Latest on MJJC

Sony/ATV Bidding For The Marketing Rights To Elvis Presley's Estate

loveforever said:
Is this the worthy investment and will it bring in money? The previous owner clearly lost many money since he bought the Elvis estate. It seems the value of the estate drops dramatically in merely 2 years. I am not very exited like some fans here.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Elvis Presley's estate is a dead asset. Those who think it's a great investment aren't looking at the big picture. This is not about revenge, but about creating & supporting revenue stream for MJ's kids & their future family for years to come.

one last thing...there is no such thing as an Elvis Catalogue...his songs were written by other people and Sony/ATV already own a big chunk of those hits.
 
Memefan said:
No matter how much I despise racist Priscilla Presley and would want nothing but the worse for her (in this case a black man's estate co-owning her precious Elvis) from a business standpoint, I don't believe this is a wise investment.

i have been saying for years now that I believe Dear Old Priscilla & co have been inflating EP's estate revenue. I don't believe for a second EPE have had the reported annual revenue of $60M...this is a dead asset (no pun intended) and I don't think
Sony/ATV should gamble on it. Not after the recent EMI takeover.

And let's not forget , EP didn't write his songs.
Baby boomers are retired and aren't buying music as they used to. Younger gens don't know or can't relate to EP. They've exploited those assets for 30 years and now are passing them around from one investor to the next.
Click to expand...

Good points.
 
I don’t mind one day to see Prince Michael to rule EP Estate.
 
Memefan;3853384 said:
No matter how much I despise racist Priscilla Presley and would want nothing but the worse for her (in this case a black man's estate co-owning her precious Elvis) from a business standpoint, I don't believe this is a wise investment.

i have been saying for years now that I believe Dear Old Priscilla & co have been inflating EP's estate revenue. I don't believe for a second EPE have had the reported annual revenue of $60M...this is a dead asset (no pun intended) and I don't think
Sony/ATV should gamble on it. Not after the recent EMI takeover.

And let's not forget , EP didn't write his songs.
Baby boomers are retired and aren't buying music as they used to. Younger gens don't know or can't relate to EP. They've exploited those assets for 30 years and now are passing them around from one investor to the next.
Click to expand...
That’s what I was thinking too. It’s fun to imagine Priscilla having a fit over a black man’s estate owning EPE, but it’s not really worth it to make a bad investment. And I’m not convinced at all that Elvis at this point is a good investment.

Elvis has a lot of very loyal fans, but they’re mostly older people. I don’t think Elvis means very much to the younger generations. Wasn’t the Elvis themed Cirque du Soleil show cancelled pretty quickly because it was unsuccessful? I don’t think there’s any great interest in Elvis anymore.

Interesting point about EPE’s annual revenue. I don’t know if it’s inflated or not, but I’ve read that about half of his annual revenue comes from Graceland ticket sales, and half of it comes from merchandise. I’ve also read that the number of visitors to Graceland is decreasing, so that means his revenue is probably going to decrease as well.
 
Sunwalker7;3853756 said:
Interesting point about EPE’s annual revenue. I don’t know if it’s inflated or not, but I’ve read that about half of his annual revenue comes from Graceland ticket sales, and half of it comes from merchandise. I’ve also read that the number of visitors to Graceland is decreasing, so that means his revenue is probably going to decrease as well.
Click to expand...

What the Estate is bidding for is marketing rights, the use of his likeness etc. So does it mean they would be in control of that merchandise?
 
I would think so respect. thats what likeness etc is about
 
wasn’t the Elvis themed Cirque du Soleil show cancelled pretty quickly because it was unsuccessful
Click to expand...
Cirque du soleli did a elvis show? i didnt know that
 
8701girl said:
Cirque du soleli did a elvis show? i didnt know that
Click to expand...

viva-elvis-poster.gif


poster.jpg


240px-Viva_Elvis_promo_poster.jpg


[youtube]8-6KS59R0L0[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-6KS59R0L0
 
Soundmind said:
I believe Priscilla's nightmares started with Thriller , the 1993 and 2003 were such a relieve to her because she believed finally something happened that would prevent MJ from being as big and influential as her abusing husband was.However, MJ proved her wrong dead and alive . What MJ's estate made in two to three years outdid what Elvis estate did in 30 years . The estate was doing well, he constantly was the top earner among the dead celebrities for decades, until MJ died everything changed then.
Click to expand...




