Reply With QuoteDiane,Originally Posted by Diane
I agree also.
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.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.
Diane
Diane,
I agree also.
I understand the opposing thoughts. And I would hope that others understand that this is a little more personal to me.
I think May has answered the question..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 diedThe 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".
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
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...
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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:
Of course I do Missy, I always respect your view.
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.
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??
Exactly!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!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 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 see no problem with taking pictures of the outside of the homes though.
Diane
[quote=MissyM;303544]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!
Exactly[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]
Work in Progress!
Posting Permissions
