Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

6 Phoenix Park Concerts 2012

Options
1…1617192122

Comments

  • Options
    #542
    bren2001
    Registered Users Posts: 6,667 ✭✭✭bren2001


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    I don't know about last night, but most people I now weren't happy with the Roses gig experience. People falling around the place drunk, and few incidents (albeit not stabbings) within the venue. Plenty of complaints about the entrances and exits, and the complete lack of security or even lighting on exit routes. And plenty of comments on here about how easy it was to sneak drink in (i.e. lack of security checks) as advice to others going to the subsequent gigs.

    They probably won't find it any harder to get a licence - but that says more about the lack of interest of the authorities rather than the promotors doing everything they can to ensure safety of punters imo.

    Its pretty easy to sneak drinks into most gigs. That all has nothing to do with the venue itself, they are all security issues. The amount of security doesnt change too much from site to site i.e. 60,000 people at Marlay Park would have the same security as 60,000 at Phoenix Park (made up numbers obviously).

    The venue wasn't the issue, the promoters lack of investment in security was. So they wont find it any harder to get a license for Phoenix Park.


  • Options
    #543
    Macy0161
    Registered Users Posts: 9,451 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    bren2001 wrote: »
    The venue wasn't the issue, the promoters lack of investment in security was. So they wont find it any harder to get a license for Phoenix Park.
    Which should be a licencing issue.


  • Options
    #544
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,824 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    Which should be a licencing issue.

    As it is in the UK. MCDs "security well in excess of the legal requirement" is such a cheap get out of jail on a technicality type of move.

    They, and everyone else, knew that it would be a total knack fest on Saturday and should have paid for more security/police.

    The legal requirement is the same regardless of the demographics. x amount of security for x amount of people. A flower show for pensioners or a show for idiot knackers. The law doesn't take the type of people into account, only the volume of people.


  • Options
    #545
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    I don't see the licence being an issue. There's always ways to put spin on how things will be different etc the next time and whoever grants the licence normally buys it.

    The bigger issue I see will be the OPW. Will they be willing to put up with the bad press the gigs have got? It's not fair to compare gigs in the Phoenix Park to ones at punchestown or Marley park. The fact that the OPW are in charge of the park and not one of the councils shows the importance of the place.

    I know they get good money from MCD and that'll be hard to turn down but the place took a hammering this weekend, both literally and in the minds of people so unless their budget really needs these paydays (which it probably does unfortunately), the OPW shouldnt allow these next year.


  • Options
    #546
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    I don't know about last night, but most people I now weren't happy with the Roses gig experience.

    I only heard positive things about the Roses gig. Other than those who wore flip flops, despite days of warnings from both the national press and MCD, and then got covered in mud.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #547
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 21,047 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    I only heard positive things about the Roses gig. Other than those who wore flip flops, despite days of warnings from both the national press and MCD, and then got covered in mud.
    the sound could have been a lot better...other than that twas great...


  • Options
    #548
    Macy0161
    Registered Users Posts: 9,451 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    I only heard positive things about the Roses gig. Other than those who wore flip flops, despite days of warnings from both the national press and MCD, and then got covered in mud.
    Didn't hear one complaint about the band, but of those that I've spoken to about it who went were that impressed with the organisation that it's pretty much universal that they've no intention of going to another gig put on there.


  • Options
    #549
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 21,047 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    Didn't hear one complaint about the band, but of those that I've spoken to about it who went were that impressed with the organisation that it's pretty much universal that they've no intention of going to another gig put on there.
    the whole fest was about getting as many people into a field as cheaply as possible...definitely one of the most poorly equipped gigs i've ever been to


  • Options
    #550
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    Can someone explain why we're forced to drink Heineken if we want to buy beer at these events?

    Same with Electric Picnic where you can just buy Heineken and Bacardi.


  • Options
    #551
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    flyswatter wrote: »
    Can someone explain why we're forced to drink Heineken if we want to buy beer at these events?

    Same with Electric Picnic where you can just buy Heineken and Bacardi.

    Sponsorship.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #552
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    lordgoat wrote: »
    Sponsorship.

    Surely that's not exactly ethical though?


  • Options
    #553
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    flyswatter wrote: »
    Surely that's not exactly ethical though?

    I don't get your point? It's purely business. Drinks companies sponsor events and in return for the cash upfront they get exclusivity on their drinks to be sold.

    Ethics doesn't come into it. Pure commerce.


  • Options
    #554
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    lordgoat wrote: »
    I don't get your point? It's purely business. Drinks companies sponsor events and in return for the cash upfront they get exclusivity on their drinks to be sold.

    Ethics doesn't come into it. Pure commerce.

    Commerce doesn't always have to be unethical.

    My point is, people should be free to bring whatever drink they want in. They paid good money for tickets.


  • Options
    #555
    Professey Chin
    Registered Users Posts: 51,054 ✭✭✭✭Professey Chin


    flyswatter wrote: »
    Commerce doesn't always have to be unethical.

    My point is, people should be free to bring whatever drink they want in. They paid good money for tickets.

    In big business it always is.
    Glastonbury is the only 1 I know of where you can bring in any drink you want but they have 0 corporate sponsorship (except Orange to charge mobile phones but I think thats going to be gone too)


  • Options
    #556
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    flyswatter wrote: »
    Commerce doesn't always have to be unethical.

    My point is, people should be free to bring whatever drink they want in. They paid good money for tickets.

    I know tickets are expensive but if promoters don't take money from beer companies to allow them exclusive rights to the drink site, tickets would be more expensive.


  • Options
    #557
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    flyswatter wrote: »
    Commerce doesn't always have to be unethical.

    My point is, people should be free to bring whatever drink they want in. They paid good money for tickets.


    People should be allowed drink whatever they want, is a completely different argument than the first question you posed!

    If concerts allowed people brin in their own beer/booze they'd make no money. If they make no money there'll be no concerts.

    Also I disagree on you calling it unethical.


  • Options
    #558
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    lordgoat wrote: »
    People should be allowed drink whatever they want, is a completely different argument than the first question you posed!

    If concerts allowed people brin in their own beer/booze they'd make no money. If they make no money there'll be no concerts.

    Also I disagree on you calling it unethical.

    A monopoly is in a way unethical.


    Someone gave the example of Glastonbury, no sponsorship, they do alright and they book the most expensive acts possible.


  • Options
    #559
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    flyswatter wrote: »
    A monopoly is in a way unethical.


    Someone gave the example of Glastonbury, no sponsorship, they do alright and they book the most expensive acts possible.

    A monopoly? What are you on about? It's simple sponsorship.
    Glastonbury doing alright for themselves?

    Here's an interview with Michael Eavis ( the guy who owns the farm where it's on)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jul/11/michael-eavis-glastonbury


  • Options
    #560
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    lordgoat wrote: »
    A monopoly? What are you on about? It's simple sponsorship.
    Glastonbury doing alright for themselves?

    Here's an interview with Michael Eavis ( the guy who owns the farm where it's on)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jul/11/michael-eavis-glastonbury

    It is a monopoly, A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity.

    That's what Heineken have at these gigs.

    I'll wait and see how Glastonbury ends up, but it's the most famous festival there is and long running.


  • Options
    #561
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    flyswatter wrote: »
    It is a monopoly, A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity.

    That's what Heineken have at these gigs.

    I'll wait and see how Glastonbury ends up, but it's the most famous festival there is and long running.

    No it is not a monopoly. You're 100% wrong on that.

    You can wait all you want but the fact is, it's not making a hell of a lot of money. If it had sponsorship, which i think it will incorporate shortly, it will make more.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #562
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    lordgoat wrote: »
    No it is not a monopoly. You're 100% wrong on that.

    You can wait all you want but the fact is, it's not making a hell of a lot of money. If it had sponsorship, which i think it will incorporate shortly, it will make more.

    If Coca Cola sponsors a local sports event does it mean people can only drink Coca Cola products at it?

    I don't think so.

    Heineken may sponsor gigs, but they monopolise the drinks sold.


  • Options
    #563
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    flyswatter wrote: »
    If Coca Cola sponsors a local sports event does it mean people can only drink Coca Cola products at it?

    I don't think so.

    Heineken may sponsor gigs, but they monopolise the drinks sold.

    They don't sponsor the event. The sign an exclusivity deal with the promoter. "We'll give you a bucket load of cash and you allow only our beers to be sold." It's a win-win for both sides but not for the poor souls who have to drink the pish they serve up!


  • Options
    #564
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    jack presley wrote: »
    They don't sponsor the event. The sign an exclusivity deal with the promoter. "We'll give you a bucket load of cash and you allow only our beers to be sold." It's a win-win for both sides but not for the poor souls who have to drink the pish they serve up!

    It's an alright beer imo, better than Budweiser, can't imagine it would be nice at outdoor gigs!


  • Options
    #565
    Big Game
    Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭Big Game


    flyswatter wrote: »
    It's an alright beer imo, better than Budweiser, can't imagine it would be nice at outdoor gigs!

    That's what I always tell myself, at least it's not Bud! Was Fosters in Manchester....


  • Options
    #566
    A V A
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,755 ✭✭✭A V A


    another male confirmed dead this morning in Connolly, was in the year ahead of me in blanch , sad really to think i use play football with him


  • Options
    #567
    Paully D
    Registered Users Posts: 28,710 ✭✭✭✭Paully D


    flyswatter wrote: »
    It's an alright beer imo, better than Budweiser, can't imagine it would be nice at outdoor gigs!

    The pints of Heineken are pretty nice at the gigs IMO. They're constantly being poured and sold so you usually end up getting fresh enough ones and they're quite cold.

    Agree with you on the Budweiser, no way could I stomach that. I'd rather go into the portaloo and ask someone to piss a cup for me and drink that.


  • Options
    #568
    howiya
    Registered Users Posts: 3,298 ✭✭✭howiya


    Paully D wrote: »
    The pints of Heineken are pretty nice at the gigs IMO. They're constantly being poured and sold so you usually end up getting fresh enough ones and they're quite cold.

    Agree with that. Was there last night and the beer was fine. Definitely improved on years ago. I think the exclusivity helps in that way ie they are promoting their beer so people will remember a bad pint if they get one


  • Options
    #569
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    Didn't hear one complaint about the band, but of those that I've spoken to about it who went were that impressed with the organisation that it's pretty much universal that they've no intention of going to another gig put on there.

    I heard the same thing after Slane 2009 and yet the next one sold out. It definitely needs to be organised better, but MCD will never change as long as they can sell tickets.


  • Options
    #570
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    On the beer thing. Is it up to Heineken to provide larger bars then? Rather than MCD?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #571
    flyswatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭flyswatter


    MCD: The Ryanair of Concert Promoters.





    Without the cheap prices.


Advertisement