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

Effects

Rang two of my mates who also had tickets and they got vouchers in this mornings mail too!!

Bogdanistan

Effects wrote: »

Just checked my bank account and I've been refunded for all the tickets I bought. My wife also rang and told me when she opened the mail this morning there was a €100 voucher from ticketmaster there. Some sort of apology for the Garth Brooks ticket fiasco. Anyone else get this?

Effects wrote: »

Rang two of my mates who also had tickets and they got vouchers in this mornings mail too!!

Hmmm, how much are the vouchers for, sounds like a voucher in order to not hold someone liable. Some one must be very legally worried to be giving away 400,000 large vouchers

Bogdanistan

stefan idiot jones wrote: »

You will need a silver bullet to kill this thread.

The repeated announcements of not being interested have help keep it going strong.

Peppa Pig

end of the road wrote: »

no doesn't seem to be availible if it even exists at all, even if it did exist no doubt its set up in such a way that more then 3 concerts could happen

Peter McKenna disagrees with you.

The Bord Pleanala conditions from 1992 grant 3 licences automatically for non sporting events. After that a PEL must be applied for.

The GAA then agreed to no more than 3 per year in 2009 and it is this agreement that the GAA and Aiken are blindly ignoring .

A heated meeting between the GAA, Aiken Promotions and Croke Park residents took place last night when it emerged that a written agreement in 2009, where no more than three concerts a year were to be held at the national stadium, was to be ignored.

Stadium director Peter McKenna told the crowded room that "times move on".

This is why they are trying to justify ignoring the agreement "national importance" "great cultural event" and Keegan is saying "unprecedented" for 5 in a row to be asked for when the 3 have already taken place.

I think this is why the minutes of this meeting are the only ones since 2010 not to appear on the GAA website.
The GAA told the Oireachtas committee yesterday, that the meeting in February was "positive"

I would imagine that the BP permission legally supersedes the 2009 agreement, but without seeing both it is impossible to say. But was Aiken and the GAA naive, stupid or arrogant to think that there would be no issue with 5 consecutive nights after 1D had already played 3 consecutive nights, 2 months earlier, after signing an agreement to limit concerts to 3.


Link 1
Link 2

Flem31

Effects wrote: »

Just checked my bank account and I've been refunded for all the tickets I bought. My wife also rang and told me when she opened the mail this morning there was a €100 voucher from ticketmaster there. Some sort of apology for the Garth Brooks ticket fiasco. Anyone else get this?

Are the vouchers restricted to future GB concerts ?

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Effects wrote: »

Rang two of my mates who also had tickets and they got vouchers in this mornings mail too!!

If for every two tickets bought, a €100 voucher is issued.. that's roughly a €20m outlay.

How is that feasible for them.

Reformed Character

Bogdanistan wrote: »

One directon had already played three concerts in May, everyone knew this, so why was this not brought up by anyone when the first GB gig was mentioned ?

It was, take a quick look at how long ago the original thread was started.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88877269&postcount=1

There has been a thread on Boards since 7/2/2014 about the residents reaction to the announcement of these concerts.

Bogdanistan

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Peter McKenna disagrees with you.

The Bord Pleanala conditions from 1992 grant 3 licences automatically for non sporting events. After that a PEL must be applied for.

The GAA then agreed to no more than 3 per year in 2009 and it is this agreement that the GAA and Aiken are blindly ignoring .

This is why they are trying to justify ignoring the agreement "national importance" "great cultural event" and Keegan is saying "unprecedented" for 5 in a row to be asked for when the 3 have already taken place.

I think this is why the minutes of this meeting are the only ones since 2010 not to appear on the GAA website.
The GAA told the Oireachtas committee yesterday, that the meeting in February was "positive"

I would imagine that the BP permission legally supersedes the 2009 agreement, but without seeing both it is impossible to say. But was Aiken and the GAA naive, stupid or arrogant to think that there would be no issue with 5 consecutive nights after 1D had already played 3 consecutive nights, 2 months earlier, after signing an agreement to limit concerts to 3.

So if planning say its 3 max, why did DCC entertain 3 more and then two extra 'matinees' ?

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Bogdanistan wrote: »

So if planning say its 3 max, why did DCC entertain 3 more and then two extra 'matinees' ?

They were bored. How dare you imply that entertaining these ideas was anything else.

Withdraw!

Peppa Pig

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

If everyone that bought two tickets or more, gets €100 voucher.. that's roughly a €20m outlay.

Who cares - think of the benefits to the economy

€20M plus the €28M ticket money refund is just short of the €50M boost we could have had.

Mind you I agree with you about the €20M not being feasible.

bumper234

Daith wrote: »

It could probably be refused if the planning application wasn't up to snuff.

It does mean that residents couldn't object to the event on the basis that it was disruptive etc because they agreed to have 3.

Where have the residents agreed to 3?

muddypaws

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Who cares - think of the benefits to the economy

€20M plus the €28M ticket money refund is just short of the €50M boost we could have had.

Mind you I agree with you about the €20M not being feasible.

Peter did say yesterday that he and Gareth were going to be out of pocket by millions, maybe the pair of them are funding it.

Peppa Pig

Bogdanistan wrote: »

So if planning say its 3 max, why did DCC entertain 3 more and then two extra 'matinees' ?

The Bord Pleanala conditions from 1992 grant 3 licences automatically for non sporting events. After that a PEL must be applied for.

.

conorh91

Bogdanistan wrote: »

I really don't know how that works, it's like saying three buildings a year will be granted planning permission, but other buildings will have to make full planning applications.

It's much simpler than that. Three special events per year subject to health and safety, and each one doesn't need a description because all such events, be they concerts or matches, don't really need much elaboration on what goes on there. I don't see the big fuss.

Peppa Pig wrote: »

The GAA then agreed to no more than 3 per year in 2009 and it is this agreement that the GAA and Aiken are blindly ignoring .

This is why they are trying to justify ignoring the agreement "national importance" "great cultural event" and Keegan is saying "unprecedented" for 5 in a row to be asked for when the 3 have already taken place.

Do you have a link to the 2009 agreement?

I've yet to hear of a media outlet or journalist who has seen it.

And that raises its own questions.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Mind you I agree with you about the €20M not being feasible.

It's taken awhile but we at least we finally found something we can agree on

Bogdanistan

conorh91 wrote: »

It's much simpler than that. Three special events per year subject to health and safety, and each one doesn't need a description because all such events, be they concerts or matches, don't really need much elaboration on what goes on there. I don't see the big fuss.

No I don't see the "stadium used for stadium events shocker" either

Peppa Pig

muddypaws wrote: »

Peter did say yesterday that he and Gareth were going to be out of pocket by millions, maybe the pair of them are funding it.

No -he said he was out about 1 million because of all the deposits he had paid. GB was out millions because of the television company he had hired.

bumper234

end of the road wrote: »

no lesson to be learned, they did nothing wrong

Except for take it for granted that they could force through 5 concerts on the local residents. Hopefully they keep making these mistakes, it will make for a few peaceful years.

Mrs Garth Brooks

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Peter McKenna disagrees with you.

The Bord Pleanala conditions from 1992 grant 3 licences automatically for non sporting events. After that a PEL must be applied for.

The GAA then agreed to no more than 3 per year in 2009 and it is this agreement that the GAA and Aiken are blindly ignoring .

Aiken didn't have any agreement

muddypaws

Peppa Pig wrote: »

No -he said he was out about 1 million because of all the deposits he had paid. GB was out millions because of the television company he had hired.

Please don't destroy all of my dreams, let me believe that they are doing this for the love of the fans.

bumper234

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

I've been calling the guy an idiot all along.



Ha.

GAA / Aiken were called 'scumbags' on the thread and obviously Garth Brooks was forever being called 'Girth', 'fat' etc. Then add to that the fact that all were accused of just making decisions to fill their pockets, Garth going a little further than the others in that he took money from the sick and dying. Yeah, your side of the debate have never resorted to personal attacks on those involved at all like.

I don't speak for "my side". What others do is up to them, just pointing out your personal attacks is all.

Peppa Pig

conorh91 wrote: »

Do you have a link to the 2009 agreement?

I've yet to hear of a media outlet or journalist who has seen it.

And that raises its own questions.

No - it's not posted publicily.

I gave 2 links to where Peter McKenna agreed to its existence.
The GAA won't even publish the minutes of that meeting

Peppa Pig

HardLuckWoman wrote: »

Aiken didn't have any agreement

Ah come on :rolleyes:
He is ignoring an agreement that the stadium owners, where he is putting on his concerts, have with the local community.

miss no stars

No sign of a refund here yet, or a voucher of any discription.

Dan_Solo

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Sussshhhhh, you're not supposed to say that.

You're also not supposed to say that bringing money into it is exactly what the pro-GB crowd are claiming is a conflict of interest which they're accusing Keegan of...

Mrs Garth Brooks

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Ah come on :rolleyes:
He is ignoring an agreement that the stadium owners, where he is putting on his concerts, have with the local community.

DCC solicitors gave advice to Owen Keegan and said they didnt have to take whatever 2009 agreement into consideration.

Its been reported. Do a search. Im not it digging out for you.

Dan_Solo

Bogdanistan wrote: »

So if planning say its 3 max, why did DCC entertain 3 more and then two extra 'matinees' ?

They said they'd consider it. They did. They went with 3 and GB went with 0.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

bumper234 wrote: »

I don't speak for "my side". What others do is up to them, just pointing out your personal attacks is all.

If you aren't speaking from the position of taking a side, then how come you take issue with me calling Owen Keegan an idiot, but not with Garth being called Fat Girth? Or with Aiken being called a scumbag? Funny how you're pointing out my 'personal attacks' on the DCC but yet somehow don't feel as compelled to point out other users 'personally attacks' on Garth Brooks or Peter Aiken. And yet you have the gall to say you're not speaking for a "side"? Yeah, of course you're not.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Ah come on :rolleyes:
He is ignoring an agreement that the stadium owners, where he is putting on his concerts, have with the local community.

In fairness that was down to the GAA to sort that out, not Aikens.

conorh91

Peppa Pig wrote: »

No - it's not posted publicily.

I gave 2 links to where Peter McKenna agreed to its existence.
The GAA won't even publish the minutes of that meeting

I don't deny that something exists, but it's the most curious thing that this document purports to clarify everything, and yet it seems this document has not been given to the media or otherwise made generally available.

Like I said it's difficult to see the sense in this. I am totally disinterested in the Garth Brooks fiasco but am really skeptical about this agreement, and I'd say many people are.