Garth Brooks concerts cancelled - **READ FIRST POST FOR MOD NOTES**

AudreyHepburn

nm wrote: »

The law needs to be amended to allow appeals.

And this is where my confusion is. I don't see why this can't happen.

cournioni

bumper234 wrote: »

But our integrity is intact by the fact DCC did not bend to pressure and for me that is a price well worth paying. People now know that the gombeen politics of the past are finally behind us and there is a correct way to do business in Ireland.

The DCC are the ones that have come out of this with the least integrity intact in my opinion. Some of their "offers" have been cringe worthy to say the least, particularly the matinee offer which was completely at odds with their original decision to grant three shows licenses because of the "effect" it would have on the area. Why do you think Keegan is being grilled today over it?

bumper234

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And this is where my confusion is. I don't see why this can't happen.

It will happen, It just wasn't going to happen in a 24/48 hour period as some GB fans wanted. They wanted changes rushed through to suit themselves.

Calina

cournioni wrote: »

The DCC are the ones that have come out of this with the least integrity intact in my opinion. Some of their "offers" have been cringe worthy to say the least, particularly the matinee offer which was completely at odds with their original decision to grant three shows licenses because of the "effect" it would have on the area. Why do you think Keegan is being grilled today over it?

As I understand it, they did not make the matinée offer, only that they were prepared to look at an updated event plan that incorporated split shows on the Saturday and Sunday.

The original matinée comment was attributed to Garth Brooks under doing whatever it takes.

bumper234

cournioni wrote: »

The DCC are the ones that have come out of this with the least integrity intact in my opinion. Some of their "offers" have been cringe worthy to say the least, particularly the matinee offer which was completely at odds with their original decision to grant three shows licenses because of the "effect" it would have on the area. Why do you think Keegan is being grilled today over it?

I think you will find he is not being "Grilled" over anything.

cournioni

AngryHippie wrote: »

NO ITS NOT.
As has already been pointed out here on numerous occasions.

Due to the economic leakage that Brooks and his production represents, the denial of permission will actually result in a saving to the Irish economy.

If you want to make money for the economy, export Daniel O'Donnells talent (as he has for many years) or Foster and Allen, or Riverdance, but don't keep fooling yourself as to the drain that the import of an entertainment service represented to rural communities.

I haven't read it anywhere on here, please point it out to me. Are you telling me that an spend average of €150 per person in the Dublin area on the day (not including tickets) will result in a saving to the Irish economy? Particularly with 70,000 from abroad coming in to see the gigs? Absolute tosh if that is the case.

secman

cournioni wrote: »

The DCC are the ones that have come out of this with the least integrity intact in my opinion. Some of their "offers" have been cringe worthy to say the least, particularly the matinee offer which was completely at odds with their original decision to grant three shows licenses because of the "effect" it would have on the area. Why do you think Keegan is being grilled today over it?

In fairness he was put under extreme pressure from Aiken, politicians, music fans, GAA. He just should have stuck rigidly to one decision and never deviated or appeared to be bending. It was not right being put under that pressure especially by politicians, that was disgraceful bearing in mind where this has got us to from past planning interference by politicians.

Liamo08

cournioni wrote: »

I haven't read it anywhere on here, please point it out to me. Are you telling me that an spend average of €150 per person in the Dublin area on the day (not including tickets) will result in a saving to the Irish economy? Particularly with 70,000 from abroad coming in to see the gigs? Absolute tosh if that is the case.

How exactly are we going to lose €50m to the economy, people are still going to have that money in their pockets and will spend it in other ways around other parts of the country. There will be a reduction in the flow of cash to the Dublin area on the days in question but that €150 per person will not be taken out of the economy.

bumper234

secman wrote: »

In fairness he was put under extreme pressure from Aiken, politicians, music fans, GAA. He just should have stuck rigidly to one decision and never deviated or appeared to be bending. It was not right being put under that pressure especially by politicians, that was disgraceful bearing in mind where this has got us to from past planning interference by politicians.

Keegan was damned from the moment Aike announced 5 gigs.

Allow all 5 and he would have been slated for bowing to big business money, accused of gombenism and probably dragged through the courts via injunctions to explain his decision.

Cancel all five he would have been slated for bowing to a few nimby residents, Accused of gombeenism and taking brown envelopes from residents and dragged through the courts by Aiken to explain his decision.

Try to keep everyone happy by allowing 3 concerts and he got slated for bowing to pressure from both nimby residents and big business money, He has been accused (laughably) by the GB crowd of gombenism for following the planning laws ( ) and could potentially still be dragged through the courts to explain his decisions.

Damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

Valetta

I notice that the facility to search for planning decisions on the DCC website is not working.

I think it probably blew itself up.

Bob Z

BenThere wrote: »

He contracted with Aiken promotions for 5 concerts. He put together a show on a huge scale which could only be justified by spreading the cost over the five shows. Aiken dropped the ball by not having DCC onside from the beginning. They over reached and DCC only granted permission for three concerts. Brooks had a gun put to his head to accept three concerts or none at all. No one likes having a gun put to their head and having a contract broken on them. He doesn't need the money so he decided to stick to the contract he signed to do five concerts or none at all.

How do you know it was 5 concerts? i thought it was originally 3. What if they had not sold out? or did he know they would?

cournioni

Liamo08 wrote: »

How exactly are we going to lose €50m to the economy, people are still going to have that money in their pockets and will spend it in other ways around other parts of the country. There will be a reduction in the flow of cash to the Dublin area on the days in question but that €150 per person will not be taken out of the economy.

70,000 of these people most likely won't be in the country to spend it here.

True people from Ireland will still have it in their pockets. The problem now is, it may now stay there, it may not, it may go on a holiday abroad, it may not. Had the Garth Brooks event took place, these people would most certainly have spent it.

There will be losses to businesses such as transport. Think about how much private bus companies will have been affected. The list goes on and on.

NORTH1

I am a neutral to this, following the story with interest at how it got to this stage.

One think I have noticed does not seem to be covered at all.

How much interest do you think was earned on six months of 400,000 ticket sales?

If everyone paid by some sort of card, at .50 cent service charge that's 200,000 euro on top.

So at a guess there was 30 million in ticket sales? What would six months interest on that be?

And that's not counting the people that are not in a position to refund their tickets.

Peppa Pig

BenThere wrote: »

He contracted with Aiken promotions for 5 concerts. He put together a show on a huge scale which could only be justified by spreading the cost over the five shows.

That's not what Garth Brooks said himself. He said that it he could not play to 240,000 and disappoint 160,000.

Either you are wrong or he is, my money is on you being slightly more right than him.

Hermy

cournioni wrote: »

Our economy is €50,000,000 poorer and a lot of small businesses who will have spent a lot of money stocking up for this event will be out a large amount of money. Shame.

Caveat emptor.

cournioni

NORTH1 wrote: »

I am a neutral to this, following the story with interest at how it got to this stage.

One think I have noticed does not seem to be covered at all.

How much interest do you think was earned on six months of 400,000 ticket sales?

If everyone paid by some sort of card, at .50 cent service charge that's 200,000 euro on top.

So at a guess there was 30 million in ticket sales? What would be six months interest on that be?

And that's not counting the people that are not in a position to refund their tickets.

It will be a fairly large operation to put refunds in place. I know my local ticketmaster agent pretty well and he says it will cost him a good sum of money to administer.

Not saying that it will be as large as the interest but I'd imagine any figure gained on interest will have been spent on trying to put the show together in other ways.

Liamo08

cournioni wrote: »

70,000 of these people most likely won't be in the country to spend it here.

True people from Ireland will still have it in their pockets. The problem now is, it may now stay there, it may not, it may go on a holiday abroad, it may not. Had the Garth Brooks event took place, these people would most certainly have spent it.

There will be losses to businesses such as transport. Think about how much private bus companies will have been affected. The list goes on and on.

So people are just going to put this €150 into their pockets and never spend it? That makes no sense, the vast majority of this will go back into the economy. Some small businesses will lose out but others will gain as the money is just going to be spent elsewhere.

Mr Freeze

I'm just glad this whole thing is over.

Complete mess.

LynnGrace

cournioni wrote: »

It will be a fairly large operation to put refunds in place. I know my local ticketmaster agent pretty well and he says it will cost him a good sum of money to administer.

Not saying that it will be as large as the interest but I'd imagine any figure gained on interest will have been spent on trying to put the show together in other ways.

Agree. I think the refunds operation will be a major headache, as it will be on a scale that most agents won't have dealt with previously.

Laois_Man

RoyalCelt wrote: »

can you link me to where you read the above please?

Sure

It is understood that Dublin City Council was willing to offer three more concerts in October, but Mr Brooks rejected this proposal.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0714/630770-garth-brooks/


And...

In a desperate bid to save the shows, it is understood that the Brooks camp was offered the chance to play three gigs this month and then two or even three more in October.

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/music-news/crushed-garth-pulls-plug-despite-lastditch-deal-bid-30431272.html

Valetta

cournioni wrote: »

70,000 of these people most likely won't be in the country to spend it here.

True people from Ireland will still have it in their pockets. The problem now is, it may now stay there, it may not, it may go on a holiday abroad, it may not. Had the Garth Brooks event took place, these people would most certainly have spent it.

There will be losses to businesses such as transport. Think about how much private bus companies will have been affected. The list goes on and on.

I would have thought the majority of people coming from abroad will still come to Dublin.

Most will have non-returnable flights booked.

I know if I booked a weekend in, say Munich for a concert, I would still go if the concert were to be cancelled for any reason.

They will also have an extra €60 or €70 to spend from their ticket refund while here, rather than helping fund a new stetson for Garthy.

Phoebas

BenThere wrote: »

He put together a show on a huge scale which could only be justified by spreading the cost over the five shows.

I don't think there is any evidence for that.

anncoates

RoyalCelt wrote: »

If more were like him (the government most importantly) our country would be in a much better place.

Be careful what you wish for.

Dravokivich

cournioni wrote: »

70,000 of these people most likely won't be in the country to spend it here.

So? If we are so focused on the "70,000" who aren't coming here now because Garth Brooks isn't playing, we should be thinking about what can be done here to attract people to come.

cournioni wrote: »

True people from Ireland will still have it in their pockets. The problem now is, it may now stay there, it may not, it may go on a holiday abroad, it may not. Had the Garth Brooks event took place, these people would most certainly have spent it.

If they don't spend it in 2 weeks, it'll be spent and if not taxed eventually anyway. It makes no difference if it was on an overpriced hotel in 2 weeks time, or something else they may want to get at a later date. Why begrudge someone a holiday abroad as well?

cournioni wrote: »

There will be losses to businesses such as transport. Think about how much private bus companies will have been affected. The list goes on and on.

That's just the nature of business built on dependency of other business. Sure it sucks, but there's not really much use to waving a banner for'em as if they've been hard done by as a result of this.

First Up

bumper234 wrote: »

I think you will find he is not being "Grilled" over anything.

I think you are wrong.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

First Up

secman wrote: »

In fairness he was put under extreme pressure from Aiken, politicians, music fans, GAA. He just should have stuck rigidly to one decision and never deviated or appeared to be bending. It was not right being put under that pressure especially by politicians, that was disgraceful bearing in mind where this has got us to from past planning interference by politicians.

Keegan is paid to solve problems, not act like a junior clerk reciting the by-laws. If the Council had the authority to make a decision, it also had the authority to re-visit it. It did not need an "appeal" process, just some adults working out a solution that worked for everyone.

As the ultimate authority for deciding if the concerts went ahead, Keegan and the Council also had the ultimate responsibility for sorting it. Instead they behaved like petty bureaucrats hiding behind the small print.

Keegan has a long and well-earned reputation for being a pig-headed self- promoter. He may have bitten off a bit more than he bargained for this time.

bobmalooka

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sit down.

Knowbody said the concerts should be cancelled to help the economy, they merely pointing out that the argument that Garth brooks should be allowed circumvent our planning laws due to the economic impact is an empty one. (Based on unverified figures produced by vested interests)

Of course the examples you mentioned will lose out but others will benefit.

The money that would have been spent won't vanish.
Some won't be spent Ireland, some will.
Brooks won't be taking his €11/12 million out.

The actual impact to the irish economy will be negligible ( either a small loss or benefit but insignificant either way)

Dyr

Lock her up boys, shes done

*bangs roof*

secman

First Up wrote: »

Keegan is paid to solve problems, not act like a junior clerk reciting the by-laws. If the Council had the authority to make a decision, it also had the authority to re-visit it. It did not need an "appeal" process, just some adults working out a solution that worked for everyone.

As the ultimate authority for deciding if the concerts went ahead, Keegan and the Council also had the ultimate responsibility for sorting it. Instead they behaved like petty bureaucrats hiding behind the small print.

Keegan has a long and well-earned reputation for being a pig-headed self- promoter. He may have bitten off a bit more than he bargained for this time.

He made the decision, taking into account the conditions put in by an Bord Pleanala, which would carry a lot of weight in fairness. Don't know if you are old enough to remember when the GAA were rebuilding CP, because it was in such a built up residential area, they encountered fierce opposition. It ended up in an bord pleanala, the GAA ended up with an odd shaped stadium, only 3 proper sides and restrictions for usage other than games. The GAA accepted these whereas they refuted the notion of moving to a greenfield site and not having these restrictions.

Keegan had to take the conditions into account and compromised on 3 gigs on top of the 3 permitted.