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

Peppa Pig

Keegan accepts he probably should not have agreed to look at a 4th but he felt it was such a big matter he had to go the extra mile.
All he was met with "5 concerts or no concerts"
Defends defending a judicial review-keeps the integrity of the planning process
Had he told Aiken in Feb he would not get 5 he would have be accused of not following the proper procedures - he also did not know what consultations Aiken would have with the residents

AudreyHepburn

Calina wrote: »

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.

He refused to play just three after DCC refused to licence all five.

Lets not lay the blame solely on one person or another. There are many people at fault here; GB, GAA, Aiken, DCC, the residents, the fans. Everyone played their part.

AudreyHepburn

bumper234 wrote: »

But then granting all five would be

You're right it would. Which is why a compromise should have been reached, rather than a blanket refusal to allow all five.

Again the playing of three now and three later would have been ideal.

Peppa Pig

Chairman arguing with Keegan -pulls out a TR Dallas stetson

Timmy - insinuating that if 4 were to be looked at why not go to 5
Timmy says that they should have looked for 6 then he would have got 5
Bangs on again abut a CP resident working for DCC - "When did you know"
Mary Lou on next- I'm going for a cup of tea





Not true about the TR Dallas stetson

nxbyveromdwjpg

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Chairman arguing with Keegan -pulls out a TR Dallas stetson

Timmy - insinuating that if 4 were to be looked at why not go to 5





Not true about the TR Dallas stetson

Ha ha that would be great

bumper234

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You're right it would. Which is why a compromise should have been reached, rather than a blanket refusal to allow all five.

Again the playing of three now and three later would have been ideal.

Oh sweet.......


You keep using the word compromise.

compromise was reached......Garth wanted 5, DCC offered 3.....That's the compromise........Garth didn't want 3 so he...he.....HE cancelled all 5. Why do Brooks fans think that the word compromise means that they get what they want no matter what?

muddypaws

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.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

He refused to play just three after DCC refused to licence all five.

Lets not lay the blame solely on one person or another. There are many people at fault here; GB, GAA, Aiken, DCC, the residents, the fans. Everyone played their part.

But DCC didn't refuse licences for 3 now and 3 later, they haven't had an application for that. They refused a licence for 2 which would have made 5 in a row.

KingOfFairview

Yis have to admit, this is kind of funny

bumper234

KingOfFairview wrote: »

Yis have to admit, this is kind of funny

It's ****ing hilarious tbh, Brooks fans are off their rockers.

BenEadir

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

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

for two reasons:-

1. Changing the national law takes time. you can't make up law on the fly.

2. New laws are effective going forward not retrospective. New laws which avoid such a situation in future will only apply to new applications not to old applications which were refused.

Ben

nxbyveromdwjpg

Keegan getting hung by this lad, whoever he is, for allowing 3/4 and not 5, or 5 incl two matinee, and not taking the economic benefit into account.

He's also suggesting Keegan might have had a conflict of interest due to having family living in the area.

muddypaws

I didn't have any knowledge of Owen Keegan before this 'debacle', but watching this now, he actually seems to be a very rational, intelligent man, the committee on the other hand ........

Peppa Pig

Mary Lou made to wait, some politician from CLare (I think) on now
"Why did you grant even 1 concert above PP
"Could you not just have given 5 and then looked at the process after"
"Should you not have delegate the decision to someone less conflicted"

Took him about 4 minutes to say that
DCC boys responding very concisely

AudreyHepburn

bumper234 wrote: »

Oh sweet.......


You keep using the word compromise.

compromise was reached......Garth wanted 5, DCC offered 3.....That's the compromise........Garth didn't want 3 so he...he.....HE cancelled all 5. Why do Brooks fans think that the word compromise means that they get what they want no matter what?

I don't think that in any way.

I do think he should have done the three, of course he should.

I'm just saying there is a lot a different areas where blame could laid here.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Even Keegan and Keegans side accepting the economic benefit/loss to Dublin.

Has no one on the thread let them know that everyone is coming anyway, and the money will be spent anyway?

Peppa Pig

muddypaws wrote: »

I didn't have any knowledge of Owen Keegan before this 'debacle', but watching this now, he actually seems to be a very rational, intelligent man, the committee on the other hand ........

And I can see Mick Wallace the self confessed VAT fraud waiting for his go

NORTH1

nm wrote: »

This is just getting ridiculous now

Why is this th thought ridiculous?

The was 30 plus million taken in, the interest on this figure most be substantial. What happens to this figure?

Hardly a ridiculous question.

Happyman42

Matinee bull**** blown out of the water...Aiken proposed it not DCC

nxbyveromdwjpg

NORTH1 wrote: »

Why is this th thought ridiculous?

The was 30 plus million taken in, the interest on this figure most be substantial. What happens to this figure?

Hardly a ridiculous question.

They keep it. Is it a serious suggestion that TM refund the interest on €6.50 to each ticket holder?

I'm not a fan of TM but stay in the real world here.

muddypaws

I can't watch anymore of this, it really is just boards on TV. That Clare TD is a troll, he asks a question, gets an answer, not the one he wants, so refuses to hear it.

BenEadir

Bob Z wrote: »

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?

The promoter (Aiken) takes these risks. Aiken went to Brooks and contracted for him to do 5 concerts. Maybe it was 3 initially and Brooks agreed to build a show based on 3 nights but Aiken overreached and then contracted with Brooks for 5 concerts so Brooks built a show based on the economics of 5 shows. Giving him 3 weeks notice to then scale it back to a 3 show contract isn't viable. Brooks is right to not allow himself be messed around. He is/was available to perform his end of the contract. Aiken dropped the ball. DCC made their decision and came under pressure to retract or amend it and they have ended up looking a bit stupid for trying to be accommodating, they should have just stuck to their guns but as the old saying goes, "no good deed goes unpunished"!!!

Ben

Peppa Pig

Guy from Clare telling Keegan he should have known it would be controversial given the association with the area
Keegan - I lived in Drumcondra for 3 years myself
Guy making the decision now lives in Skerries


Now if Keegan should foresee the controversy why should Aiken not see it

Mary Lou - can you confirm that your relatives made a submission
They didn't
Have they ever made a submission
No

Mary Lou says it is insane that tickets are sold subject to licence
DCC confirm it is common practise

Mary Lou now starts her rant

nxbyveromdwjpg

Mary Lou going mad, says all residents views should have been taken into account not just the 300 or whatever

nxbyveromdwjpg

muddypaws wrote: »

it really is just boards on TV..

This is true. Great craic.

Peppa Pig

BenThere wrote: »

so Brooks built a show based on the economics of 5 shows. Giving him 3 weeks notice to then scale it back to a 3 show contract isn't viable.

For the second time GB himself said that it was so not to disappoint the 160,000.
You have no evidence for this and repeating it does not make it true

Happyman42

There is a certain irony in GAA members impugning somebody for having a vested interest here.

NORTH1

nm wrote: »

They keep it. Is it a serious suggestion that TM refund the interest on €6.50 to each ticket holder?

I'm not a fan of TM but stay in the real world here.

They keep it, money for nothing. Who was sitting on the ticket sales? Who's in the real world now?

Peppa Pig

muddypaws wrote: »

I can't watch anymore of this, it really is just boards on TV. That Clare TD is a troll, he asks a question, gets an answer, not the one he wants, so refuses to hear it.

I think he has left

Not that interested

muddypaws

Peppa Pig wrote: »

I think he has left

Not that interested

I know, I saw that. He said what he wanted, got himself on TV, and the news, and now he's gone off.

First Up

Reading the comments above makes me wonder are we watching the same meeting.