Garth Brooks Comeback Special *ALL 5 SHOWS CANCELLED* READ FIRST POST

Happyman42

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

And everyone who had a ticket for the last 2 nights should seek a refund from the residents?

This whole fiasco is an absolute embarrassment, crazy decisions made by a civil servant who would probably struggle to land a job in McDonald's were he not making a mint costing the economy 10's of millions in the process. Embarrassing.

Look at the millions/billions civil servants cost us by abusing the laws for years, including one civil servant (in the same job) being apprehended trying to leave the country with his corrupt mullah. Thank god we have finally learned to put regulation and proceedure first. Some people need to cop on here.

latynova

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

And everyone who had a ticket for the last 2 nights should seek a refund from the residents?

This whole fiasco is an absolute embarrassment, crazy decisions made by a civil servant who would probably struggle to land a job in McDonald's were he not making a mint costing the economy 10's of millions in the process. Embarrassing.

That civil servant was trying to uphold the laws of the land. DCC should never, ever have given permission for three concerts.

Mrs Garth Brooks

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

DCC admit they offered to grant licences for 4 nights, but only if Brooks agreed but would only offer 3 if he didn't!

That's a disgrace, as it means they were only willing to say they offered 3 licences to save face. If they were willing to offer 4, then they should have made that public, not wait until the GAA / Aitken made the announcement.

The council's actions are a joke and I believe what Aiken / GAA are saying now, where are had doubted it but the only ones backtracking and contradicting themselves now is the DCC.

Thats a fcuking joke. What was all the talk about it being non amendable?

Turn around and offer four? It should have been five. Christ.

horseburger

lertsnim wrote: »

Nonsense. $$$$$ is all he saw. This has nothing to do with concert goers missing out.

Garth Brooks could have had 3 shows which would have made 240,000 people happy but refuses and still people see him as some kind of Jesus.

In that case, what would your response be to the people who managed to obtain tickets for the 4th and 5th shows, if the first three were held?

They would justifiably feel very annoyed if the shows for which they got tickets were not held.

And also if only the first three shows went ahead, if there were people selling on their tickets online for the first three shows, the tickets would then become even more expensive, considering the increased numbers of fans looking for them, who were originally going on the Monday or Tuesday.

Reekwind

CapricornOne wrote: »

It also takes less than five minutes to realise that according to the agreement upon the redevelopment of the stadium, NO MORE THAN 3 NON-SPORTING EVENTS PER YEAR ARE PERMITTED. That limit was reached with the One Direction concerts earlier this year.

Croke Park should never have been eligible for one Garth Brooke concert, never mind five.

You should probably release the CAPSLOCK and try again. If that were the case then DCC would not have allowed any Brooks concerts this summer. There is plenty of scope for interpretation in that agreement.

Which is not to deflect from the fact that the residents could have been handled much better. But that's an issue for the GAA, not Aiken or Brooks.

latynova wrote:

Any concert which doesn't have planning permission is illegal.

Then every single major concert or festival that is to be held in Ireland this summer is illegal. Should we cancel the lot and arrest the promoters?

Woodville56

Woodville56 wrote: »

So tell me if this civil servant "making a mint"should have stood by and allow the laws he is paid to uphold be circumvented by greedy promoters ? Is the GAA & Aiken not at all culpable ?? And as for Mr Brooks- mercenary best describes his attitude !

Greedy promoter? You'd swear he was forcing people to go... All he did was align demand with supply.

mrjoshua

CountyHurler wrote: »

Garth Brooks is not a fan of the outdoor arena... he was quoted as saying...

"I'm not big on open spaces,
They want me to move my show to the Punchestown Races,
oh I'm not a fan... of open spay .e. aces.. "

Ha Ha Quality. Irish humour wins hands down. Post of the week. Pmsl lol

miju

RTE saying DCC offered Garth Brooks 4 gigs behind the scenes. Seems it could have been changed after all

latynova

Reekwind wrote: »

Then every single major concert or festival that is to be held in Ireland this summer is illegal. Should we cancel the lot and arrest the promoters?

We won't need to cancel them because they cannot legally proceed.

Can't understand why so many people are too stupid to understand that the promoter didn't have a licence. He's not *entitled* to one. The residents were correct, especially the one who took out the injunction. He should be hailed as hero for trying to uphold planning laws, but of course, here people who do the right thing are attacked. Nothing changes.

blankblank

horseburger wrote: »

In that case, what would your response be to the people who managed to obtain tickets for the 4th and 5th shows, if the first three were held?

The response would be what is all over the news

They were granted a license for THREE shows and unfortunately that is all thats allowed.

Apologies, refunds and general head bowing all round for those 160,000 unlucky fans

Overall tough only 160,000 are left unhappy as opposed to 400,000

Logic prevails in this instance, its a pity it has been over ruled by the complete childish tantrum Gareth is throwing

horseburger

CapricornOne wrote: »

It also takes less than five minutes to realise that according to the agreement upon the redevelopment of the stadium, NO MORE THAN 3 NON-SPORTING EVENTS PER YEAR ARE PERMITTED. That limit was reached with the One Direction concerts earlier this year.

Croke Park should never have been eligible for one Garth Brooke concert, never mind five.

As I understand it, it is not just three concerts a year,

but that any more than three is subject to a decision by Dublin City Council on granting any additional shows.

smileyj1987

HardLuckWoman wrote: »

Thats a fcuking joke. What was all the talk about it being non amendable?

Turn around and offer four? It should have been five. Christ.

Ah no three is enough . Plus that is only speculation . If it is true it was a masterful plan by DCC to force his hand and back out of the gigs .

lordgoat

horseburger wrote: »

As I understand it, it is not just three concerts a year,

but that any more than three is subject to a decision by Dublin City Council on granting any additional shows.

three events a year, but what classifies as an event is what causes the hassle.

i.e. is Garth the event or are they 5 separate events?

Fortyjocks

Davie89 wrote: »

The response would be what is all over the news

They were granted a license for THREE shows and unfortunately that is all thats allowed.

Apologies, refunds and general head bowing all round for those 160,000 unlucky fans

Overall tough only 160,000 are left unhappy as opposed to 400,000

Logic prevails in this instance, its a pity it has been over ruled by the complete childish tantrum Gareth is throwing

I agree - for someone who loves Ireland this is a slap in the face for the thousands who camped all night in the miserable weather in January for what are now three fully licensed shows! As I recall it was he not anxious to go home after Sunday for his daughters birthday which he then said she could celebrate in Ireland....mmmmm!! Don't know what will happen with all the specially made set that we are told is on a ship somewhere in the ocean - maybe it can go in a museum or perhaps the next mrs brown film!

DannySparks

Spare a thought for the poor lad currently staring at 400000 cowboy hats he bought to flog on the jones road. That fella is in a really dark place today

lertsnim

Davie89 wrote: »

its a pity it has been over ruled by the complete childish tantrum Gareth is throwing

It's amazing the amount who still thinks he can do no wrong.

Fortyjocks

DannySparks wrote: »

Spare a thought for the poor lad currently staring at 400000 cowboy hats he bought to flog on the jones road. That fella is in a really dark place today

Who knows if Garth doesn't want us Dolly Parton might come to his rescue next Summer - mime you that's a long shot

horseburger

Davie89 wrote: »

The response would be what is all over the news

They were granted a license for THREE shows and unfortunately that is all thats allowed.

Apologies, refunds and general head bowing all round for those 160,000 unlucky fans

Overall tough only 160,000 are left unhappy as opposed to 400,000

Logic prevails in this instance, its a pity it has been over ruled by the complete childish tantrum Gareth is throwing

When I asked about a response, I meant, how is a promoter or artist to respond to the fans who had tickets to the 4th and 5th shows, in a situation where the artist was willing to play all five, but was only granted permission for three.

If the first three went ahead, and you queued all night for tickets for the first three and was unsuccessful and then and managed to get tickets for either the 4th or 5th gigs, you'd feel very let down if they weren't held.

There would then be the possibility of tickets for the first three shows being sold online at even more inflated prices, considering the extra demand.

OhHiMark

Jesus that's a fair embarrassing show from socal musiclover in this thread. Did she think that we'd drop to our knees and beg her to come for a little holiday in Ireland?

sydthebeat

Woodville56 wrote: »

So tell me if this civil servant "making a mint"should have stood by and allow the laws he is paid to uphold be circumvented by greedy promoters ? Is the GAA & Aiken not at all culpable ?? And as for Mr Brooks- mercenary best describes his attitude !

Let's nip this in the bud because this mistake Is being made over and over again in this thread.
There is NO law which restricts there to only being 3 events a year in croke park!!

There is an agreement in place since 1998 which limited the events to three with an element of community gain in place for every event.

This is not a law, neither aiken nor Garth Brooks was doing anything illegal

hynesie08

horseburger wrote: »

When I asked about a response, I meant, how is a promoter or artist to respond to the fans who had tickets to the 4th and 5th shows, in a situation where the artist was willing to play all five, but was only granted permission for three.

Honestly?
"we tried everything we could etc, etc.
DCC's decision is final etc etc
Do not agree but respect decision etc etc
Best of a bad situation blah blah blah"

Honestly, considering the cult like nature of some Garth fans, he could threaten to pISS on your granny and they'd think it's adorable.

Reekwind

latynova wrote: »

We won't need to cancel them because they cannot legally proceed.

Well there will have to be a public announcement, no? All those hundreds of thousands of people who are planning on attending events throughout the rest of the year should have their tickets refunded. Then the promoters should be fined. So much for Electric Picnic.

This is of course inconceivable. Yet every other promoter has done the exact same as Aiken. Should we be bureaucratic killjoys and drive them all out of business?

Can't understand why so many people are too stupid to understand that the promoter didn't have a licence. He's not *entitled* to one. The residents were correct, especially the one who took out the injunction. He should be hailed as hero for trying to uphold planning laws, but of course, here people who do the right thing are attacked. Nothing changes.

Again, you speak from ignorance. Let me be clear: strict adherence to the Council timetable is impossible. Simple as.

If you had your way then the concert would not have been announced or tickets put on sale until the licence had been accepted - July 3. That would have provided less than a month to sell the tickets, make the necessary logistical arrangements and actually set-up a show for hundreds of thousands of people. The punters would then have had a month to actually plan attendance (rearrange holidays, take time off work, etc).

It is not possible to do all the above in the space of 3-4 weeks. Hence why promoters agree a venue in advance and proceed 'subject to licence'. The idea that this is a crime or a subversion of the State's planning laws is nonsense.

Again, it would take all of five minutes for someone to learn this independently.

blankblank

horseburger wrote: »

When I asked about a response, I meant, how is a promoter or artist to respond to the fans who had tickets to the 4th and 5th shows, in a situation where the artist was willing to play all five, but was only granted permission for three.

If the first three went ahead, and you queued all night for tickets for the first three and was unsuccessful and then and managed to get tickets for either the 4th or 5th gigs, you'd feel very let down if they weren't held.

There would then be the possibility of tickets for the first three shows being sold online at even more inflated prices, considering the extra demand.

You sir have been spending far too much time at the church of' Brooks

You would rather see 400,000 unhappy fans rather than 160,000

Yes it would be devastating to be in that 160,000 but unfortunately this is life

8-10

Was there a reason given to why the 3 licenced shows have been cancelled? Surely they have to announce the reason?

Duck Soup

Someone was asking previously for a link to where a 4 night option was discussed. The relevant bit:

The ‘four night’ option

Meanwhile, it’s emerged that the prospect of the country star playing four of the five nights originally booked was discussed earlier in the negotiation process.

According to a brief statement from the Council press office this evening, “prior to a decision being made on the Garth Brooks concert event licence application a conversation took place between the Chief Executive of Dublin City Council and a senior representative from Aiken Promotions”.

In the course of that conversation the Chief Executive advised the representative of Aikens (sic) that the likelihood was that only three concerts would be permitted.

However, on being advised that Brooks would not perform just three concerts, the Chief Executive, Owen Keegan, “offered to discuss with the decision maker in the Planning Department the possibility of permitting a fourth concert if a guarantee was given by the promoter that Garth Brooks would fulfil the four events”.

http://www.thejournal.ie/garth-brooks-concerts-cancelled-1560304-Jul2014/

horseburger

hynesie08 wrote: »

Honestly?
"we tried everything we could etc, etc.
DCC's decision is final etc etc
Do not agree but respect decision etc etc
Best of a bad situation blah blah blah"

Honestly, considering the cult like nature of some Garth fans, he could threaten to pISS on your granny and they'd think it's adorable.

would you like to reply to the other scenario that I mentioned, if only the first three went ahead - the possibility of tickets for the first three shows being sold at mental prices by touts?

How would you counteract that?

When the 4th and 5th shows were announced, many people spoke of how it would result in less touting of tickets.

8-10

Duck Soup wrote: »

Someone was asking previously for a link to where a 4 night option was discussed. The relevant bit:



http://www.thejournal.ie/garth-brooks-concerts-cancelled-1560304-Jul2014/

Is this legal? Seems unfair on the residents to claim they did everything to the letter in getting only 3 licences and no more are possible while at the same time they were open to a 4th behind closed doors

horseburger

Davie89 wrote: »

You sir have been spending far too much time at the church of' Brooks

You would rather see 400,000 unhappy fans rather than 160,000

Yes it would be devastating to be in that 160,000 but unfortunately this is life

You could try answering my question, rather than trying to be funny, on the issue of tickets being sold on by touts, considering the extra demand of people from the 4th and 5th shows looking for them.

how could that be dealt with?

sydthebeat

8-10 wrote: »

Is this legal? Seems unfair on the residents to claim they did everything to the letter in getting only 3 licences and no more are possible while at the same time they were open to a 4th behind closed doors

Welcome to horse trading Ireland

bodhrandude

jebus84 wrote: »

What am I going to do with all these cowboy hats i was planning on selling ?

I suppose you could go down to Bundoran and sell them there, they like their country western music down there.