christine~ (eppylover) wrote,

The 25% ~ A comment response once again morphs into a post

From yesterday's post, just prior to this one

neongoddess ~ Speaking of dissing Eppy, I bought a DVD the other day called "The Beatles: From Liverpool to San Francisco." It mainly featured Beatle interviews, and it had a few good shots of Eppy, but the ONLY thing it said about him (other than that he died of a drug O.D.) was that John Lennon was quoted as saying "He knew what he was doing. He robbed us." WTF??

hb_princess ~ I have that DVD, too! Santa put it in my sock.
Oh, John. *rolls eyes* John said a LOT of things.
That's one thing I'll say for Paul - the worst I've ever heard him say about Eppy is that he was "green." That he "got in over his head." I've never heard him say Brian ever did anything to deliberately cheat or harm them. But John says "he robbed us." All I can guess is that must be the Klein influence talking.
BTW, does anyone know why Eppy took 25% as his fee? Not saying he didn't earn it, especially at the beginning, but 10% is the standard agent's fee.

neongoddess ~ 25% does seem like alot. Maybe fees were more back then?? Or maybe that's why John thought they'd been robbed. I'll bet Eppylover would know more about that.

In 1960's England, I doubt if a mere 10% was the going rate for a full-time all-inclusive manager (not merely an agent) of an entertainment artiste.

Lennon, as you know, was a great one for re-writing history to conveniently suit how he felt at any point in time. Add that to the fact his brain didn't know how to control his mouth. On top of all that, he was heavily, heavily under the influence of Eppy-basher Allen Klein at the time, with the encouragement of Yoko, so that says it all.

This post and related comments from last July 25 might help.

Brian in blue Brian Epstein gave his very life to his Boys, he coddled them, and he would have cheerfully wiped their bums noses if they told asked him to... he knew this had to be done, so The Beatles would enjoy the necessary freedom to create what they did without even one iota of distraction. All he took was 25 percent, and managed the businesses as best he could under the circumstances.

Contrast that with the percentage taken by the Colonel from Elvis:
But Presley's biggest financial liability was Parker himself, who systematically siphoned off far more than the usual 15 to 25 percent of his client's earnings. By the late '60s, Parker had forced Presley into a contracted 50/50 split. But through double dipping, the Colonel got his 50 percent, and all but about 22 percent of Elvis' half, too.

Parker had always figured out a way to make more money than his client, whether through song publishing, souvenirs, or side deals with Presley's record company and movie studios. Then, when he formed Boxcar, a merchandising company, with Presley in the early '70s, he took 56 percent control, apart from his 50 percent commission. Some estimates have concluded that the Colonel wound up with nearly 78 percent of Elvis' name and likeness -- a highly valuable commodity, considering Presley's obviously failing health.
Source: article
The Colonel wasn't the only one, just the most visible.

Now compare that with Brian's 25 percent, especially in the beginning years, which was was spent time and again on his boys more than himself
  ~ and when the 25 percent was gone, he often dug deep into his own pockets
  ~ and, when that also was gone, borrowed money from parents and wealthy friends, which he, being the anal perfectionist professional he was, made sure to repay the moment his next commission came in.

All this, to satisfy all the demands made by his boys. That continued until the touring and heavy promotional days were over and he started descending into the fatal phases of his bipolar depression, gambling, drugging and boy-toying it away in a crazed attempt to stop the pain.

I often feel his boys were so thoroughly spoiled by his mothering that they expected him to watch out for them, to the exclusion of himself and his own needs. If that wasn't bad enough, any extravagance he enjoyed personally was sometimes taken the wrong way; i.e., when they'd damage a priceless piece of art or furniture in Brian's house, making him cringe, Lennon (more often than the others) would scornfully berate him, "you don't have any right to complain, Eppy... after all, we bought it for you, now, didn't we?"

Brian loved them so ferociously, and they were like little kids who just took advantage of it. What's really daft is that, to the ends of their lives, The Beatles will never admit it... and I don't think they even (consciously) realize it.
John Lennon in orange glasses
Sometimes I get the feeling that John, who we all know was messed-up in the head anyway, started bad-mouthing his late manager out of a combined subconscious feeling of guilt at the way he treated him and resentment at his dying and leaving him. This reaction is not uncommon with the death of a parent, by the way.

NOTE: My oft-spoken frustration at John, and sometimes the others, is not unlike a mom's despair over her children. I do love The Beatles, each one of them ~ not only because of I'm proud of their accomplishments and their irresistible wit, talent, looks, and individual types of genius ~ but, mostly, because Brian would be heartbroken if an admirer of his didn't love his boys as well.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.