They either released singles before the album came out or on the same day, otherwise they took none at all from the album. It was one of Epstein/Martin's guidelines, which also included four singles and two albums a year. Interestingly, the UK EPs were issued quite haphazardly, and apart from Long Tall Sally and Magical Mystery Tour contained no new material.

The rules fell apart in the Allen Klein days, when making money was more important than giving value for money to fans, hence Come ...]]> Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:14:42 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53216 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53216 That still doesnt stand. Ticket To Ride is on the Help lp, both released in 1965; Cant Buy Me Love is on A Hard Days Night (both '64); Yellow Submarine & Eleanor Rigby were released as a double A-side single on the same day as they were included on Revolver lp. Plus there is Help! (the single was released before the album in '65) and A Hard Days Night (both issued on 10th July 1964). 

meanmistermustard said

The Walrus said

In the UK, singles could not be included on an album for a year after they had been release. There was no such problem in the US.

Not so. Love Me and PS I love you were on Please Please Me which was released 6 months later, Ticket To Ride is on Help!,  Eleanor Rigby and Yellow Submarine were released as a single on the same day Revolver was issued. The Beatles didnt think it was right for fans to buy the single and then get the same songs again on the lp; that was the reason why Strawberry Fields and ...]]> Fri, 08 Jun 2012 22:51:34 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53207 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53207 Thank Joe, very interesting.

I would love to read the Spizer books but always seem to expensive, tho The Beatles are Coming is on amazon for £17. 

Vee-Jay had an exclusive licence to release EMI recordings, although Capitol had first refusal in the USA. Capitol weren't interested, except in Canada.

Eventually Vee-Jay's president Ewart Abner got into gambling difficulty and the label was in debt - he 'borrowed' $3-400,000 from the label to cover his losses (the label was doing very well). Vee-Jay couldn't pay their artists, suppliers or pressing plants, and the release of Introducing The Beatles was delayed until January 1964.

Because they hadn't paid royalties on Beatles or Frank Ifield ...]]> Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:00:26 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53198 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53198 There is always an exception to the rule, and nothing in Beatle history is straightforward.

I have no idea why some singles are on albums and others are not. I suppose because Ticket To Ride is in the film Help! and Cant Buy Me Love is in film AHDN they were naturally going to be on the relevant albums, and the title tracks were always going to be on the albums. 

When the Please Please Me lp was issued in the UK it was standard practice for the singles to be the selling points for the album ("Please Please Me with Love Me Do and 12 others ...]]> Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:48:33 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53196 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53196 MMM, good summary.

One little correction to  "The Beatles didnt think it was right for fans to buy the single and then get the same songs again on the lp; that was the reason why Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were not included on Sgt Pepper":

Although it's true that generally speaking "The Beatles didnt think it was right for fans to buy the single and then get the same songs again on the lp," they clearly violated that policy multiple times over. (Or at least EMI did.)

Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were not included on Sgt Pepper because of the ...]]> Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:00:51 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53193 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53193 They signed with Swan and Vee Jay, two small US labels, but the singles didnt do a lot if anything until after I want to hold your hand hit #1 and everything exploded. One reason for the failure was that Swan and Vee Jay didnt have and didnt put the finance into promoting the songs.

Capitol was always the target, one reason being that Capitol was linked to EMI (i think owned but could be wrong) and parlophon another that it was a big US label. However Capitol didnt believe The Beatles would make a dent in the market place, and ...]]> Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:40:02 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53190 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53190 In the UK, singles could not be included on an album for a year after they had been release. There was no such problem in the US.

Also, It's Only Love and I've Just Seen A Face were displaced from Help! to Rubber Soul by the inclusion of various instrumentals. This created unintended coherence (It's Only Love, Girl, I'm Looking Through You) which inspired Brian Wilson to create Pet Sounds.

They signed with Capitol because

a) this was the American branch of their British EMI recording label

b) No other major American company was interested! Even Capitol wasn't interested for an entire year despite the band's spectacular success in Europe (for more details on this matter, read "Can't Be Me Love" or, if you ...]]> Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:00:06 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53179 The albums http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/albums/us-uk-question/#p53179 So why did they sign with Capitol and not something else?

Maybe I'm losing my mind something. I remember know the answer to this question before but I guess I forgot.

What was the reason for the different albums in the US? The albums in general and also in some cases, just the track listings.

Thanks.