It doesnt bother me that the red decor was tacky though, in that I dont have to live with it;) Out of the two colour schemes, I much prefer the blue and white. However, people who say they wouldnt like to see the red decor as it was tacky need to remember that back in the mid 70's this wasnt seen as tacky at all. It was all the fashion. I remember we had bright orange carpet in our hallway and green and white psychodelic wallpaper. I mean YUK!!!!!! but I didnt think that at the time. :lol:

also, they would be seeing what Elvis lived with. Not what Priscilla has re-done as it were.

I do understand what you are saying. I just think that Elvis fans should just accept this "tasteless" (as they see it) decor and realise that it was like that in the 70's and if they dont like it, tough. Elvis (and Linda) did! :lol:
(y)(y)

[KPM]

It doesnt bother me that the red decor was tacky though, in that I dont have to live with it;) Out of the two colour schemes, I much prefer the blue and white. However, people who say they wouldnt like to see the red decor as it was tacky need to remember that back in the mid 70's this wasnt seen as tacky at all. It was all the fashion. I remember we had bright orange carpet in our hallway and green and white psychodelic wallpaper. I mean YUK!!!!!! but I didnt think that at the time. :lol:

also, they would be seeing what Elvis lived with. Not what Priscilla has re-done as it were.

I do understand what you are saying. I just think that Elvis fans should just accept this "tasteless" (as they see it) decor and realise that it was like that in the 70's and if they dont like it, tough. Elvis (and Linda) did! :lol:
(y)(y)
I actually had a red decor in my living room in 1973-not quite as bright as photos I have seen of Elvis's decor. I did not think it tacky-but then someone pointed out what old time brothels looked like-very fluffy, very red, gold and black look to them and I reconsidered the look-long before I knew Elvis had that style also.:D;)

[May]

Yes, very brothel-esque!!:lol::lol:

[debtdbruno]

It doesnt bother me that the red decor was tacky though, in that I dont have to live with it;) Out of the two colour schemes, I much prefer the blue and white. However, people who say they wouldnt like to see the red decor as it was tacky need to remember that back in the mid 70's this wasnt seen as tacky at all. It was all the fashion. I remember we had bright orange carpet in our hallway and green and white psychodelic wallpaper. I mean YUK!!!!!! but I didnt think that at the time. :lol:

also, they would be seeing what Elvis lived with. Not what Priscilla has re-done as it were.

I do understand what you are saying. I just think that Elvis fans should just accept this "tasteless" (as they see it) decor and realise that it was like that in the 70's and if they dont like it, tough. Elvis (and Linda) did! :lol:
(y)(y)


Wow.....way to go May............LOL

[May]

I know!!!!! I had SUCH trendy parents (not) !!!!! hahaha

[Junebug]

At the time, I believe part of the decision to move away from the red decor was to counter the negative image A. Goldman's 1981 book, ELVIS, painted of Graceland.

Chap. 1 - The King's Palace, the King's Pleasure, pg. 7 -

"When you step through the ten-foot oak door and enter the house, you stop and star in amazement. Having just come from the contemplation of the tenderest scene in the Holy Bible (referring to the Christmas creche on the front lawn), imagine the shock of finding yourself in a *****house! Yet there is no other way to describe the drawing room of Graceland except to say that it appears to have been lifted from some turn-of-the-century bordello down in the French Quarter of New Orleans. LuLu White or........
The room is a gaudy melange of red velour and gilded tassels, Louis XV furniture and porcelain bric-a-brac, all informed by the kind of taste that delights in a ceramic temple d'amour.......

Looking a little closer, you realize that the old madams of the French Quarter would have been horrified at the quality of the hangings and furniture at Graceland. They decorated their sporting houses with magnificent pieces crafted in Europe, upholstered them in the finest......
Though it cost a lot of money to fill up Graceland with the things that appealed to Elvis Presley, nothing in it is worth a dime.

Take that fake fireplace that blocks with its companion bookcases (filled with phony leather bindings)...........
Every piece is elaborately carved and gilded.....; but it's not only fake (Louis XV's upholsteres didn't go in for sectional sofas), its that dreadful fake antique furniture that Italian gansters dote on: garish, preposterous, uncomfortable and cheating wherever it can, as in the substitution of velour for velvet. ..............."

And on it goes through the rooms of Graceland.........


:king:

[debtdbruno]

At the time, I believe part of the decision to move away from the red decor was to counter the negative image A. Goldman's 1981 book, ELVIS, painted of Graceland.

Chap. 1 - The King's Palace, the King's Pleasure, pg. 7 -

"When you step through the ten-foot oak door and enter the house, you stop and star in amazement. Having just come from the contemplation of the tenderest scene in the Holy Bible (referring to the Christmas creche on the front lawn), imagine the shock of finding yourself in a *****house! Yet there is no other way to describe the drawing room of Graceland except to say that it appears to have been lifted from some turn-of-the-century bordello down in the French Quarter of New Orleans. LuLu White or........
The room is a gaudy melange of red velour and gilded tassels, Louis XV furniture and porcelain bric-a-brac, all informed by the kind of taste that delights in a ceramic temple d'amour.......

Looking a little closer, you realize that the old madams of the French Quarter would have been horrified at the quality of the hangings and furniture at Graceland. They decorated their sporting houses with magnificent pieces crafted in Europe, upholstered them in the finest......
Though it cost a lot of money to fill up Graceland with the things that appealed to Elvis Presley, nothing in it is worth a dime.

Take that fake fireplace that blocks with its companion bookcases (filled with phony leather bindings)...........
Every piece is elaborately carved and gilded.....; but it's not only fake (Louis XV's upholsteres didn't go in for sectional sofas), its that dreadful fake antique furniture that Italian gansters dote on: garish, preposterous, uncomfortable and cheating wherever it can, as in the substitution of velour for velvet. ..............."

And on it goes through the rooms of Graceland.........


:king:


You know, I got this book from the library many, many years ago........and that was how far I got, reading about the red deco, and the 'atrium of a heart'.......didn't read any more.........

[KPM]

You know, I got this book from the library many, many years ago........and that was how far I got, reading about the red deco, and the 'atrium of a heart'.......didn't read any more.........
Goldman hated rock and Elvis was the epitome of Rock. His venom is in every single page, down to the page numbers.
It is one thing to paint a true picture, and to be fair-equal time for good and bad-this book presented nothing that even hinted at good-nothing in a complimentary way, he downgraded Elvis on everything.(n)

[Unchained Melody]

the problem with the Elvis legacy is that Sony owns his recordings - at least the ones that aren't public domain

and the estate owns his image and some works - but they don't seem to care overmuch about quality packages

if you look at the shop on the official site - movies, music and dvds are lumped into one category - and largely lost in the listings for clothes, pictures, knickknacks and the other crap they sell


Sony is interested in compliations and greatest hits - little thought to Elvis' vast recordings or fan interest


so, I rely on companies like www.memphisrecordingservice.com (http://www.memphisrecordingservice.com) and other bootleggers to put together quality packages

I couldn't agree more, they do not focus on the creative individual Elvis was with his work but stuff like Elvis Ducks and impersonator costumes is what they promote mostly. (n)

If it wasn't for Follow That Dream label I don't know where we'd be.

[KPM]

I couldn't agree more, they do not focus on the creative individual Elvis was with his work but stuff like Elvis Ducks and impersonator costumes is what they promote mostly. (n)

If it wasn't for Follow That Dream label I don't know where we'd be.
EPE/Sillerman can never have any say so about the recordings-and that is not their fault-as I pointed out if they had the artists royalties coming in yearly for all of the recordings Elvis made-they would have never had to even open Graceland to the public and they could afford to be much more selective in what they sell. But the only royalties that come to Elvis from Sony are for the few recordings he did after 1973.
Sillerman can not afford what Sony would ask for all the recordings outright-because they are just priceless-so EPE/Sillerman is left with no say so and little profit from the recordings.
It may not be pretty but thats the truth as I see it.
If they received full royalties for all the recordings, or if they owned them and then they still sold Elvis Ducks-I would probably feel exactly as you do-but they don't own them.
My hope is that someday this tasteless stuff-will not sell well-and then they will rethink their marketing-but......unfortunately the tasteless stuff has been selling since 1956-and its still selling and as long as it does it will be produced.

[yvonne]

I wonder about this? Lisa has little interest, and her children seem pretty removed from it as well.
I think Elvis will still be here long after Priscilla, Lisa and her kids are gone.
It was Elvis who had that fantastic voice, who made that timeless music, who is the the legend and not Priscilla, Lisa or all her kids. Elvis lives on without them.

