Page 21 of 28 FirstFirst ... 11141516171819202122232425262728 LastLast
Results 401 to 420 of 553

Thread: TCB - Philosophical Debate

  1. #401
    PeacockLady Diane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    11,636

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by utmom2008 View Post
    Elvis has been gone almost 32 years now, there is no telling how many times in that 32 years that Graceland might have changed ownership had they sold it to an individual. Considering what has become of the general area around Graceland it could be totally trashed out, or belong to the local "drug king." I can just imagine seeing a story on 20/20, or maybe by Geraldo Rivera, on what has become of "The King's" mansion all these years later. It doesn't matter to me how many millions Lisa and her kids have made because it was opened to the public, what matters to me is that it has been preserved and kept intact and serves as a place for those of us who loved him to come and pay our respects.

    I'll go on record here and say that if I had the option of having my 2 kids "provided for", OR the option of my 2 kids becoming "filthy rich".....I'll take "filthy rich" any day.
    I have to agree, I would not have liked to see Graceland sold to strangers who might not have kept it up and this way, Lisa and her children are set for life and she still has access to the house whenever she wants to go there.

    Diane

  2. #402
    Resident SP! Tony Trout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Brasstown/Murphy, North Carolina (USA)
    Posts
    2,941

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Diane View Post
    I have to agree, I would not have liked to see Graceland sold to strangers who might not have kept it up and this way, Lisa and her children are set for life and she still has access to the house whenever she wants to go there.

    Diane
    Diane,

    I agree also.

  3. #403
    MissyM
    Guest

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    I understand the opposing thoughts. And I would hope that others understand that this is a little more personal to me.

  4. #404
    Too Much Monkey Business Jumpsuit Junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    In Your Heart
    Posts
    5,993

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    They did sell Elvis house in L.A. and you never hear anything about that

    it doesn't draw a lot of fans there if any.

    I heard once the lady from Green Acres bought it and lives there with her husband.
    Quote Originally Posted by May View Post
    The L.A. and/or Palm Springs house/s may not draw a lot of fans, but it does draw some, me being one of them! Graceland would always be the house that gets the fans whether EPE owned or not, because that was his home, not some place he rented whilst making films, or using as a "weekend getaway".
    I think May has answered the question..

  5. #405
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,229

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by May View Post
    The L.A. and/or Palm Springs house/s may not draw a lot of fans, but it does draw some, me being one of them! Graceland would always be the house that gets the fans whether EPE owned or not, because that was his home, not some place he rented whilst making films, or using as a "weekend getaway".
    I think he bought that house in the early 70's and continued living there part time until he died

    If it's not Elvis house anymore why would the fans bother the new owners
    it's just not polite and an invasion of privacy

  6. #406
    Walking In Memphis Sonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    6,686

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Could be true Brian...

    However, also in Bad Nauheim fans go to see where Elvis lived. Just a natural thing my friend, maybe it is invasion of privacy, but it happens...



  7. #407
    TCB Mafia May's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,977

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    I think he bought that house in the early 70's and continued living there part time until he died

    If it's not Elvis house anymore why would the fans bother the new owners
    it's just not polite and an invasion of privacy
    Not at all. The Perugia, Rocca and Hillcrest houses, maybe.

    The houses Im talking about are the Chino Canyon house in Palm Springs and the Ladera Circle (honeymoon) house also in Palm Springs.

    The Honeymoon House is open to visitors and the Chino Canyon house is owned (but not lived in) by an Elvis fan who, if you phone him and ask to have a look round, arranges to meet you there and is delighted to show you round and tell you little stories about Elvis, Priscilla, Lisa and the MM.

    As far as it not being an Elvis house anymore, and why do fans want to visit, I think that all goes back to what 'level' of 'obsession' we have with Elvis. Im not embarrassed to admit I want to know everything, however big or small, about Elvis - including his previous homes. I feel like once I have had a good nose round them, I get more of a feeling of the kind of person he was. there are other fans who are just happy to visit Graceland maybe once, and from thereon in just appreciate his music.

    It takes all sorts.

