Latest on MJJC

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

So she has nothing really? I hope that won't happen when it comes to Michael's children. I hope everything can stay in their possession.
 
Virre said:
So she has nothing really? I hope that won't happen when it comes to Michael's children. I hope everything can stay in their possession.
Click to expand...
i don't think PPB is that nonchalant when it comes to their father. for a long time Lisa tried to distance herself from everything Elvis Presley.
 
Last edited:
qbee said:
No CKX owned Graceland and she owned 15% interest in that and sold it.
Click to expand...
CkX doesn't own Graceland. Graceland and all the personal belongings is Lisas. what she sold was the right to the name and brand of Elvis Presley.
8701girl said:
Oh ok i thought she like inherited it all from the moment he died
[h=2][/h]
Click to expand...
she did! but then she sold the rights to his name
 
maral said:
CkX doesn't own Graceland. Graceland and all the personal belongings is Lisas. what she sold was the right to the name and brand of Elvis Presley.

she did! but then she sold the rights to his name
Click to expand...

Thank you that article is confusing the ways it's worded
 
^ The question is what does Elvis' Estate own? They do not own Elvis' marketing rights, for one - that's what is owned by CkX and up for sale. They do not own copyright to many Elvis songs (for example, the 60 song that is in the Sony/ATV catalog is not owned by them - they are owned by the MJ Estate and Sony).
 
When she sold some of EPE for one hundred mil she kept 15 percent. Did she sell it later on?
 
Lisa owns the house and the stuff in it.. that is all
 
So priscilla doesnt own anything in graceland?
 
AliCat said:
This is an interesting turn of Events. The Sony/ATV music publishing catalog does own all of Elvis's #1 hits. I wonder what this Company would take as a minimum bid? John Branca advised Michael Jackson to bid $9 million for "Neverland," when Bill Bones was asking $35 million. Michael's competition put in a bid of $14 million and Bill Bones said yes to Michael's $17 million. If John Branca bid that low for "Neverland" originally, I wonder if this Company would take anything less than $100 million or just break even? Michael's Estate would bid $50 million and Sony/ATV would bid $50 million. It really is hard to say, as the Elvis brand just doesn't sell like it once did, as the Elvis Show had to close already. Elvis's fan's are pretty old, the one's who fell in love with him back in the mid-1950's, the core group. There just isn't that nostalgic feeling that's why the Company is selling off Elvis's property so they don't lose their shirt. Those maintenance fees are a killer for anyone!



graceland.jpg
Click to expand...

^^What you mention above should be a good wake up call to those fans who like to complain when the estate makes decisions that would attract newer and younger fans. A business cannot remain stagnant and has to evolve.

I hope Sony-ATV wins this bid.

I found this interesting:

"Elvis Enterprises was acquired by CKx in 2005 when its CEO Bob Sillerman, paid $100 million for an 85 percent stake.
The balance is held by Lisa Marie Presley.

My question is what exactly does Lisa own now in relation to Elvis Presley?
 
According to her, she still own Graceland and she also owns personal belongings as she allowed them to be exhibited. But she does not own his likeness and name (how silly that sounds, given that she has his name).

Not only did Lisa re-release Don't Cry Daddy, and In The Ghetto (both owned by Michael at the time she released them), but the song she released this year, I Love You Because is also owned by the catalogue.
 
I wonder what that is like--seeing what your dad accomplished being sold or you yourself selling off parts of it. I guess since you are the one who originally sold certain aspects of it, you do not care and see it only as good business strategy. Is Lisa still a millionaire?
 
Petrarose said:
I wonder what that is like--seeing what your dad accomplished being sold or you yourself selling off parts of it. I guess since you are the one who originally sold certain aspects of it, you do not care and see it only as good business strategy. Is Lisa still a millionaire?
Click to expand...

Ive seen she is worth 300 Million. don't know how accurate that is
 
Petrarose said:
^^What you mention above should be a good wake up call to those fans who like to complain when the estate makes decisions that would attract newer and younger fans. A business cannot remain stagnant and has to evolve.

I hope Sony-ATV wins this bid.

I found this interesting:

"Elvis Enterprises was acquired by CKx in 2005 when its CEO Bob Sillerman, paid $100 million for an 85 percent stake.
The balance is held by Lisa Marie Presley.

My question is what exactly does Lisa own now in relation to Elvis Presley?
Click to expand...

Why this is being offered up for sale is the fan base of Elvis is either really old or dead, Elvis began his Career in the mid-1950's.

Without a fan base, the new owners are losing money and that's why they want to sell!
 
I would like to think that Lisa also owns the burial/grave sites of her Father and his parents.
 
Well I like Elvis, so if something innovative is done with his legacy, I am sure some money can be made. After all Donald Duck is still making money.
 
The baby boomer generation was more into the 1960's, the British Invasion and don't trust anyone over 30, the Establishment. A total upheaval was going on in the Country by 1968, even the Civil Rights movement and segregation ending in the South.

Now, instead of anti-War movements, those former protester's of the Viet Nam era, have turned to saving the Environment. The Beatles were a huge part of this time period. It's what most of the Baby Boomers identify with, not Elvis from the 1950's. Which is why the company wants to sell their Elvis rights. I wonder why they can't repackage what they have and make it more appealing. The comedian Denis Leary made an interesting statement about Elvis, in saying Elvis should have put a bullet in his head in 1957. Meaning that was the end of Elvis's originality and all went down hill after that.

The jumpsuits that Elvis made popular and the big heavy sideburns and Elvis's heaviness isn't that appealing anymore. I don't even know if the greasy slick back hair that Elvis wore in the 1950's is all that appealing.

There is always Graceland to visit and reminisce! ^^^ as picture up above...
 
The King of Rock and the King of Pop may be moving in together — financially speaking, that is.
An investment group that includes Sony/ATV, the music publishing giant half-owned by the estate of Michael Jackson, is emerging as the favorite to acquire Elvis Enterprises, The Post has learned.
The group, with G2 Investment Group, led by its music expert David Schulhof, and Highbridge Capital alongside Sony/ATV, is close to signing an exclusive negotiating contract with Apollo’s Core Media Group, sources said, which is selling Elvis Presley’s assets along with the name and likeness of Muhammad Ali.
elvis--300x300.jpg
[FONT=arial !important]​
​
[FONT=arial !important]<credits style="list-style: none; border: 0px; outline: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: border-box;"></credits>Elvis with Ann-Margret in “Viva Las Vegas”[/FONT]

[/FONT]
While other suitors, Universal Music Group and fashion merchandising giant, Iconix, for example, kicked the tires, they did not submit bids, according to a source familiar with the talks.
Negotiations over the assets, including Graceland, The Heartbreak Hotel and the late singer’s clothes, cars and airplanes and music rights to many Elvis songs, are at a crucial point and could still break down, sources cautioned. The banker on the deal, Raine Group, is believed to have dark horse bidders still in the mix.
Sony/ATV, the music publishing arm of Sony, co-owned by the estate of the late King of Pop, already owns publishing rights to Elvis songs but pays royalties to the Elvis estate. Those royalties will no longer need to be paid if it succeeds in buying the assets from Apollo.
Any successful bidder will have to work hard to polish the Elvis brand, which earned $55 million in both 2012 and 2011, according to Forbes, down slightly from the $60 million it earned in 2010. Much of the decline is pegged to the closing of Cirque du Soleil’s Las Vegas show, “Viva Elvis.”
Record sales are not included in Forbes’ tally for Elvis, who died in 1977.
“Elvis is showing his age a little bit,” said Zack O’Malley Greenburg, who compiles the Forbes list and is author of “Michael Jackson Inc.,” told The Post. “Elvis is going to keep generating tens of millions of dollars a year, but I don’t know how easy it is to make those numbers go up.”
By comparison, the estate of screen siren Elizabeth Taylor earned $210 million last year while *****’s estate earned $145 million, according to the magazine.
A movie about the King of Rock could fire up profits for the Presley estate, sources said, much like what “Walk the Line” did for Johnny Cash. An unnamed celebrity is said to have expressed interest in getting involved in such a project.
The owners, Core Media, then known as CKX, invested $20 million into the Las Vegas production.
Any deals for Elvis, movie or otherwise, would have to meet the approval of the Presley family. Lisa Marie Presley retains a 15 percent interest in Elvis Enterprises, just as the Ali family holds a stake, about 20 percent, in the Ali assets being sold

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/got_to_be_there_6LoiDsL7yhR5K961ZSbbxN
 
Interesting, apollo have done really well with Elvis they released special collections of recordings he did from the very beginning to more recently a collection of the last songs Elvis recorded, as well several live albums.
 
Elvis' posthumous success has been incredibly there's no denying it, but Elvis has been in decline over the last few years. Since MJ died Elvis had his butt kicked every year. It will take some work to get Elvis back on top, but I don't really want Sony/ATv or anybody else to "fire up profits".
If I'm honest I like the fact Elvis is finally fading. MJ is on top of the musical legend tree and the longer he maintains that status the better IMO.
 
It's about time the hype of Elvis faded. Michael kicked his ass in life and death, and I for one hope he continues to do so.
 
bobmoo79;3897677 said:
Elvis' posthumous success has been incredibly there's no denying it, but Elvis has been in decline over the last few years. Since MJ died Elvis had his butt kicked every year. It will take some work to get Elvis back on top, but I don't really want Sony/ATv or anybody else to "fire up profits".
If I'm honest I like the fact Elvis is finally fading. MJ is on top of the musical legend tree and the longer he maintains that status the better IMO.
Click to expand...
I agree. Elvis&#8217;s posthumous success really has been incredible, but personally I don&#8217;t think he deserves all that success. I mean, I have no problem with people liking his music or thinking he was a good performer or an interesting person. I just feel like he&#8217;s often hugely overrated as an artist when people go on about how he pioneered rock&#8217;n&#8217;roll music or call him the King or whatever.

His popularity has been waning in the last few years, and I&#8217;m not sure he could become much more popular again. I just don&#8217;t think many younger people are interested in him or his music. And to be honest I don&#8217;t mind that his popularity is in decline. I hope it means that people appreciate his talent and accomplishments as an entertainer, but don&#8217;t buy into the &#8220;Elvis is the King and he single-handedly created rock&#8217;n&#8217;roll!!&#8221; thing so much anymore.
 
Last edited:
Sunwalker7;3897761 said:
I agree. Elvis&#8217;s posthumous success really has been incredible, but personally I don&#8217;t think he deserves all that success. I mean, I have no problem with people liking his music or thinking he was a good performer or an interesting person. I just feel like he&#8217;s often hugely overrated as an artist when people go on about how he pioneered rock&#8217;n&#8217;roll music or call him the King or whatever.

His popularity has been waning in the last few years, and I&#8217;m not sure he could become much more popular again. I just don&#8217;t think many younger people are interested in him or his music. And to be honest I don&#8217;t mind that his popularity is in decline. I hope it means that people appreciate his talent and accomplishments as an entertainer, but don&#8217;t buy into the &#8220;Elvis is the King and he single-handedly created rock&#8217;n&#8217;roll!!&#8221; thing so much anymore.
Click to expand...

Another that makes me scratch my head is when people call Elvis a genius. For me a genius has to write and compose their own songs and Elvis never did that. Was Elvis a good singer and a good performer? Yes. Was he a genius? No!
 
The genius term gets thrown around too much as it is. Not that I've heard it used in relation to Elvis a whole lot, but when it is used it has nothing to do with songwriting. Elvis was a genius singer and performer. That's a pretty fair statement in my opinion. He was also essentially the producer and arranger of most of his best work.
 
Lisa still owns Graceland and its contents. As to Elvis, I think it's remarkable he still does generate so much $$ all these decades later. I don't think the Cirque show failed because folks are tired of Elvis but rather because the show just wasn't good. (It really didnt work.) EPE needs someone running it with an eye to quality, less kitsch, like Branca.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top