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

nxbyveromdwjpg

Neamhshuntasach wrote: »

A lot of the reported 70,000 were coming from the North of Ireland or the UK.

The 70,000 doesn't include people from the North. That would be an additional 60,000 that almost definitely won't be coming.

Circular, circular, circular.

Peppa Pig

Chairman asking questions now - he is a GAA member who had tickets. First thing he wants to know - are any of the decision makers CP residetss and would this influence their decision?

NORTH1

somesoldiers wrote: »

more like 6.50 service charge per ticket, at least TM have said they will give back with the refund

6.50 does that seem excessive?
At most that's 2.6 million in service charges. Six months interest on that must be a sizeable amount.

Are they refunding the interest?

ardle1

Why did DCC chose the biggest event in the World involving one off the best Entertainers in the world! to show off their NON LICENSING LAW skills....
Why didn't they chose a rave or something, just to get a feel from the locals, instead of giving the whole World a birds eye view of how not to do business

LOL






P.s- anyone happy with this disaster, apart from agreed, maybe some residents from the immediate area! well you is not thinking straight innit :cool:

Muise...

ardle1 wrote: »

Why did DCC chose the biggest event in the World involving one off the best Entertainers in the world! to show off their NON LICENSING LAW skills....
Why didn't they chose a rave or something, just to get a feel from the locals, instead of giving the whole World a birds eye view of how not to do business

LOL






P.s- anyone happy with this disaster, apart from agreed, maybe some residents from the immediate area! well you is not thinking straight innit :cool:

go home post, you're drunk.

hmmm

Peppa Pig wrote: »

11 (eleven) fraudulent applications received - all taken out before objections reviewed

Besides it wouldn't have mattered if all the objections were fake. DCC had to make a decision on behalf of all the residents & of the city as a whole, not just the ones who were brave enough to stick their heads above the parapet. Just because someone wasn't willing to put their objection in writing and deal with the abuse that some residents have received, doesn't mean that their views should be ignored.

nxbyveromdwjpg

NORTH1 wrote: »

Are they refunding the interest?

This is just getting ridiculous now

Peppa Pig

Informal contact before 2 concerts were announced .
Late January council then told 3
Early Feb then told 5.
Council told Aiken it was big ask and could forsee problems
No verbal assurance given that 5 would be permitted
Council responder is a CP resident

nxbyveromdwjpg

hmmm wrote: »

Besides it wouldn't have mattered if all the objections were fake. DCC had to make a decision on behalf of all the residents & of the city as a whole, not just the ones who were brave enough to stick their heads above the parapet. Just because someone wasn't willing to put their objection in writing and deal with the abuse that some residents have received, doesn't mean that their views should be ignored.

If that's the case then the majority of residents there, the ones that didn't object and wanted to concerts to go ahead, should have been taken into account too, but they weren't.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Informal contact before 2 concerts were announced .
Late January council then told 3
Early Feb then told 5.
Council told Aiken it was big ask and could forsee problems
No verbal assurance given that 5 would be permitted
Council responder is a CP resident

What are you watching/listening to? Where is it on?

Happyman42

nm wrote: »

If that's the case then the majority of residents there, the ones that didn't object and wanted to concerts to go ahead, should have been taken into account too, but they weren't.

They didn't make submissions.

Happyman42

nm wrote: »

What are you watching/listening to? Where is it on?

http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/music/taoiseach-says-garth-brooks-situation-is-a-mess-1.1866824

scroll down page

Peppa Pig

Timmy Dooley up now -he's not wearing a stetson
His big question, how could you allow 400,000 tickets to be sold
Annoyed that Keegan did not want GAA members.
He's angry - looks like he posted on here
Main interest is loss of revenue to hotels along with 70,000 tourists coming in and the 400,000 who live here
Questioning Keegan's judgement

Effects

nm wrote: »

The 70,000 doesn't include people from the North. That would be an additional 60,000 that almost definitely won't be coming.

Circular, circular, circular.

They probably wouldn't be spending any money anyway. Based on anecdotal evidence.

Valetta

nm wrote: »

If that's the case then the majority of residents there, the ones that didn't object and wanted to concerts to go ahead, should have been taken into account too, but they weren't.

Were they proactive in making observations to the planning application?

nxbyveromdwjpg

Happyman42 wrote: »

They didn't make submissions.

That was the other posters point. Did you read the post I quoted?

muddypaws

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Timmy Dooley up now -he's not wearing a stetson
His big question, how could you allow 400,000 tickets to be sold
Annoyed that Keegan did not want GAA members.
He's angry - looks like he posted on here
Main interest is loss of revenue to hotels along with 70,000 tourists coming in and the 400,000 who live here
Questioning Keegan's judgement

Who was the question about selling the tickets addressed to?

Peppa Pig

nm wrote: »

What are you watching/listening to? Where is it on?

RTE news now. UPC channel 200.
I think its on Oireachtas TV as well on the web

Neamhshuntasach

nm wrote: »

The 70,000 doesn't include people from the North. That would be an additional 60,000 that almost definitely won't be coming.

Circular, circular, circular.

Doesn't matter.

Because it would be an additional 60,000 that almost definitely might be still coming.

Peppa Pig

muddypaws wrote: »

Who was the question about selling the tickets addressed to?

I'm not sure if it was how could it happen or how could DCC allow it.

Timmy annoyed only 3 given, even more annoyed that 4 were offered (they weren't) and that DCC would allow matinees (they didn't)
Extremely annoyed that Keegan would use public money defending his decision if a judicial review was requested.
Straight from on here he finishes with "Not Aiken/ Brooks fault" "Do you have responsibility" "Rugby world cup" "Huge effect on tourism industry"

Red Pepper

Larbre34 wrote: »

As a PR person, you no doubt know that the above people have most of their time wasted by PR people and lobbyists on daft issues all of the time.

Well I hope the FG/Lab muppets realise that people will vote for them based on how they handled the private banking debt and not a music concert. It's a new low.

AudreyHepburn

Calina wrote: »

Compromise includes not holding all five concerts. You don't accept this, however.

No. Compromise is finding a solution that works for all, in everyone's best interests. For example the suggestion of 3 nights and 2 later would be compromise. The concerts would still go ahead, but with signifigantly less distruption to local residents.

Banning all five is bowing outright to the pressure from the 300 ( or more likely a lot less since we know many of the objections to be fraudulent) people who didn't want the concerts. It's given one side everything they want, and the other side nothing.

Happyman42

Keegan bursts the GAA members huffy bubble there...didn't rise to the bait.

bumper234

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No. Compromise is finding a solution that works for all, in everyone's best interests. For example the suggestion of 3 nights and 2 later would be compromise. The concerts would still go ahead, but with signifigantly less distruption to local residents.

Banning all five is bowing outright to the pressure from the 300 ( or more likely a lot less since we know many of the objections to be fraudulent) people who didn't want the concerts. It's given one side everything they want, and the other side nothing.

No body BANNED all five ffs!

And are you not contradicting yourself by saying the latter?

AudreyHepburn

hmmm wrote: »

Besides it wouldn't have mattered if all the objections were fake. DCC had to make a decision on behalf of all the residents & of the city as a whole, not just the ones who were brave enough to stick their heads above the parapet. Just because someone wasn't willing to put their objection in writing and deal with the abuse that some residents have received, doesn't mean that their views should be ignored.

No they shouldn't.

No more than those who want the concerts should be ignored. But presumably, based on responses on this thread, they don't count.

Valetta

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No. Compromise is finding a solution that works for all, in everyone's best interests. For example the suggestion of 3 nights and 2 later would be compromise. The concerts would still go ahead, but with signifigantly less distruption to local residents.

Banning all five is bowing outright to the pressure from the 300 ( or more likely a lot less since we know many of the objections to be fraudulent) people who didn't want the concerts. It's given one side everything they want, and the other side nothing.

This never happened.

AudreyHepburn

bumper234 wrote: »

No body BANNED all five ffs!

Sorry rephrase that to 'refusing to grant licences for....'

Calina

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No. Compromise is finding a solution that works for all, in everyone's best interests. For example the suggestion of 3 nights and 2 later would be compromise. The concerts would still go ahead, but with signifigantly less distruption to local residents.

Banning all five is bowing outright to the pressure from the 300 ( or more likely a lot less since we know many of the objections to be fraudulent) people who didn't want the concerts. It's given one side everything they want, and the other side nothing.

IIRC, splitting the concerts to three and three was put on the table.

DCC did not ban all five. They licensed three. Garth Brooks's decision resulted in those three not happening. He is responsible for all five being banned, not DCC.

AudreyHepburn

Valetta wrote: »

This never happened.

Bad phrasing sorry. Rephrase to 'Refusing to grant licences for'. And the point still stands.

bumper234

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Sorry rephrase that to 'refusing to grant licences for....'

But then granting all five would be

given one side everything they want, and the other side nothing