  8. #408
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,229

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny View Post
    Could be true Brian...

    However, also in Bad Nauheim fans go to see where Elvis lived. Just a natural thing my friend, maybe it is invasion of privacy, but it happens...

    If no one lives there where Elvis lived in Bad Nauheim that's okay
    but if people live there it's not nice for fans to hang out around the property and bother them besides it's not like Elvis is going to come down and give them an autograph.

  9. #409
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,229

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by May View Post
    Not at all. The Perugia, Rocca and Hillcrest houses, maybe.

    The houses Im talking about are the Chino Canyon house in Palm Springs and the Ladera Circle (honeymoon) house also in Palm Springs.

    The Honeymoon House is open to visitors and the Chino Canyon house is owned (but not lived in) by an Elvis fan who, if you phone him and ask to have a look round, arranges to meet you there and is delighted to show you round and tell you little stories about Elvis, Priscilla, Lisa and the MM.

    As far as it not being an Elvis house anymore, and why do fans want to visit, I think that all goes back to what 'level' of 'obsession' we have with Elvis. Im not embarrassed to admit I want to know everything, however big or small, about Elvis - including his previous homes. I feel like once I have had a good nose round them, I get more of a feeling of the kind of person he was. there are other fans who are just happy to visit Graceland maybe once, and from thereon in just appreciate his music.

    It takes all sorts.
    Well if it's open for tours like the Honeymoon house or the Chino house that's okay but going to a house Elvis use to own that was sold and has people living there I wouldn't do that that's what I'm saying it's not right.

  10. #410
    TCB Mafia May's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,977

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Personally, I can understand if fans go to see a previous home of Elvis's - we drove past the other 3 I mentioned and took a photo of each one. However, we were there for all of 2 minutes, so I can't see how it would really bother the owners; especially as for the most part all we could see was the outside gate!

    Yes, I would imagine it would get on their nerves if everyone did it, but its only the occasional person who does. If it were me, I wouldnt mind it myself.

  11. #411
    TCB Mafia Miss Clawdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Germany & Norway
    Posts
    1,172

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny View Post
    However, also in Bad Nauheim fans go to see where Elvis lived. Just a natural thing my friend, maybe it is invasion of privacy, but it happens...
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    If no one lives there where Elvis lived in Bad Nauheim that's okay
    but if people live there it's not nice for fans to hang out around the property and bother them besides it's not like Elvis is going to come down and give them an autograph.
    It is said that the owners who live there don't like the fans hanging around and taking pictures at all. But to be honest, they knew what they would have to expect when they bought the house as it wasn't a secret that Elvis lived there.

    Sadly he won't come down and give us autographs, however it's like with other places or homes of Elvis, it's like feeling a little bit close to him and I agree with what May said:

    Quote Originally Posted by May View Post
    As far as it not being an Elvis house anymore, and why do fans want to visit, I think that all goes back to what 'level' of 'obsession' we have with Elvis. Im not embarrassed to admit I want to know everything, however big or small, about Elvis - including his previous homes. I feel like once I have had a good nose round them, I get more of a feeling of the kind of person he was.

  12. #412
    Angel utmom2008's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    10,021

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by MissyM View Post
    I understand the opposing thoughts. And I would hope that others understand that this is a little more personal to me.
    Of course I do Missy, I always respect your view.

  13. #413
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,229

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by May View Post
    Personally, I can understand if fans go to see a previous home of Elvis's - we drove past the other 3 I mentioned and took a photo of each one. However, we were there for all of 2 minutes, so I can't see how it would really bother the owners; especially as for the most part all we could see was the outside gate!

    Yes, I would imagine it would get on their nerves if everyone did it, but its only the occasional person who does. If it were me, I wouldnt mind it myself.
    Driving by there and looking at it from your car is okay but if people were to get out and show up near the property that wouldn't be good that's what I would consider troublesome.