Unfortunately it's too soon to compare MJ's posthumous success to Elvis'. Elvis has had fantastic success since he died and to this day is very successful. MJ as only been dead four years and so it's possible that in the next few years Elvis once again becomes the biggest dead celebrity.


BUT at the risk of contradicting myself, I do think this may be a bad investment because Elvis is probably in decline IMO. I don't know any of the business figures - revenue, profit etc - but I do know that Elvis is not as big as he was. I'm positive that he's selling fewer albums. I'm positive that his memorabilia sales are falling. I'm positive that it will be VERY difficult to reverse this trend - his value is decreasing IMO. Sony/ATV need to concentrate on other avenues, rather than getting more involved with Elvis IMO.


Sony/ATV have been good at expanding their contempory artists portfolio over the last few years and they should continue along that path as they are the artists who can secure the profits in the future. Artists like Elvis and the Beatles are going to reach a point where they depreciate in value.


This is a slight distraction from the main purpose of the thread, but it might be a good example to explain my point. In the European Union (EU) copywrite runs out after only 50 years and so early Beatles songs (e.g. 'Love Me Do' and 'P.S I Love You') are already in the public domain in the EU. I don't believe the MJ Estate can make money from those songs in those 27(!) countries in the EU. In the USA copywrite extends to 90 years, so it's not such a problem for now. Although there is currently a plan to increase the copywrite to 70 years in the EU, it hasn't happened yet and hopefully you can see my point. As more Beatles songs become worthless around the world, the value of the catalogue will decrease. The same issue is becoming apparent on Elvis songs too. This is a side point really because Sony/ATV are actually bidding for marketing rights, not copywrites, but it emphasises my point. There is a limited life and Elvis and The Beatles are nearing the end in many parts of the world.
 
bobmoo79 said:
This is a slight distraction from the main purpose of the thread, but it might be a good example to explain my point. In the European Union (EU) copywrite runs out after only 50 years and so early Beatles songs (e.g. 'Love Me Do' and 'P.S I Love You') are already in the public domain in the EU. I don't believe the MJ Estate can make money from those songs in those 27(!) countries in the EU. In the USA copywrite extends to 90 years, so it's not such a problem for now. Although there is currently a plan to increase the copywrite to 70 years in the EU, it hasn't happened yet and hopefully you can see my point. As more Beatles songs become worthless around the world, the value of the catalogue will decrease. The same issue is becoming apparent on Elvis songs too. This is a side point really because Sony/ATV are actually bidding for marketing rights, not copywrites, but it emphasises my point. There is a limited life and Elvis and The Beatles are nearing the end in many parts of the world.
Click to expand...

^That's not the position re copyright law. Since the 90s in the uk and the rest of the eu (and also i think usa) the copyright for songs is 70 years from the death of the composer - so mj's estate is going to be making money for a looong time from that beatles catalogue.
There is a different position for expiration of copyright for songwriters like the beatles (70 yrs from death) and people like elvis who were just the performers of songs. There was in the eu copyright for 50yrs since first perfomance of a particular song,but in 2011 the music industry led by sir cliff (!) got the eu to extend it to 70 years. I don't know the position of performance copyright in the us.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...a-pension-after-copyright-ruling-2351636.html
 
Last edited:
bobmoo79 said:
it's possible that in the next few years Elvis once again becomes the biggest dead celebrity.
Click to expand...


What is it exactly that the Elvis Estate makes so much money from?

When Whitney died I read an article comparing the prospects of her Estate to that of MJ's. One of the points made was that Whitney did not write her songs, so they will get significantly less money because the MJ Estate also has income from songwriting credits, something Whitney's Estate does not have. Elvis did not write his songs either so that is true to his Estate as well. Though in Elvis' case there are a couple of songs where he got songwriting credit (even though he did not write any part of the song), because that was the only way he was willing to sing them. Apparently it's true to most Otis Blackwell songs he sang and also Heartbreak Hotel. So actually the Elvis Estate does have some income from "songwriting" even if Elvis did not write his songs. But by far not as much as Michael. So what it is that makes money for the Elvis Estate?

The Elvis-Cirque du Soleil collaboration was not successful. The ELV1S album was pretty successful but that was 11 years ago. Since then they did not really score any big success on the charts. (And it was by far his biggest posthumus success since his death.) So where does the Elvis income come from? Someone said earlier in this thread: Graceland visits and merchandising. Is that enough to make him top earner? But isn't the merchandising controlled by whoever owns the marketing rights those are up for sale now? Aren't they up for sale because they did not generate the profit the owners hoped from it?

(BTW, if Graceland really does generate so much money how much more Neverland would? I mean it's a lot more exciting place IMO. With the amusement park and all. It's also in California where tourism, especially international tourism is bigger.)
 
Besides 60 Elvis songs are already owned by MJ Estate/Sony. Moonwalker.Fan posted the list earlier in this thread:

AN AMERICAN TRILOGY (Mickey Newbury)
AND THE GRASS WON’T PAY NO MIND (Neil Diamond)
BIG BOSS MAN (Al Smith/Luther Dixon)
BOSSA NOVA BABY (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
BURNING LOVE (Dennis Linde)
DIRTY DIRTY FEELING (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
DON’T (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
DON’T CRY DADDY (Mac Davis)
FOOLS FALL IN LOVE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
FUNNY HOW TIME SLIPS AWAY (Willie Nelson)
GET BACK (John Lennon/Paul McCartney)
GIRLS, GIRLS, GIRLS (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
HE IS MY EVERYTHING (Dallas Frazier)
HEARTBREAK HOTEL (Mae Boren Axton/Tommy Durden/Elvis Presley)
HELP ME (Larry Gatlin)
HEY JUDE (John Lennon/Paul McCartney)
HOT DOG (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
HOW’S THE WORLD TREATING YOU (Chet Atkins/Boudleaux Bryant)
I CAN’T STOP LOVING YOU (Don Gibson)
I FEEL SO BAD (Chuck Willis)
I LOVE YOU BECAUSE (Leon Payne)
I WANT TO BE FREE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
IN THE GARDEN (Gordon Stoker/Neal Matthews)
IN THE GHETTO (Mac Davis)
IT’S A SIN (Fred Rose/Zeb Turner)
JAILHOUSE ROCK (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
JUST TELL HER JIM SAID HELLO (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
KING CREOLE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
LAWDY MISS CLAWDY (Lloyd Price)
LITTLE EGYPT (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
LONG TALL SALLY (Richard Penniman/Entoris Johnson/Robert Blackwell)
LOVE COMING DOWN (Jerry Chesnut)
LOVE LETTERS (Victor Young/Edward Heyman)
LOVE ME (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
LOVING YOU (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
MAKE THE WORLD GO AWAY (Hank Cochran)
MIRACLE OF THE ROSARY (Lee Denson)
NEVER AGAIN (Billy Edd Wheeler/Jerry Chesnut)
ONE NIGHT (Dave Bartholomew/Pearl King/Anita Steiman)
RELEASE ME (Eddie Miller/Dub Williams/Robert Yount)
RIP IT UP (Robert Blackwell/John Marascalco)
SANTA CLAUS IS BACK IN TOWN (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
SAVED (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
SHE’S NOT YOU (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller/Doc Pomus)
STEADFAST, LOYAL, AND TRUE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
SUSPICIOUS MINDS (Mark James)
SWEET CAROLINE (Neil Diamond)
THAT’S WHEN YOUR HEARTACHES BEGIN (Fred Fisher/Billy Hill/William Raskin)
THERE GOES MY EVERYTHING (Dallas Frazier)
TREAT ME NICE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
TROUBLE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)
T-R-O-U-B-L-E (Jerry Chesnut)
TUTTI FRUTTI (Richard Penniman/Dorothy LaBostrie/Joe Lubin)
WALK A MILE IN MY SHOES (Joe South)
WEAR MY RING AROUND YOUR NECK (Russell Moody/Bert Carroll)
WELCOME TO MY WORLD (Ray Winkler/John Hathcock)
WITCHCRAFT (Dave Bartholomew/Pearl King)
YESTERDAY (John Lennon/Paul McCartney)
(YOU’RE SO SQUARE) BABY I DON’T CARE (Jerry Leiber/Mike Stoller)

Those are some of Elvis' most popular and most played songs, such as Jailhouse Rock, Heartbreak Hotel, In The Ghetto, Don't Cry Daddy etc. So those songs already enrich the MJ Estate, not Elvis Estate.

I think it's pretty ironic that when LMP decided to sing In The Ghetto and Don't Cry Daddy "with" her father she had to ask MJ for permittion as both songs are owned by him:

[video=youtube;0m7QrZf_VyA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0m7QrZf_VyA[/video]

[video=youtube;9eZOAfxWbTY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9eZOAfxWbTY[/video]


It's especially ironic, because LMP expressed her anger over the fact that Michael sold some of her father's songs to be in commercials.


Jane Magazine
September 2003

Interestingly, Michael owns the rights to some of her father’s songs. “I saw a Velveeta commercial, and it was playing, I think, ‘Burning Love.’ [Jackson] had approved it–that’s something we can’t control. He can do whatever he wants with the songs he owns to make money, and that got under my skin.”

“What about that Club Crackers commercial, where one of the Keebler elves dresses up like Elvis?” “ I just saw that too–I freaked out!” she says, her eyes widening in disbelief. “Thanks for reminding me. I’m going to kill whoever approved that one.”
Click to expand...

August 2007

Being that your ex-husband Michael Jackson owns the rights to a lot of the Elvis Presley catalog, do you ever have the inclination to call him up and ask him to stop the commercialization of these songs?

LMP: I don't know if he owns that one [laughs]. But have I thought about it? Yeah. I get mad all the time. If I see something wacked out, I'll definitely yell and say, 'What the hell is that?' or 'Get rid of this!'
Click to expand...
 
respect77 said:
What is it exactly that the Elvis Estate makes so much money from?
Click to expand...

I googled this article from a blog yesterday about the history of elvis presely enterprises, you might find it interesting.

http://www.elvis-history-blog.com/epe-update-2013.html


(BTW, if Graceland really does generate so much money how much more Neverland would? I mean it's a lot more exciting place IMO. With the amusement park and all. It's also in California where tourism, especially international tourism is bigger.)
Click to expand...
I think the lack of planning permission with opposition from the neighbouring pretty wealthy landowners and lack of infrastructure in terms of roads is a bit of an obstacle.
 
Bonnie Blue said:
^That's not the position re copyright law. Since the 90s in the uk and the rest of the eu (and also i think usa) the copyright for songs is 70 years from the death of the composer - so mj's estate is going to be making money for a looong time from that beatles catalogue.
There is a different position for expiration of copyright for songwriters like the beatles (70 yrs from death) and people like elvis who were just the performers of songs. There was in the eu copyright for 50yrs since first perfomance of a particular song,but in 2011 the music industry led by sir cliff (!) got the eu to extend it to 70 years. I don't know the position of performance copyright in the us.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...a-pension-after-copyright-ruling-2351636.html
Click to expand...


the article you linked to doesn't mention it, but the extension isn't actually enforced yet I believe...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/a...an-recordings-to-keep-european-copyright.html


respect77 said:
What is it exactly that the Elvis Estate makes so much money from?

When Whitney died I read an article comparing the prospects of her Estate to that of MJ's. One of the points made was that Whitney did not write her songs, so they will get significantly less money because the MJ Estate also has income from songwriting credits, something Whitney's Estate does not have. Elvis did not write his songs either so that is true to his Estate as well. Though in Elvis' case there are a couple of songs where he got songwriting credit (even though he did not write any part of the song), because that was the only way he was willing to sing them. Apparently it's true to most Otis Blackwell songs he sang and also Heartbreak Hotel. So actually the Elvis Estate does have some income from "songwriting" even if Elvis did not write his songs. But by far not as much as Michael. So what it is that makes money for the Elvis Estate?

The Elvis-Cirque du Soleil collaboration was not successful. The ELV1S album was pretty successful but that was 11 years ago. Since then they did not really score any big success on the charts. (And it was by far his biggest posthumus success since his death.) So where does the Elvis income come from? Someone said earlier in this thread: Graceland visits and merchandising. Is that enough to make him top earner? But isn't the merchandising controlled by whoever owns the marketing rights those are up for sale now? Aren't they up for sale because they did not generate the profit the owners hoped from it?

(BTW, if Graceland really does generate so much money how much more Neverland would? I mean it's a lot more exciting place IMO. With the amusement park and all. It's also in California where tourism, especially international tourism is bigger.)
Click to expand...

The Elvis Estate makes money from a range of product lines and deals.


I don't think Neverland would ever be turned into another 'Graceland' style tourist attraction. MJ liked it because it was 'out of the way', and that same reason is one reason why it could be very difficult to open it up as a large scale tourist attraction. Plus, the local residents have already indicated they would be unhappy about the number of visitors that may be expected to visit the place.


HOWEVER, IF Neverland was ever opened up like that, it could certainly be a fantastic money earner, although it would need to be managed carefully. It was MJ's peaceful oasis in a turbulent life for many years and it would be difficult to retain that peacefulness with so many people visiting. It's a large area (2700 acres?) which allows alot of scope for developing opportunities and it would be tempting to expand the number of rides, turning it into a mini theme park. They could use parts of it for corporate events/meetings. They could build a hotel. they could do all sorts of things. Some of the improvement ideas would need planning permission and others would just be distasteful to the MJ fan community but that place could be a good money earner for the estate.
 
Last edited:
respect77 said:
Interesting. So LMP has nothing to do with EPE any more.
Click to expand...

Yes, and the biggest earner for EPE with nearly 50% of the revenue (in Q1 2011) was the Cirque Du Soleil show in Vegas, which we know has since been axed meaning the revenue for EPE must be significantly less than it was then.
 
bobmoo79 said:
the article you linked to doesn't mention it, but the extension isn't actually enforced yet I believe...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/a...an-recordings-to-keep-european-copyright.html
Click to expand...

You mean the copyright to songs lasting for the life of composer plus 70 years? Here's one -
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-duration/c-duration-faq/c-duration-faq-lasts.htm

I'm not sure if you're mixing up sound recording/performance copyrights and publishing rights as they're different. Sony/atv own the lucrative publishing rights to the beatles, they'll have them until mccartney dies plus 70 years. The performance/sound recording rights are owned by the beatles - it's that which was due to expire 50 yrs after the date of performance but which will now be extended to 70yrs. And yes, as well as sir cliff, paul maccartney was lobbying hard for that extension of copyright as all those beatle hits are all coming up now to the 50yrs expiration point.
 
Sunwalker7;3853756 said:
That’s what I was thinking too. It’s fun to imagine Priscilla having a fit over a black man’s estate owning EPE, but it’s not really worth it to make a bad investment. And I’m not convinced at all that Elvis at this point is a good investment.

Elvis has a lot of very loyal fans, but they’re mostly older people. I don’t think Elvis means very much to the younger generations. Wasn’t the Elvis themed Cirque du Soleil show cancelled pretty quickly because it was unsuccessful? I don’t think there’s any great interest in Elvis anymore.

Interesting point about EPE’s annual revenue. I don’t know if it’s inflated or not, but I’ve read that about half of his annual revenue comes from Graceland ticket sales, and half of it comes from merchandise. I’ve also read that the number of visitors to Graceland is decreasing, so that means his revenue is probably going to decrease as well.
Click to expand...
the reason the sales are decreasing is that prices are way too hight and the products a joke. the FTD albums are among the few things that are worth it but they cost way too much. Elvis Is still popular. just look at the candlelight vigil held every year.

bobmoo79;3854591 said:
Unfortunately it's too soon to compare MJ's posthumous success to Elvis'. Elvis has had fantastic success since he died and to this day is very successful. MJ as only been dead four years and so it's possible that in the next few years Elvis once again becomes the biggest dead celebrity.


BUT at the risk of contradicting myself, I do think this may be a bad investment because Elvis is probably in decline IMO. I don't know any of the business figures - revenue, profit etc - but I do know that Elvis is not as big as he was. I'm positive that he's selling fewer albums. I'm positive that his memorabilia sales are falling. I'm positive that it will be VERY difficult to reverse this trend - his value is decreasing IMO. Sony/ATV need to concentrate on other avenues, rather than getting more involved with Elvis IMO.


Sony/ATV have been good at expanding their contempory artists portfolio over the last few years and they should continue along that path as they are the artists who can secure the profits in the future. Artists like Elvis and the Beatles are going to reach a point where they depreciate in value.


This is a slight distraction from the main purpose of the thread, but it might be a good example to explain my point. In the European Union (EU) copywrite runs out after only 50 years and so early Beatles songs (e.g. 'Love Me Do' and 'P.S I Love You') are already in the public domain in the EU. I don't believe the MJ Estate can make money from those songs in those 27(!) countries in the EU. In the USA copywrite extends to 90 years, so it's not such a problem for now. Although there is currently a plan to increase the copywrite to 70 years in the EU, it hasn't happened yet and hopefully you can see my point. As more Beatles songs become worthless around the world, the value of the catalogue will decrease. The same issue is becoming apparent on Elvis songs too. This is a side point really because Sony/ATV are actually bidding for marketing rights, not copywrites, but it emphasises my point. There is a limited life and Elvis and The Beatles are nearing the end in many parts of the world.
Click to expand...
to be fair i do think MJ will survive longer than Elvis have. he was in many ways more talented and used that talent to build a more stable legacy that will last a long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top