[Brian]

EPE/Sillerman can never have any say so about the recordings-and that is not their fault-as I pointed out if they had the artists royalties coming in yearly for all of the recordings Elvis made-they would have never had to even open Graceland to the public and they could afford to be much more selective in what they sell. But the only royalties that come to Elvis from Sony are for the few recordings he did after 1973.
Sillerman can not afford what Sony would ask for all the recordings outright-because they are just priceless-so EPE/Sillerman is left with no say so and little profit from the recordings.
It may not be pretty but thats the truth as I see it.
If they received full royalties for all the recordings, or if they owned them and then they still sold Elvis Ducks-I would probably feel exactly as you do-but they don't own them.
My hope is that someday this tasteless stuff-will not sell well-and then they will rethink their marketing-but......unfortunately the tasteless stuff has been selling since 1956-and its still selling and as long as it does it will be produced.

I don't think Elvis' estate would have any say in what Sony puts out regardless of whether Elvis sold the royalty rights.

I do think even if Elvis did not sell the artist royalty rights on his recordings and his estate got the income for them they'd still sell the ducks and other items.

[debtdbruno]

I don't think Elvis' estate would have any say in what Sony puts out regardless of whether Elvis sold the royalty rights.

I do think even if Elvis did not sell the artist royalty rights on his recordings and his estate got the income for them they'd still sell the ducks and other items.

Agree there Brian..........it's all extra $$$$$$$(y)(y)(y)(y)

[Donut]

No I did not forget that, but it does take all his artist royalties.... which for most artists of Elvis's stature should be around 15-20% in todays world-considering the success of yearly album sales in total(such as the Christmas releases) that is substantial.
Sony said a few years back that The Elvis 30#1s had sold around 16 million worldwide, at.... lets say an average of 12$ an album.... total $192 million in sales.... if true-Elvis's estate lost 38.4 million in royaties at the 20% rate or 27 million at the 15% rate-for the one album.
Even at a conservative 10% rate that would be nearly 20 million lost.
His estate has lost untold millions in 31 years which go right into profit for RCA/BMG/SONY-the best deal a record label ever made.

Yes, I know they don't get his artist royalties but they still own part of the songs wich is something important and doesn't mean pocket change for them either. Correct me if I'm wrong but I read that his top hits can command as much as $250,000 in publishing royalties for a single use.

[Donut]

I do think even if Elvis did not sell the artist royalty rights on his recordings and his estate got the income for them they'd still sell the ducks and other items.

They would have their own duck factories.

[Merry]

At the time, I believe part of the decision to move away from the red decor was to counter the negative image A. Goldman's 1981 book, ELVIS, painted of Graceland.

Chap. 1 - The King's Palace, the King's Pleasure, pg. 7 -

"When you step through the ten-foot oak door and enter the house, you stop and star in amazement. Having just come from the contemplation of the tenderest scene in the Holy Bible (referring to the Christmas creche on the front lawn), imagine the shock of finding yourself in a *****house! Yet there is no other way to describe the drawing room of Graceland except to say that it appears to have been lifted from some turn-of-the-century bordello down in the French Quarter of New Orleans. LuLu White or........
The room is a gaudy melange of red velour and gilded tassels, Louis XV furniture and porcelain bric-a-brac, all informed by the kind of taste that delights in a ceramic temple d'amour.......

Looking a little closer, you realize that the old madams of the French Quarter would have been horrified at the quality of the hangings and furniture at Graceland. They decorated their sporting houses with magnificent pieces crafted in Europe, upholstered them in the finest......
Though it cost a lot of money to fill up Graceland with the things that appealed to Elvis Presley, nothing in it is worth a dime.

Take that fake fireplace that blocks with its companion bookcases (filled with phony leather bindings)...........
Every piece is elaborately carved and gilded.....; but it's not only fake (Louis XV's upholsteres didn't go in for sectional sofas), its that dreadful fake antique furniture that Italian gansters dote on: garish, preposterous, uncomfortable and cheating wherever it can, as in the substitution of velour for velvet. ..............."

And on it goes through the rooms of Graceland.........


:king:



This "person", Goldman, was showing his ignorance.

There are percentage rules in Interior Decorating to do with furniture, and colour.