  14. #414
    Angel utmom2008's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    10,021

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    Driving by there and looking at it from your car is okay but if people were to get out and show up near the property that wouldn't be good that's what I would consider troublesome.
    I think it becomes troublesome if and when they linger too long. Getting out and making a couple of pics I don't see as a problem. Besides, the new owners have to know what "comes with the territory" so to speak. If I buy a house that once belonged to Elvis Presley I have to know that there are going to be visitors. If that's a problem to me, I best buy a different house.

  15. #415
    MissyM
    Guest

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Thanks..U-Mom.

    Why do people buy these houses?? Are people motivated by the fact that they were his houses?? If so then how could they not expect others to be facinated. But I don't know if that is the case??

  16. #416
    TCB Mafia May's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,977

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by utmom2008 View Post
    Besides, the new owners have to know what "comes with the territory" so to speak. If I buy a house that once belonged to Elvis Presley I have to know that there are going to be visitors. If that's a problem to me, I best buy a different house.
    Exactly!

  17. #417
    TCB Mafia Miss Clawdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Germany & Norway
    Posts
    1,172

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by utmom2008 View Post
    I think it becomes troublesome if and when they linger too long. Getting out and making a couple of pics I don't see as a problem. Besides, the new owners have to know what "comes with the territory" so to speak. If I buy a house that once belonged to Elvis Presley I have to know that there are going to be visitors. If that's a problem to me, I best buy a different house.
    That's what I was trying to say!

  18. #418
    PeacockLady Diane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    11,636

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by utmom2008 View Post
    I think it becomes troublesome if and when they linger too long. Getting out and making a couple of pics I don't see as a problem. Besides, the new owners have to know what "comes with the territory" so to speak. If I buy a house that once belonged to Elvis Presley I have to know that there are going to be visitors. If that's a problem to me, I best buy a different house.
    I fully agree with this statement too. I'm sure there are some fans who will knock on the door and try to see the inside of the houses Elvis lived in but I hope they are very few.

    I see no problem with taking pictures of the outside of the homes though.

    Diane

  19. #419
    TCB Mafia KPM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,932

