CSPC: Elvis Presley Popularity Analysis
Bonus: Compilation Albums Sales
Elvis’ Golden Records, Vol. 3 (1963)
- America
- US – 1,800,000
- Canada – 115,000
- Argentina – N/A
- Brazil – 5,000
- Mexico – N/A
- Asia – 85,000
- Japan – 60,000
- Oceania
- Australia – 35,000
- New Zealand – 7,000
- Europe – 420,000
- UK – 200,000
- France – 50,000
- Germany – 45,000
- Italy – 15,000
- Spain – 7,500
- Sweden – N/A
- Netherlands – 10,000
- Switzerland – N/A
- Austria – N/A
- Finland – N/A
- World – 2,490,000
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132
Elvis soundtrack sells quite poorly, compared to e.g Walk the Line, Johnny Cash’s biography. This soundtrack sold platinum in US, easily over 2 million copies worldwide.
Watched the Elvis movie the other day, it was quite good actually, probably on the same level as Elton’s, though no way near as good as Bohemian Rhapsody.
I noticed at the end of the movie just before the credits, it wrote that Elvis is the biggest ever recording artist of all time ( presumably there meaning sales?) which as we know here is incorrect as it is the Beatles. This seems the same sort of hype that has always been associated with Elvis record sales.
The Beatles isn’t an artist.
“Biggest” is a bit ambiguous or perhaps along the lines of Analord, they mean artist singular, as oppose to a band.
But if that was the case MJ is the next biggest recording artist, isn’t he?
No, Elvis sold more albums and more singles than MJ.
Chartmasters has MJ ahead of Elvis in sales?
Yes, when everything is taken into account, streams, videos, ringtones etc. What Analord is relating to is just albums and singles sales.
Albums:
Elvis – 244m
MJ – 235m
EPs:
Elvis – 16m
MJ – 0m
Physical Singles:
Elvis – 135m
MJ – 79m
Digital Singles:
Elvis – 37m
MJ – 80m
Streaming:
Elvis – 7m
MJ – 14m
Home Video:
Elvis – 10m
MJ – 30m
Who knows what they creatively manipulated, to back up their statement.
Elvis sales Ardmore than double that of the Beatles.
Does anyone know what kind of boost Elvis has had on spotify since the release of his biopic? The movie seems to be doing fairly well.
It’s not doing well at all… Looks like it’s gonna make less than the Elton John movie despite having twice the budget.
It has actually performed better in its first two weeks than the Elton John movie according to boxofficemojo. Especially in the United States (71.8M gross after 11 days for Elvis vs. 51.9M for Elton)
But my question was about his spotify numbers, not the movie gross so not sure what you’re getting at.
Yes, it’s got of to a better start than Rocketman, but looking at Spotify, while there is obviously an upturn in his popularity, it is not looking like it’s having the kind of effect on his streams, that Rocketman had on Eltons streams…well not as yet, at least. He’s gone up to 14,982,874 unique monthly listeners, an upward trend of 2.5m but that still puts him behind acts like Zeppelin 16,469,755 and Floyd 15,425,176 and miles behind acts like Queen 40m and Elton 47m and even some way behind Nirvana, AC/DC. Guns N Roses & Fleetwood Mac who are all… Read more »
You’re “not sure what I’m getting at” ? I’m answering to your post saying the movie is doing “fairly well” which is false, it looks like it’s gonna gross around $200m on a $85m budget (not good).
It is doing “fairly well”. I didn’t say “excellent” or “amazing”. My post was about the boost on spotify numbers. This is a music website and that’s what I’m interested in. Your attitude is always shit and 90% of your posts are shit.
Wow… OK. I must have pissed you off in the past…
Anyway, you said yourself you “don’t care about movie grosses” which might explain why you think the movie is doing “fairly well”, anyone who knows a little bit about the subject can see it’s not doing well, but you don’t care so why am I even answering…
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/analysis-why-did-elvis-underperform-205612420.html
I saw that headline when the movie came out and that was an outlier. Most of the box office experts I checked agreed that it had a good opening. Specially when you consider that the movie was aimed at the demographic that was the most reluctant to come back to the theaters and it’s almost 3 hours long. And the predictions have increased since. They were saying it would struggle to hit 100m, after the opening weekend 120m and now some are saying it might even hit 140m. It’s performing well from Monday to Thursday. Internationally it’s doing good enough… Read more »
“At least it will break even and even if it doesn’t it’s going to get very close.” So you’re not even sure it will break even but you think it’s doing “fairly well” also ? 😕 Just to be clear, breaking even isn’t considered a success, and being profitable isn’t necessarily considered a success either, because of opportunity cost, i.e. studios are only greenlighting a certain amount of movies each year so if one of them only makes a $10m profit it’ll be considered a waste compared to another project which could have make much more. I’m not saying Elvis… Read more »
So, after I wrote that most box office experts agree that its performance is good, how the estimates have been growing after its release, and how it’s even more impressive because of its target audience and length, you only replied to a phrase that actually underlines that I believe it’s going to do well. “AT LEAST (AS IN WORST CASE SCENARIO) IT’S GOING TO BREAK EVEN”. For a movie that doesn’t hit all four-quadrants; it’s not a sequel; its subject is more than half a century old; and belongs to a subgenre that is unpredictable at the box office (for… Read more »
It was a huge success. You’re talking nonsense. Made $286 on a budget of $85. Second highest earning bio pic movie of all time.
Johnny Cash’s (american country singer) bio Walk The Line grossed $186,8 million in 2005. Today $284,5 million. Production cost was $28 million. Low profile Cash’s bio made same with lower pruduction costs.
Based on Box Office returns the movie has skewed toward an older demographic (“Sixty percent of the “Elvis'” audience was over the age of 35, with the majority being women over the age of 50″), not necessarily the best demographic for Spotify.
Thanks for the insightful reply. My initial post was about spotify numbers; I frankly don’t care about movie grosses. That’s a topic for another forum!
You’re welcome @Kris! I’m an Elvis fan myself & had high hopes for the film raising his Spotify numbers as well. But with Doja Cat’s “Vegas” performing well, it could lead to increased attention. I read an article after the movie first premiered that stated Elvis’ streaming numbers were up 70% over the previous week, but I have not been able to corroborate that (or find it for you).
These articles are interesting:
Here is an article from Billboard: https://www.billboard.com/pro/elvis-business-what-its-worth-graceland-publishing-film/
Or: https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2022/05/25/elvis-presley-rock-and-roll-graceland/
If you check his last.fm page, it lines up with that 70% increase. I know the monthly listeners stat is tricky if you consider the big picture but Elvis’ increase shows that people who weren’t listening to him before are doing it now. I also noticed that he’s missing from the Rock Classics playlist on Spotify that has 10.5m followers. In its 200 songs you can find The Beatles, CCR, The Doors, AC/DC and even The Cranberries, Blur and The Killers but no Elvis. The reason is anyone’s guess. Considering how broad that is, I believe if Elvis was there… Read more »
@Kris. Per the Spotify Tool Elvis streaming ran approximately 4 million per day prior to the film’s debut. Over the last week Elvis was streamed 36,704,931 times (5,243,562/day), roughly 31% increase. The problem is there are SO MANY Elvis tracks the Spotify tool has trouble running the same number on consecutive days, which affects the result. In response to @baraka92, Elvis is not considered Classic Rock. He is probably closer to Sinatra (whose streaming numbers he TRAILS) than Fleetwood Mac or Led Zeppelin. Sorry, buddy. I don’t know if you’re in the USA but he is not played on Classic… Read more »
That seems like a decent increase. I wasn’t expecting it to be major.
And ya Elvis doesn’t get play on “classic rock” stations that I know of. He’s considered more “oldies,” which are stations that young people generally don’t listen to unless their parents have it on.
@Kris … Here is an interesting article listing the 10 Most-Streamed Tracks on the Elvis soundtrack, per Spotify: https://screenrant.com/elvis-movie-best-songs-ranked/
My point wasn’t about the term “Classic Rock” as the radio staple. The Spotify playlist doesn’t seem to care about it, since it goes all the way to Sublime, Muse, The Killers, and even the Beastie Boys. IMO Jailhouse Rock or Suspicious Minds wouldn’t feel out of place next to All Day and All of the Night, I Want to Hold Your Hand and Satisfaction, which are all in. I’m not from the US. Where I live, Elvis is part of oldies stations. Less than before but the same happened to the likes of The Rolling Stones, Eric Clapton, and… Read more »
There has been quite a transition in what bands/genres are deemed “Classic Rock” in my lifetime. Back in the 80s it seemed to refer to harder edge rock artists, such as Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Aerosmith, Deep Purple, Whitesnake, Rainbow, Montrose, BOC, Kiss, Thin Lizzy, Rush etc but as time progressed, it’s gamut seemed to widen to incorporate softer rock acts such The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac, who never seemed to be thought of as classic rock acts in the 80s. Then as mentioned acts such as GNR and Bon Jovi initially, then acts such as Nirvana, RHCP, Green Day seemed… Read more »
And now, Elvis (7,405,000) has surpassed Fleetwood Mac (7,390,000) and is getting closer and closer to the Stones (7,653,000). I didn’t put Bon Jovi (7,411,000) in my last comment, but he’s going to pass them very soon too. The movie did great at the box office and has been #1 on digital sales since it became available (will obviously drop to #2 once Top Gun: Maverick hits). Yes, it’s nowhere near the levels of Bohemian Rhapsody, but more people (myself included) are realizing that was such a lightning in a bottle thing in terms commercial success (the quality of the… Read more »
I hate to quash your enthusiasm but he doesn’t seem to get more daily streams than the Stones, and Fleetwood Mac’s total is actually 7.45m. He may have already passed Bon Jovi though.
I have to say, I didn’t think the movie would’ve better legs than Bohemian Rhapsody or Rocketman, the older audience being a likely explanation. I guess it did OK in the end, definitely not “great” but hey let’s not start this again…
Don’t worry, you can’t. Yes, I should’ve checked the date; Fleetwood Mac hadn’t been updated for a couple of days, although Elvis has indeed shorten distance, compared to a few weeks ago.
@Kris However, the track “Vegas” by Doja Cat on the Elvis soundtrack, seems to be getting good numbers.
…… 71,336,640 on Spotify & 30 million on YouTube
Lol very wrong went on to be a massive success. Went on to be the second highest earring music bio ever. On queen movie beat it.
Since its release he’s gained around 100k-120k new listeners everyday and also has been appearing sporadically on the highest gainers in followers and the most viral artists lists. In the box office, the movie’s outpacing Ray, Rocketman and Walk the Line. It should finish its US run around 110m-130m. enough to be the third highest grossing music biopic there; just below Straight Outta Compton and Bohemian Rhapsody. Worldwide it should finish second. Granted, with a massive gap between his film and Queen’s. The 45 day window might be hurting its box office but will definitely give another boost to his… Read more »
Walk the Line was made 2005 and worldwide box offices was 180 $ million and DVD sales was about 120 $ million. Movie about Johnny Cash. By the way, Johnny Cash over all sales is over 100 million, maybe 120-140 million EAS.
Walk the Line inf. adj. Domestic 171 million grossing (in US). Budget 27 million.
285m worldwide, similar to Amadeus and Coal Miner’s Daughter. Straight Outta Compton would be about 235m.
Comparing box office grosses without adjusting for inflation is pointless, there are at least two other music biopics which sold way more tickets than Elvis will (Amadeus and Coal Miner’s Daughter).
when i went to usa last december i realized that the artist who had the most vinyls on stock (OBVIOUSLY excluding adele) was elvis, and i started think abt elvis’ biopic. if it does well what can we expect from it? how much can elvis sales increase if it does well?
The film is going to be huge. After less than a week, the trailer has around 20m views (combined from Warner official accounts) on Youtube. The reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. I’ve read some (alleged) comments from tests screenings that say it’s a home run and the studio is very happy with it. If true, they’re going to spend a lot in marketing. Also, Luhrmann has good reputation as a director and his films tend to do well at the box office. It could be a perfect storm. At the end of the day, Elvis is still the 3rd best… Read more »
You are indeed too optimistic, Queen were already hugely popular before the movie while Elvis is more in the league of a David Bowie for example.
And he’s already past MJ as far as I’m concerned, after all he sold more albums and more singles (not to mention his countless hit movies).
Elvis & Michael are pretty much tied, according to this site. They’re both around 425 – 430 million records (Albums, Singles, Boxsets & Videos) sold globally. I think MJ edges him out tho, considering his digital single sales haven’t been factored in since 2018. Also, MJ sold the same amount as Elvis, according to this site, despite releasing FAR less material. That’s probably why MJ is considered the most successful, even over The Beatles. I think the movie will help boost Elvis’s vinyl & streaming sales.
“Records” doesn’t mean anything, combining albums and digital singles is ridiculous, don’t you think ?
And I’m pretty sure most people consider The Beatles to be more successful than MJ.
I don’t really have a ‘dog’ in this one so to speak. I appreciate Elvis and MJ but wouldn’t call myself a superfan of either. Just a thought. According to the ASR scale Elvis is around 70% as successful as MJ (696 VS 1000 as the baseline). Does this mean that because Thriller, Bad and Dangerous account for 69.3% of MJ’s total EAS (ie 693 on the ASR scale) then just these three albums gave MJ the same level of success as Elvis? Would another way of reading this be to say that these three releases made MJ ‘as big/popular’… Read more »
MJ sold more total equavilent units than Elvis, which is what matters in the end.
Elvis sold more albums and more singles than MJ, which is what matters in the end (to me).
MJ’s total includes about 30m of “music videos” (such as documentaries like This Is It or The Making Of Thriller) which I personally wouldn’t include.
Just for the record, Elvis’ remaining sales (outside of the physical singles and studio albums categories) also include nearly 10 million music videos, as well as 16 million EPs valued as 8 million albums, plus nearly a million of interviews/tapes and loopholes, so I’m not sure that according to your way of seeing it Elvis did sell more albums than Jackson.
I’m just quoting the “Raw sales – All albums” list from this very website :
1. The Beatles – 333,145,000 (as of Mar 2017)
2. Elvis Presley – 244,475,000 (as of Sep 2018)
3. Michael Jackson – 235,440,000 (as of Sep 2017)
+ 16 million EPs for Elvis, indeed.
I just realized that HIStory is counted twice in MJ’s total (18.6m in “Studio Album Sales” + 18.6m in “Other LPs Sales”) which is like saying it’s the 5th best selling album of all-time, above Zeppelin IV and Back In Black… That doesn’t make any sense to me.
It’s a double disc. One is a Grestest Hits and the other one with new songs. What does not make sense?
Actually MJ didn’t invent double albums, there were others before like Pink Floyd’s The Wall for example. Do you think all of these albums should be counted twice ?
I really think this double counting of HIStory deserves an explanation, and by the way Clockingbell asked the same question in the MJ thread two months ago, with no answer…
Hi Analord! No need to use that suspicious and kinda childish tone, it’s not like I manage to be up to date in answering comments, just now I only see these ones because I heard about another starting fan clash. The Wall and HIStory are completely different subjects. One is a studio album, which happens to be double due to lenght, the other is a pack of two records, a compilation of already released songs, and a studio album with unreleased material. As you know, the difference between a studio set and a compilation is key inside the CSPC process.… Read more »
I didn’t mean to sound “suspicious”, but surely you understand that not answering to a two months old post and then a two weeks old similar post might be a little frustrating… As for your explanation, sorry but it still doesn’t make sense to me. HIStory sold 19m copies, not 38m. Yes, it consists of old and new songs, so what ? Just because an album contains old and new songs we should multiply its sales by two ? I hope I’m not the only person thinking this is illogical. And I’m surprised you agree with the RIAA inflating Garth… Read more »
Please, don’t repeat the same thing….yes we are understood.
Hi Analord! I would say that out of the 4 possible solutions, yours is definitely the most illogical of all. The whole thing is how you define “an album”, it’s not like every purchase is on par, if that was the case we would mix singles and EPs and albums, we certainly don’t do that. Let get into the cases. 1) we consider that 19m persons bought a compilation with tracks from Thriller, Bad, etc., so we put HIStory among compilations, acting as if no new songs were into it. Illogical falls short. 2) we consider that 19m persons bought… Read more »
“4) we consider that 19m persons bought a compilation and also a studio album, which actually happen to be nothing but the truth.” Of course, people bought HIStory because they wanted the new songs and the old songs. You seem to think that 19m persons would’ve bought it even if it didn’t include the old songs ? This is pure speculation, we should assume that people bought an album because of, you know, the content of the album, instead of pretending that MJ released two albums in 1995 that both sold 19m copies… I mentioned Garth Brooks because I just… Read more »
Buddy, CSPC is just about how popular each album is. The compilations are split between studio albums, each gaining sales equivalent to its popularity. It’s totally understandable that the 19M of History is split among the studio albums due to the CD with GH, as people bought the songs from the old albums. Not to mention the very high price that HIStory was sold at the time for being double CD. It sold 19M but could have been a lot more had it been marketed at a standard price. Anyway, I think you are arguing a point that goes completely… Read more »
Technically, it’s not, it’s how popular it’s tracks are, not the actual album.
No it’s not “understandable” that HIStory would be the only double album counted twice, and you don’t know how much it would’ve sold without the GH.
Price is irrelevant, as I’ve said albums were much more expensive before the 80s, do you think that should be considered ? What about the price decrease during the 2000s ? Or MJ waiting five years between albums, his fans must’ve had more money to spend than others…
Hi again Analord! There are several wrong claims in your message. Firstly, albums weren’t much more expensive before the 80s, they were in the 50s/60s, but prices went down a lot relatively speaking during the 70s already. Secondly, the large majority of Elvis’ album sales came after his passing, not before. Thirdly, of course Elvis sold bucketloads of budget albums (his Pickwick/Camden releases are famous, but outside of the US there have been even much more in proportion) and continues to sell a monster amount of budget albums, charting like 3x more budget albums than anyone else in the UK… Read more »
Hi Analord! It seems you want to apply rules depending on how results fit what you would expect, that’s not how we set the rules. They must be consistent for all. You say that Elvis’ 2-in-1 release sold 1m, we won’t do different rules depending on if the album sold 1m or 19m. That the Beatles are “#1 anyway” is irrelevant when we decide how we set up the rules. In the same way, you say “it’s not that big a deal” for Garth Brooks, again, what matters is not how results satisfy you, but to set up consistent rules… Read more »
@MJD:
What is your opinion of MidweEk bestselling UK Album Artists?
Music Week
Biggest-selling albums artist of the 21st century in the UK.
1 Robbie Williams (16,674,978),
2 Coldplay (14,734,824),
3 Elvis Presley (13,502,834),
4 Eminem (13,276,742),
5 Westlife (12,907,183),
6 Take That (12,613,279),
7 The Beatles (12,585,043),
8 Adele (12,402,363).
9 Michael Bublé (12,150,504 units), including 10,452,370 physical sales and 1,049,456 digital downloads.
10 Ed Sheeran(11,989,075) with digital downloads (2,208,972) and sales-equivalent streams (3,577,046).
They had Elvis @7.2m in 2012. But #3???? How???
Your thoughts,G?
You have no manners, and you are nervous, but why. Grow up dude!
In The league of David Bowie? You’re insane! 🤣 🤣 🤣 Elvis is much higher than him! He sold several folds what Bowie has and he is certainly a lot more popular than Bowie, even more popular than Elton john, led zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, pink floyd, the eagles amd some current artists like Kanye West! I keep saying this generation of people know shit about Elvis and how huge he was and still is!
So he’s “still huge” but “this generation of people know shit about him” ? OK.
David Bowie is one of the biggest box set seller. Bowie is much bigger than others think. But Beatles is giant box set seller. But after Beatles is Dylan, Springsteen, Bowie, Pink Floyd, Zeppelin.. Springsteen’s live 1975-85 five LP collection price 25 dollars or three CD collection 38 dollars year 1986. And this set sold 4,4 million US, worldwide over 6 million sets. And multiply it by five. It is 6×5 = 30 million copies sold. You can add 24 million albums to Bruce.
Elvis is like Frank Sinatra, singer.
Only rock fans know about David Bowie but Elvis no matter what music type you’re into he is known! Even hip hop rap fans know about Elvis.
It would be nice if it were a massive hit but I’d be suprised if it did as well as Bohemian Rhapsody.
I don’t think people really appreciate how extraordinary the numbers for Bohemian Rhapsody were. The movie made $911 million dollars world wide. To put that into perspective, they hope Dr Strange in the Multiverse of Madness will make a billion dollars, but it will probably make a little over 900 million. It is much more likely (and expected by the experts) that the new Elvis movie will have Rocket Man (~$250 million world wide) level success or below. I see Bohemian Rhapsody on my cable TV listings at least once a month. I have yet to see Rocket Man listed… Read more »
Totally agree. Bohemian Rhapsody is the exception, not the standard to be expected. Elvis is a much older act with totally different music than Queen. That being said, he has a super interesting life story, and the 50s and 60s are a fascinating time in America. I think a modest boost in streaming numbers is a given, but only time will tell how just how well the movie does! I’m personally pretty pumped to see it
Elvis is ending its run and its worldwide total is up to $234.3 million. It is the second highest grossing music biopic second only to Bohemian Rhapsody.
On Tour (Amiga) is a bootleg recording. where would the total sold numbers come from?
Special Collectors Edition 2002 – what is this? Elvis doesn’t have an album using this title only.
Elvis at Stax is not a LIVE album. it is a 3 disc box set of Elvis’s Stax recordings in 1973, there is also a single disc of highlights released. these are compilations.
Hi Anthony! This is the SCE 2002 album listed. About AMIGA’s album you are correct. It appears ‘real’ AMIGA albums and counterfeit ones have now been mainly distinguished on discogs, we will exclude some of these once we update. Of course technically all AMIGA releases can be seen as unofficial, but for the real label at least we do add them. On Elvis due to the magnitude of releases we have also been kind lag on accounting for some loopholes, adding them to totals while they are usually excluded for most artists. It is of course debatable. Thanks for all… Read more »
There are several other albums listed as LIVE that are not live albums: The US Male and Double Dynamite al contain studio masters recorded throughout the 1960’s, these are Camden/Pickwick compilation releases. A Legendary Performer Vol 3 contains studio masters, outtakes, interviews and 1 live track. It is a compilation. The Great Performances contains Studio Masters, live TV performances and a couple of Live concert tracks but it is not a LIVE Concert recording it is a compilation. Viva Elvis contains remixed and re-recorded studo masters for use in a Vegas cirque de soliel show, kt is not a LIVE… Read more »
You list Welcome to My World (1977) as a LIVE album. ths was not a LIVE album but a compilation of country songs recorded between 1958-1973, five of which were LIVE recordings, the rest were studio masters.
You have Elvis: A Legendary Performer Vol 1 and Vol 2 listed as LIVE albums. These were not LIVE albums. They contained studio masters, outtakes, interviews and an odd live track or two. Elvis in Hollywood is also categorized as a LIVE album, this is not correct. This album contained 20 studio masters recorded for his film soundtracks. Could you fix these please. Also, is the 1.4 million copes sold for Elvis in Person at the International Hotel, Las Vegas Nevada for the single LP release in 1970 or as part of the double LP From Memphis to Vegas/From Vegas… Read more »
To add to my other comment in support of For LP Fans Only (1959) being considered an Original Album. You list Elvis For Everyone (1965) as an original album. This contained songs recorded between 1957-1963 that had been held back from release for various reasons or were from films that didn’t make that film’s LP or EP release. None of the songs had appeared on an album prior to 1965. I think you have For LP fans Only (1959) in the wrong category
I couldn’t find a Bonus compilation page for Elvis’ Gold records Vol 4 (1968) with a worldwide breakdown of album sales, where is it please? You list A Date With Elvis (1959) as an original album but not For LP Fans Only (1959). Both these albums were the same concept. They both contained four or five Sun Singles that hadn’t been released on LP as of 1959 along with songs from the Extended Play soundtracks of Love Me Tender and Jailhouse Rock along with some single B-sides all of which hadn’t been on LP as of 1959. I think these… Read more »