Dreadful, he is, just dreadful. A spiteful little man.

P.S. I'm sure even the furniture recoiled from him, hence it was uncomfortable :D (y)

[Brian]

Yes, I know they don't get his artist royalties but they still own part of the songs wich is something important and doesn't mean pocket change for them either. Correct me if I'm wrong but I read that his top hits can command as much as $250,000 in publishing royalties for a single use.

Yeah. they get something like that

EPE isn't hurting for money it's just that they'd probably love it if they got the singers royalty rights for the songs which means more money.

[cibetty]

I think Elvis will still be here long after Priscilla, Lisa and her kids are gone.
It was Elvis who had that fantastic voice, who made that timeless music, who is the the legend and not Priscilla, Lisa or all her kids. Elvis lives on without them.

I agree with you Yvonne! He did something what was immortal. I'm sure he will have many new fans in ten years who will never forget him.

[EnigmaticSun]

I'm sure he will have many new fans in ten years who will never forget him.

He has enough to offer new fans besides being the most attractive man that ever walked the face of the earth. In fact his music takes over the world!! (y)

[KPM]

Yes, I know they don't get his artist royalties but they still own part of the songs wich is something important and doesn't mean pocket change for them either. Correct me if I'm wrong but I read that his top hits can command as much as $250,000 in publishing royalties for a single use.
I think it depends on how the song is used, how much time it is heard, etc....some "sampling" of a song actually brings nothing.

[KPM]

I don't think Elvis' estate would have any say in what Sony puts out regardless of whether Elvis sold the royalty rights.
I do think even if Elvis did not sell the artist royalty rights on his recordings and his estate got the income for them they'd still sell the ducks and other items.
Never implied that EPE would have any more to say about the use of recordings if they still had all the artists royalties coming in-that "say so" should have been negotiated into Elvis's RCA contracts (somewhere along the way) while Elvis was alive-when he died it was too late. But those added royalties sure would have come in handy -in the first years after Elvis died when the sale surge was ongoing-would have solved some major problems which many fans see in Graceland being opened at all.


As far as the ducks and other items-perhaps-but lets not forget up until 1973Elvis received all his royalties....and the marketing of questionable Elvis items had continued since 1956 to that point-so if EPE follows the same pattern and precedent that Parkers managing ability had set in place and Elvis had agreed to....perhaps they would.
That is my point-none of this is truely new-it took place while he was alive-ibut as I have said-at least the profit is going into Elvis's familys hands.
The split with Parker on merchandising was 50% and Parker in many instances made more than Elvis in these type deals.

[Brian]

Never implied that EPE would have any more to say about the use of recordings if they still had all the artists royalties coming in-that "say so" should have been negotiated into Elvis's RCA contracts (somewhere along the way) while Elvis was alive-when he died it was too late. But those added royalties sure would have come in handy -in the first years after Elvis died when the sale surge was ongoing-would have solved some major problems which many fans see in Graceland being opened at all.


.

Absolutely I'm sure the co-executors of the estate Joe Hanks, The advisory board of the First National Bank of Memphis and Priscilla would've loved the money generated from those royalties.
I still think Graceland would've been opened as it's a major money maker.

[Donut]

This is not new but it gives you an idea of where the money comes from.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/ckx-inc/s-1-securities-registration-statement/2005/04/11/Section21.aspx

Our primary revenue sources include income from licensing Elvis' name and likeness for consumer products, commercials and other uses, royalties and other income derived from intellectual property created or otherwise owned by Elvis including records, movies, videos and music publishing, and ticket sales and related income from public tours of Graceland. We also derive revenue from the operation of Elvis Presley's Heartbreak Hotel and the Meadow Oaks apartment complex.

I can't make this bigger but their major income comes from licensing fees and royalties.

[Sweet_One_E.]

exactly dounut. otherwise there wouldn't be the need for expensive laswsuits they have files all these years to make it as big a monopoly as possible. the more they sell , junk or not, the more they make. imo, the tasteless had gotten out of control. when Lisa sold out, there was a huge loss of control and it will only get worse. well maybe it can't. but that's to be expected. at least with Lisa and Priscilla as the face of his representation, there is a more personal touch to the history of him. when they are not there, none of it will be.

[Donut]

exactly dounut. otherwise there wouldn't be the need for expensive laswsuits they have files all these years to make it as big a monopoly as possible. the more they sell , junk or not, the more they make. imo, the tasteless had gotten out of control. when Lisa sold out, there was a huge loss of control and it will only get worse. well maybe it can't. but that's to be expected. at least with Lisa and Priscilla as the face of his representation, there is a more personal touch to the history of him. when they are not there, none of it will be.

That's true and I understand that for the people in charge now Elvis means only business and money because they don't have any sentimental attachement to him. But they have had so many other sources of income related to Elvis that they could have been more selective in what they sold and what they did, maybe not at first but as time passed they surely could have afforded to do it. The thing is greed have not allowed them to care about it, either this or they were as tacky as many of the things they have been making money off.

[Unchained Melody]

I don't think Elvis' estate would have any say in what Sony puts out regardless of whether Elvis sold the royalty rights.

I do think even if Elvis did not sell the artist royalty rights on his recordings and his estate got the income for them they'd still sell the ducks and other items.

Agreed.

IMO, EPE, they do not look at Elvis as a serious creative recording superstar that he was, they look at him as a brand, and all they see is what they can make off of his name. I mean seriously Elvis ducks, if Elvis were alive i gurantee you he would be outraged.:doh:

[KPM]

This is not new but it gives you an idea of where the money comes from.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/ckx-inc/s-1-securities-registration-statement/2005/04/11/Section21.aspx


I can't make this bigger but their major income comes from licensing fees and royalties.
Actually from what I saw of this accounting-for the years 2002 and 2003 the Graceland retail operation was the biggest revenue for the operation-in 2004 the retail end dropped from 34-35% to 27% and the licensing and royalties increased from 29% to 32%-did that trend continue I wonder?
Or did the retail end rebound?

[KPM]

Agreed.

IMO, EPE, they do not look at Elvis as a serious creative recording superstar that he was, they look at him as a brand, and all they see is what they can make off of his name. I mean seriously Elvis ducks, if Elvis were alive i gurantee you he would be outraged.:doh:
I found this in an article which chronicles the marketing of Elvis....
The Colonel, who had a large measure of control in the licensing, was not very discerning about what type of products were approved. In addition, bootleggers manufactured Elvis products illegally to make a quick dollar off the fans. As a result, many items were produced that were ill-suited to Elvis' image or were just plain tasteless -- Elvis Presley Sweat, for instance.
The sale of Elvis has never been pretty, never been in good taste-while alive or now in death.

[Donut]

Actually from what I saw of this accounting-for the years 2002 and 2003 the Graceland retail operation was the biggest revenue for the operation-in 2004 the retail end dropped from 34-35% to 27% and the licensing and royalties increased from 29% to 32%-did that trend continue I wonder?
Or did the retail end rebound?

I don't know, KPM :hmm: I couldn't find more information, but I wonder why the retail end dropped ;):lol:

[KPM]

Found this concerning 2009 revenue of Sillermans Interests and Elvis Presley business contributions to it:
http://ir.ckx.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=382410
The way I read the graphs on this page is that the Elvis end of Sillermans empire seems to be very productive.

Commenting on the financial results, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Robert F.X. Sillerman said, "I am pleased to report that our businesses continue to perform well in this challenging economic environment. Our core business units maintain their dominant positions, with a vibrant pipeline for the future. 19 Entertainment's American Idol remains the #1 rated show on television by a wide margin. The Elvis business remains strong, with the addition of the Las Vegas based Cirque du Soleil show late this year poised to add dynamic growth. The strength of our overall business, and our balance sheet, have permitted us to accelerate our development pipeline. Exciting new initiatives, that have yet to contribute to our results, provide real potential for impact in the years to come."

Segment Results

[Donut]

The Elvis business remains strong, with the addition of the Las Vegas based Cirque du Soleil show late this year poised to add dynamic growth.

Yeah, I was going to comment on that (y) but since it has just began I guess we'll have to wait to see if it's a success.

[lvs2day]

i can only say that for ne in ten yeras JEHOVAH GOD willing i will still be going to graceland listening and watching the latest and i'm sure many if not all of you will be doing the same nobody can resist E.P. but will the next gens appreciate him and keep the fire burning i sure think so as i meet some every year at graceland and they are just as serious as us ol fans believe you me so i think in ten years it will still be strong enough to where we will still seeking to know more about him .