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    [quote=MissyM;303544]
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    I have to agree with you totally.
    Selling the home was not the way to keep the trust living and growing so that Lisa was taken care of. No Trustee with any sense would have agreed to sell the house-unless every option for keeping the trust solvent had been exhausted.
    The sale of the house would have been a "one time deal"-and that would have been that. The chances of Lisa being able to live the life Elvis would have wanted off of the sale of the house is IMO a dream.
    Elvis's expressed and implied wish with setting up the trust was to keep Lisa set for life and "he did not prohibit any action which might be needed to insure the trust"
    Everyone jumps on Priscilla and the co-executors for doing what the will said-protect the trust. (which was monitoried by the court) The trust was in distress according to the court-action had to be taken. Some want to say it was not in distress, but the court back then did not agree. If the trustees had let the trust go under-people would be saying the opposite today-why did Priscilla and the others let it happen.
    All these people involved had the straight unadulterated facts at the time-all options had to be discussed.... (with court supervision and suggestions)
    The courts point of view regarding trusts is simple, to keep it solvent and growing for the person the trust was set up for..... the option which accomplished this is the one the court would recommend the trustees go with.
    IMO it boils down to Priscilla was involved and many people would not want her to walk by Graceland on the public street-let alone be so deeply involved in it after Elvis died. I can understand their feelings-but if Lisa was my daughter I would have done exactly as she did to insure the lifestyle Elvis would have wanted for Lisa.
    Priscillas reasons for her actions may be suspect to many-but she did not act alone ........and Lisa, her kids and their kids are set for life.
    I am happy as a father to think they are secure, literally for generations......
    I do not see the house being open as such a horrid thing....as long as it accomplished the wills purpose and it did.[/QUOTE
    ________________________
    It was not his obligation to keep his ex-wife or his grandchildren set for life, and if there is that implication in the will, then I'd like to see that.
    Opening Graceland was not needed none the less, to keep them set for life. EPE made sure they held the rights to everything (Elvis). (1984)What do you suppose that has generated?? And anyone who was in charge of the trust could have been wise and invested all monies, generating profits for years to come.I am sure they did. All profits in the trust did not come from people visiting Graceland. There was more than enough money generated in other ways.
    There is a big difference between providing for your sole heir and making her filthy rich, along with an exwife, and your sole heir's children and grandchildren. They shouldn't even be part of the debate IMO.
    Are you telling me that no one has ever put the trust at risk?? Money had to be put into it in order to open it. Now seems to me and I could be wrong, that they would not have had to risk the trust if they had just sold Graceland.
    The reality is, with out opening it, EPE would have and has generated millions of dollars on Elvis Likeness, recordings, (movies and everything else). Of course opening it generated millions and millions more. And auctioning off some of his personal effects (which they have done from time to time) would have put more money into the trust. So to assume Lisa would have ended up not with millions had it not been opened is simply not logical.
    Elvis's expressed and implied wish with setting up the trust was to keep Lisa set for life and "he did not prohibit any action which might be needed to insure the trust"
    You are splitting hairs-I did not imply that Elvis made any provisions in his will for grandkids or great grandkids-Lisa was the one he wanted provided for as specified in the will.
    But are you saying Elvis would not want those grandkids and great grandkids to be cared for? You and I know he would. But I never implied it was his will which spelled out grandkids etc....
    ........As to the point of all the money which the recordings and movies would bring the estate-since the 1973 back catalogue deal the estate makes very little from direct royaltees for most of Elvis records sold except for those from 73 to 77.
    The movies are owned by the companies which made them. Elvis's publishing companies do bring in some pretty good income, and yes selling off things at auction could have brought in money. I look at this much differently than you-you seem to say-Lisa could have got by easily without taking the drastic measure of opening the estate to tours.
    The judge the court appointed to oversee the estate had every detail you mention at his side (and without a doubt many more than we know) he said the estate was in distress-near exhaustion-he knew what the recordings brought in each year, he knew about any movie profits, he knew about anything and everything which profited or drained the estate-he said it was in distress.
    So all you point to as ways to keep the estate growing-he had to have had account statements which showed what they brought in yearly and what they were expected to bring in on average-he had the facts, he made his recommendations. He would not just guess on what might be coming in each year.
    I do not see any reason he would okay opening the estate unless he thought it was the best hope of keeping the trust solvent and intact.
    Why else would he okay it? I mean this was a high profile very observed situation by the world, I assume that added to his feelings of responsibility to the trust.
    Your view of what should have been done is finite-selling off assets and living off existing income each year. Could it have been enough to keep Graceland in Lisas hand-who knows looking back and second guessing today.........................but it obviously was not enough-by this judges estimation in 1982.
    I have to believe he recommended the best course from his much more knowledgeable position of facts and figures.

    If he needed more info-he could (and did) demand it from the estate, from RCA, from any company which had any dealings with the estate. He ordered the estate to sue Parker because he did not like what he saw in the deals made before and after Elvis died-this guy had it all before him and for how much money was flowing into Parkers direction.
    I can not second guess someone who got reports on all aspects of the trust and the financial situation it faced and was responsible for making sure it stayed solvent. How can I when he had the actual facts in front of him.
    Work in Progress!

  20. #420
    TCB Mafia KPM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,932

    Re: TCB - Philosophical Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by utmom2008 View Post
    [COLOR="DarkRed"]Elvis has been gone almost 32 years now, there is no telling how many times in that 32 years that Graceland might have changed ownership had they sold it to an individual. Considering what has become of the general area around Graceland it could be totally trashed out, or belong to the local "drug king." I can just imagine seeing a story on 20/20, or maybe by Geraldo Rivera, on what has become of "The King's" mansion all these years later. It doesn't matter to me how many millions Lisa and her kids have made because it was opened to the public, what matters to me is that it has been preserved and kept intact and serves as a place for those of us who loved him to come and pay our respects.

    I'll go on record here and say that if I had the option of having my 2 kids "provided for", OR the option of my 2 kids becoming "filthy rich".....I'll take "filthy rich" any day.[/COLOR]
    Exactly I think Elvis wanted filthy filthy rich for Lisa-and she is.
    Work in Progress!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 01-19-2008, 06:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •