Guardian article: Why Elvis memorabilia is plummeting in value

There's a guy I bump into all of the time shopping for records. His retirement plan is to set up an antiques shop with things he buys cheap at the thrift stores, which he is stockpiling in his basement and garage. He buys all kind of records of 50s and 60s artists [such as Pat Boone]. There is no market for these artists today; yet he plans on there being a thriving demand for these things twenty years from now. Either he's a genius or an idiot.

 

It's something I can't understand about record collecting

Elton John was huge in the 70s. To this day he can tour and sell out anywhere. Yet his albums are always in the dollar bin.

 

I'm not going to speak for Elvis albums but in general, any album which sold in vast quantities when it was first released, will have a hard time at resale unless it's of a rare pressing. Rare pressing can mean any number of things...and this is where The Beatles equal and surpass most other bands in resale value. The average used album by any artist will not fetch any great amount of money unless it's in stellar condition or sealed.

...by the way, this isn't to defend The Beatles in terms of the OP...but I go to used record shops, on the average, once a week and I see what's in the "normal" bins as well as on the wall. The high priced "mint' copies by any artist have a hard time "moving" and you see the same albums on 'the wall' week after week.

 

I noticed the opposite locally, I'm a big fan of Elvis, and my local store knows this and has given me common Elvis albums in less than good condition for free, but I have now seen similar condition pressings going for $10+.

 

I read the Guardian article linked by Gaslight and the Beatles were not mentioned at all.

I think values for Elvis collectibles stalled out years ago then started diminishing due to lack of newer fans among my generation (40 somethings) and younger. Anecdotally, none of my peers in school or in my 20's developed any great love for Elvis while many of us became second generation Beatles fans or casual listeners. I've also interacted, as I've aged, with much younger Beatles fans. And no younger Elvis fans at all. Of course this is all anecdotal so take it with a grain of salt.

Middle aged people with money will determine the market values for pricey collectibles and if they're not buying Elvis, prices will just drop. We'll see what happens with the Beatles.

 

I hate to sound disrespectful...but while I enjoy a lot of Elvis music from throughout his career, early singles aside so very much of it is just not that captivating to today's listeners, and what is tends to be enjoyed mostly for it's campiness.

 

A big factor in this is the sheer number of records sold. I'm sure the Beatles and Elton john sold significantly more stock then a band like led Zepp because the music is so much more mainstream appealing to kids and moms and dads unlike the heavy guitar riffs of dazed and confused

 

There are a lot of different factors that come into play....

I'm a huge fan of both Elvis and the Beatles (I'm 47 so I'm not the prime demographic for either act) but I think both will keep fading away over time. It is just the way things are. Various things can delay that to one degree or another but it keeps happening as less and less younger people are truly familiar with music that was made decades ago.

However, I think one absolutely enormous factor assisting the Beatles that hasn't been mentioned yet is Paul McCartney still being a very active and high profile artist. The fact that Paul has toured relentlessly playing to huge crowds everywhere, often appearing on high profile tv events, etc. does the Beatles an enormous promotional favor that just isn't there for Elvis or other acts that have passed away so long ago. I remember Elvis being alive and was a big fan before he died but you have to be pushing 50 (like me) or higher to really say that. Even for people in their early 40's they have zero memory of Elvis.

I'm not saying that is the only thing going on here but it's really helped keep the Beatles relevant in a way that wouldn't be as true as if they had all died in the 197os.

 

There were so many pressed.

 

And while every Zep album is essential, I'm good with Yellow Brick Road, Madman, and the live Here & There.

 

@telepicker97 that's very subjective.

 

My guess is demographics. Most of the Elvis fans would be starting to get upwards of 70 years old or so. Although I am sure Elvis has younger fans as well, I don't think retirees are investing that much in memorabilia. They already have it if they were prone to get it in the first place.

The difference between Elvis and The Beatles is that the latter translates better with younger generations of music buyers. I have a 22 year old daughter who is crazy about The Beatles and probably only knows only a few songs that Elvis did. It's pretty much as simple as that.

There might be problems down the road with future generations buying Beatles memorabilia, but so far they are holding their own nicely.

 

Both bands (Elvis/Beatles) put out millions & millions of these albums, especially in N.A., so there are more than enough stuck at used Record shops....

 

Sad and depressing. That's coming from a 41-year old. An acquaintance went to a recent pub night and saw an Elvis impersonator doing his thing - all were singing along and bopping away, except the under-30s: not one of them seemed to know the words to any of the songs...

 

People think the Beatles records are so valuable because they're the Beatles. That just because they're the Beatles, that all their records are valuable. People forget, or don't know that there were millions upon millions of Beatles records pressed. There's a lot of them out there. Most were played to death and are worth little or nothing. The few mint copies still out there are worth something, but they are few and far between. Just because it's a Beatles album doesn't make it valuable. It's all about its rarity, or condition, or both.

 

I do see a lot more Beatles records in the racks and at reasonable prices than before. 5-10 years ago, my local used record stores could never keep them stock. Now, like Guy Gadbois said, many copies of Beatles IV, etc fill the racks. Not trashed copies either. VG to NM copies. Even the random non-US, usually European, copies show up time to time, usually in the $20 range.

 

I don't own any Elvis music but totally acknowledge him as a great singer & icon.
I really think all the Elvis memorabilia/tat has cheapened his legacy.

 

I think it's more about getting a picture of yourself with the famous person in it with you. It's like if The Eiffel Tower came to your town you'd get a picture of yourself with it. It's just now The Eiffel Tower equivalent is Elton john or any other older rock star you care to name. It's only about the songs that are known now, not the whole creative career. Society is a greatest hits package that's been repacked again and again. It's because that mindset has been set by having to buy upgrades of everything which get outdated. The only way to not be outdated is to put out the same thing again and again with slight variations. Just like The Beatles saying the same things about their past over and over. That's our culture now.

 

Sure. But I buy and sell used vinyl every day for a living, and my personal collection is at over 5000 pieces, and I need to draw the line somewhere.

If I ever want to expand my EJ collection, the store has his entire discography in NM for around $2/per...

 

Amen.

How many times do people come in with "I've got a numbered White Album! What's it worth?"

I hate to break it to them that there are millions more just like that one. Or better.

 

May be Elvis is just out of fashion these days...which doesn't mean that he can't became trendy in few years. This happens with old classic acts - there are periods of oblivion followed by refueled interest and new generation of fans.

 

Your comment is not related to the OP thread or to my response to him.
The point I was trying to make was ; a factor in why Beatles records lose some value is partially because these albums were bought by millions partially due to their accessible sound which appealed and still appeals to many. Elton and zeppelin have narrower fan bases (pop for Elton and hard rock for zepp). While many zepp fans bought Beatles records fewer Beatles fans would have bought zepp lps. Everyone bought the Beatles.
Ps I love the Beatles and have no problem w the fact they have a more popular sound then a more niche band like zepp whom I also love.

 

I'd also say that most Beatles records were purchased at a time when teenagers listened on lower end portable type record players, which results in there being less of them in super clean condition; most of the early - mid 60s Capitol pressings I see have scratches and rutting that result in more surface noise and Sibilance issues.

That isn't as much a problem with say, Zep or Floyd, which was usually bought by someone older with a better turntable.

 

The point I'm trying to make (and others across the world obviously feel similar to me) in that I made it a point to pick up every single Zeppelin album; in different formats AND different pressings/masterings.

I, and many others, are obviously not compelled to do the same with the entire Elton John catalog.

There's that.

 

Most Elvis and Beatles albums I see in used record stores have pretty high price tags on them. A lot of people don't want to pay collectors' prices (and some dealers charge even higher than their book value; another reason they don't sell). I did pick up a couple of Elvis Pickwick reissues in the dollar bins recently.