Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…220221223225226…265

Comments

  • Options
    #6662
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    You ant MY opinion?
    Should all five concerts have gone through even though there were HUNDREDS of objections? YES
    Should it have been forced on the residents of the area and indeed the residents of a large part of Dublin who would be affected by these concerts? YES

    Should all planning laws and concerns been thrown out of the window to facilitate these concerts just because it was big money? Absolutely friggin YES

    Cronyism at its finest, **** the people just show us the money.

    Thank **** Keegan had the balls to stand up to the people who think like you.


  • Options
    #6663
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Adamocovic wrote: »
    The potential income was very good and it is a great pity that no compromise could have been agreed on. From what I hear Brooks refused to do 3 gigs in Croke Park and 2 elsewhere because his agent said it was about making history. He's entitled to his opinion I suppose.

    What I don't understand is why you would advertise for the concert and sell tickets before the license was obtained. Does anyone know the reason? I might be wrong but was it not the case that Aiken Promotions applied for the license for 5 concerts and were led to believe the license would be granted so they went ahead to promote it and sell tickets.

    I'm no expert at concert organisation but if this is true surely it's common sense to wait until the license is approved before selling tickets?

    Aiken thought it was a foregone conclussion that licences would be granted. He figured there would be no way they would refuse him.as this was too big to cancel. He was proven wrong and is now out of pocket. Hopefully lessons were learned.


  • Options
    #6664
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    You ant MY opinion?
    Should all five concerts have gone through even though there were HUNDREDS of objections? YES
    Should it have been forced on the residents of the area and indeed the residents of a large part of Dublin who would be affected by these concerts? YES

    Should all planning laws and concerns been thrown out of the window to facilitate these concerts just because it was big money? Absolutely friggin YES
    Would that have led to High Court injunction overturning DCC decision, of course it would as they would have failed to follow the legal process.


  • Options
    #6665
    loh_oro
    Registered Users Posts: 104 ✭✭loh_oro


    There are more important things going on in the world then garth f**king brooks. Let the thread die for christ sake


  • Options
    #6666
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Cronyism at its finest, **** the people just show us the money.

    Thank **** Keegan had the balls to stand up to the people who think like you.

    What the bleedin hell are you talking about now? Cronyism?

    Keegan over stepped his mandate and did not follow judicious prudence and we will see what happens to him soon enough. He made these decisions flippantly and on his own at a whim.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6667
    Adamocovic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,292 ✭✭✭Adamocovic


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Aiken thought it was a foregone conclussion that licences would be granted. He figured there would be no way they would refuse him.as this was too big to cancel. He was proven wrong and is now out of pocket. Hopefully lessons were learned.

    Hopefully, a friend of mine told me it's common practice for promoters to sell tickets before obtaining licenses.

    Maybe I'm too safe and boring, but I wouldn't sell tickets to anything before I knew it was 100% going ahead :P


  • Options
    #6668
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    First Up wrote: »
    I have repeatedly said that Garth Brooks had no interest for me but the potential business for the city does. That should have been the imrperative for Keegan and Co but they preferred to cover their assesfollow the law and the regulations as is their statutory duty, and fair play to them, about time!.

    FYP, in the name of factual accuracy!


  • Options
    #6669
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    What the bleedin hell are you talking about now? Cronyism?

    Keegan over stepped his mandate and did not follow judicious prudence and we will see what happens to him soon enough. He made these decisions flippantly and on his own at a whim.

    He followed the process and made his decision based on what was best for the people of Dublin. You may not want to believe that but i really don't care. Too many butthurt Garth fans looking for a scapegoat because their idol refused to compromise. As for "seeing what happens to him soon" I guess that will be a different debate in a different thread.


  • Options
    #6670
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    What the bleedin hell are you talking about now? Cronyism?

    Keegan over stepped his mandate and did not follow judicious prudence and we will see what happens to him soon enough. He made these decisions flippantly and on his own at a whim.

    The smell of BS of that post is rank.
    DCC were legally correct which is why Aiken tried to get the GAA stooges on the culchie and weshtern committee to exert gombeen political pressure on Keegan not to oppose a Judicial Review, why? Because Aiken, The GAA, and the culchie and weshtern committee all have the legal advice that a legal challenge would fail, otherwise Aiken and the GAA would have launched one weeks ago.
    By the way is it jurisprudence you meant? If so you picked the wrong big word and clearly have no grasp of its meaning.
    If what you meant to say was that inter alia he was acting ultra vires, then you are clearly ignorant of the law. He was well inside his statutory powers.


  • Options
    #6671
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    bumper234 wrote: »
    He followed the process and made his decision based on what was best for the people of Dublin. You may not want to believe that but i really don't care. Too many butthurt Garth fans looking for a scapegoat because their idol refused to compromise. As for "seeing what happens to him soon" I guess that will be a different debate in a different thread.

    You should, to be honest. A decision is a decision, it should not have gone any further. Testimonies are now on record from all involved.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6672
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    You should, to be honest. A decision is a decision, it should not have gone any further. Testimonies are now on record from all involved.

    Yet they still tried to change that decision right up.to the 11th hour.


  • Options
    #6673
    Ace2007
    Registered Users Posts: 19,705 ✭✭✭✭Ace2007


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    You should, to be honest. A decision is a decision, it should not have gone any further. Testimonies are now on record from all involved.

    Are these testimonies that you speak of given under oath? are they crossed examined or is it just simple and question and answer forum, in which no one really cares about the answers?

    Or do we just assume that everyone is telling the truth


  • Options
    #6674
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Yet they still tried to change that decision right up.to the 11th hour.

    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.


  • Options
    #6675
    Ace2007
    Registered Users Posts: 19,705 ✭✭✭✭Ace2007


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.

    You mean selling 400,000 tickets to fans without having a licence is professional?


  • Options
    #6676
    secman
    Registered Users Posts: 6,297 ✭✭✭secman


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.

    Stay off the magic mushrooms .... ffs


  • Options
    #6677
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.

    Why was it wrong? Because you say so?

    How was it unprofessional?

    Enda was involved because he is the leader of the country and when you get a couple of hundred thousand whinging about something then you have to make a statement.

    How was Obama involved? I must have missed his statement on this....maybe you could link to the video?


  • Options
    #6678
    Lord Trollington
    Registered Users Posts: 4,412 ✭✭✭Lord Trollington


    Reformed Character wrote: »
    The smell of BS of that post is rank.
    DCC were legally correct which is why Aiken tried to get the GAA stooges on the culchie and weshtern committee to exert gombeen political pressure on Keegan not to oppose a Judicial Review, why? Because Aiken, The GAA, and the culchie and weshtern committee all have the legal advice that a legal challenge would fail, otherwise Aiken and the GAA would have launched one weeks ago.
    By the way is it jurisprudence you meant? If so you picked the wrong big word and clearly have no grasp of its meaning.
    If what you meant to say was that inter alia he was acting ultra vires, then you are clearly ignorant of the law. He was well inside his statutory powers.

    Aren't you a great lad.


  • Options
    #6679
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.

    Obama was not involved.

    Enda's involvement was minimal.

    IMO, the decision was correct and there is no legal justification for suggesting it was wrong.


  • Options
    #6680
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.

    Obama was not involved, unless you have a link to evidence that he was, and only a few posts ago you were claiming in made up legalistically incorrect gobbledygook that the DCC decision was in fact not legal, remember judisious prudence (whatever that is supposed to be!)
    Albeit you tried harder to use a big word this time :D


  • Options
    #6681
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    Lord Trollington wrote: »
    Aren't you a great lad.
    To be shure I am m'lord:)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6682
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Why was it wrong? Because you say so??

    You got it sunshine!

    [gif]https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/653871/314962.gif[/gif]


  • Options
    #6683
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Calina wrote: »
    Obama was not involved.

    Enda's involvement was minimal.

    IMO, the decision was correct and there is no legal justification for suggesting it was wrong.

    But they missed out on Garthy!!!!!

    I think butthurt will become the new thing in Ireland over the next few months, compensation will set in and there will be ads running 24/7

    "Did you miss oit on seeing Garth Brooks?

    Are you feeling severe butthurt?

    If so call the freephone number NOW!!!!

    One of our legal professionals is waiting to talk to you today.

    Sharon from Leitrim got €27,900 for her butthurt.....why should you miss out?

    Call today and maybe you could see Garthy play on his world tour with all of your compo!"


  • Options
    #6684
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Lord Trollington wrote: »
    Aren't you a great lad.
    I don't know, providing a free education here. Should het a medal or something really.


  • Options
    #6685
    secman
    Registered Users Posts: 6,297 ✭✭✭secman


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Why? Because it was wrong and administered in an unprofessional matter.
    Why was Enda and Obama involved? Because it was wrong, not because it was a correct decision, allbeit a legal one.

    Stay off the magic mushrooms .... ffs


  • Options
    #6686
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    I don't know, providing a free education here. Should het a medal or something really.
    :D:D:D:D:D:D :P


  • Options
    #6687
    Lord Trollington
    Registered Users Posts: 4,412 ✭✭✭Lord Trollington


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    I don't know, providing a free education here. Should het a medal or something really.

    Why is he wasting his intellectual capabilities in a thread full of six finger, banjo playing, GAA loving hicks.


  • Options
    #6688
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    Lord Trollington wrote: »
    Why is he wasting his intellectual capabilities in a thread full of six finger, banjo playing, GAA loving hicks.

    That be some com-plee-kated banjo playing with alla dem thur fingers:P


  • Options
    #6689
    Adamocovic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,292 ✭✭✭Adamocovic


    I really don't understand it, the Irish Examiner said on social media 55% blamed "Ireland" (whatever that means) for the gigs not going ahead and only 15% blamed Aiken Promotions/GAA.

    Have to put blame on Aiken Promotions, selling tickets before a license is granted...end of debate really.


  • Options
    #6690
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    Adamocovic wrote: »
    Have to put blame on Aiken Promotions, selling tickets before a license is granted...end of debate really.

    No it's not, we could get another two hundred pages showing how this is not the case and in fact this has been the practice for centuries, this is not the first concert to be refused a license, but the grounds are questionable.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6691
    Ace2007
    Registered Users Posts: 19,705 ✭✭✭✭Ace2007


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    No it's not, we could get another two hundred pages showing how this is not the case and in fact this has been the practice for centuries, this is not the first concert to be refused a license, but the grounds are questionable.

    Do you believe it is professional to sell 400,000 tickets to an event with no licence, knowing there is a possibility of it not being granted, and hence disappointing so many people who would it turn lose out because of other plans they have.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement