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

bumper234

First Up wrote: »

This post neatly encapsulates the type of adversarial attitude that bedevils much of Irish life and society. Better we all lose than the other guy wins.

Yet it was your beloved Garthy who threw that gauntlet down!

What was needed to break the impasse was some leadership and imagination but DCC is obviously not where we we'll find it.

It was not DCC remit to break the impasse it was up to Croke park to meet with and negotiate with the RA. They did meet and basically told the RA that any past agreements were not in play anymore hence the DCC recieving HUNDREDS of legitimate objections (something that has never happened before).

You can try and blame Keegan and the DCC all you like but it was the bullying attitude of Aiken/GAA that ensured only 3 concerts were licenced and then the childish pouting attitude of Brooks who ensured that none went ahead.

bumper234

First Up wrote: »

So traffic disruption for a bike race is OK, but not for a concert?

How much traffic in Dublin city on a Sunday afternoon compared to rush hour traffic in Dublin city on a Monday evening?

bumper234

conorh91 wrote: »

I'm inferring from the poster's words that the 6-month time frame is to "properly evaluate [applications] in the wider context" envisages a significantly longer waiting process than currently exists.

Nevertheless, whether 6 months or 9 months would be required before playing any gig, this idea is impractical for many smaller performers, and I think any rational person reading these suggestions must be rolling their eyes at that idea.

Smaller performers like who? Which "smaller performer" in your opinion would be selling out croke park?

First Up

JRant wrote: »

Failing to plan is planning to fail, as they say.

The whole thing stinks of amateurism by both CP and Aiken. Both kept harping on about not being told of any problems when the onus is on them to anticipate any problems, mitigate against them, and ensure that THEIR event goes ahead. Nobody owes either of these groups anything by way of holding their hands through the process.

It's kind of depressing to see people still missing the point. Of course nobody - DCC included - was under any obligation to help CP or Aiken. That's not what this is about. Any eejit can preside over a disaster. This needed someone prepared to put his head over the parapet and show some balls in the wider interests of the city. Instead we got Keegan and the culture he nurtures in DCC.

JRant

First Up wrote: »

Bad analogy. Keegan waved this one onto the rocks while he was the only one who could get to the rudder. The only "do no harm" he understands relates to covering his and DCC's ass.

Why shouldn't he cover his and DCC's ass? I do it all the time in work, logging phone calls, email trails, meeting minutes, all with the purpose of covering my and the organisations ass in case the proverbial hits the fan.

JRant

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

You shot yourself in the foot there





No interest in the answers? Ha. He barely got answers to the question he put and had to pull Keegan up on stating the obvious on two or three occasions. Trolling? He's the one who got Keegan to admit that he "broadly supported"; having five concerts despite it being "blindingly obvious" that they would cause over intensification.

He strawmanned Dooley on at least seven occasions. The main one, and most irritating one, was when Dooley asked him why he gave McKenna the impression *"without assurances"* that if he submitted an application for five concerts, and met expectations, that they could expect a positive outcome and Keegan irritatingly replied, and I quote:

Now, if the above is now dodging a question via strawman argument, I don't know what is. This reply can be seen at the 9m mark in the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDuybNev754

LMAO. Ticketmaster don't use their customer's ISP to determine where they are. They use their bloody addresses

Dooley had his fanboy hat firmly on during the whole process.

It was trolling 101, ask a question, ignore the answer, rinse and repeat.

That's interesting about the foreign ticket sales. Do you have a link for this?

bumper234

First Up wrote: »

Bad analogy. Keegan waved this one onto the rocks while he was the only one who could get to the rudder. The only "do no harm" he understands relates to covering his and DCC's ass.

And Aiken/Croke park were at the helm steering the ship.

bumper234

First Up wrote: »

It's kind of depressing to see people still missing the point. Of course nobody - DCC included - was under any obligation to help CP or Aiken. That's not what this is about. Any eejit can preside over a disaster. This needed someone prepared to put his head over the parapet and show some balls in the wider interests of the city. Instead we got Keegan and the culture he nurtures in DCC.

You mean someone weak enough to be bullied into letting all 5 concerts go ahead? The wider interests of the city were taken into consideration when Monday and Tuesday's concerts were cancelled due to the massive disruption they would have caused to the CITY.

JRant

bumper234 wrote: »

And Aiken/Croke park were at the helm steering the ship.

No, they were in their cabins asleep.

bumper234

JRant wrote: »

No, they were in their cabins asleep.

Drunk on power and expecting others to do their work for them.

conorh91

muddypaws wrote: »

I did look, I couldn't find anything at all that has happened previously to fit in with your scenario of a fairly well known act wanting to put on a festival in a field in a small rural Irish town for 5,000 (ish) people to use as an example.

It's a hypothetical point to demonstrate the absurdity of what is being proposed, but of course outdoor entertainment events with 5,000 people or more happen up and down the country throughout the Summer, and I gave Marlay Park gigs as an example and Johnny Marr will be playing at Leopardstown Racecourse later this year.

I simply think that some reasonably well-known singer or dance troupe or magician or pianist or other performer should be able to be booked 3 or 4 months in advance, as opposed to the 6 or 9 months suggested.

Even reasonably well known bands often won't know where in these islands they will be in 6 or 9 months.

I'm not sure why I'm even giving this attention because the Oireachtas obviously disagrees with you, having recently amended the application process from 16 weeks down to 10 weeks.

bumper234 wrote: »

Smaller performers like who? Which "smaller performer" in your opinion would be selling out croke park?

I'm not talking about Croke Park, although smaller performers have performed at Croke Park in the sense that they'd be less popular and would only manage to sell one night, like the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, as a fairly recent example.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

JRant wrote: »

Dooley had his fanboy hat firmly on during the whole process.

No he didn't. He asked logical questions based on the fact that DCC refused to licence five concerts in a row and publicly released a statement claiming they did this on the grounds that it would be unprecedented and an over intensification for the area. Both of these would have been blindingly obvious from the get-go and so it's rather bizarre then for DCC to "broadly support" them.

It was trolling 101, ask a question, ignore the answer, rinse and repeat.

The answers were not sufficient, that's why they were repeated.

For example, when asked if they made it clear to Croke Park that they needed to do more, he starts the sentence "We would have.." rather than "We did.." or "I did..". 'Would' is a word you would use when guessing, or to describe what you would do in the future or describing what you would do in general. It's not a word to be used use when asked if you have done something during quite a specific time frame. Yet more grounds for claiming him to be a liar.

That's interesting about the foreign ticket sales. Do you have a link for this?

Yes, it's:

http://www.commonbloodysense.com/

JRant

bumper234 wrote: »

Drunk on power and expecting others to do their work for them.

Was it Duffy or McKenna offer a sworn affidavit?

Still no sign of that either. I wonder what the hold up is.

bumper234

conorh91 wrote: »

It's a hypothetical point to demonstrate the absurdity of what is being proposed, but of course outdoor entertainment events with 5,000 people or more happen up and down the country throughout the Summer, and I gave Marlay Park gigs as an example and Johnny Marr will be playing at Leopardstown Racecourse later this year.

I simply think that some reasonably well-known singer or dance troupe or magician or pianist or other performer should be able to be booked 3 or 4 months in advance, as opposed to the 6 or 9 months suggested.

Even reasonably well known bands often won't know where in these islands they will be in 6 or 9 months.

I'm not sure why I'm even giving this attention because the Oireachtas obviously disagrees with you, having recently amended the application process from 16 weeks down to 10 weeks.


I'm not talking about Croke Park, although smaller performers have performed at Croke Park in the sense that they'd be less popular and would only manage to sell one night, like the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, as a fairly recent example.

You rate The Chilli Peppers as "small performers"?

conorh91

bumper234 wrote: »

You rate The Chilli Peppers as "small performers"?

smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller

bumper234

conorh91 wrote: »

smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller
smaller

Well since GB is reputed to be in the top 5 selling artists of all time then almost every performer is considered "smaller" in your world.

conorh91

bumper234 wrote: »

Well since GB is reputed to be in the top 5 selling artists of all time then almost every performer is considered "smaller" in your world.

Do you even have a point to make or are you engaging in pointless back-and-forth?

You asked me to name a smaller performer who could sell out Croke Park. You got your answer. I also said I wasn't speaking solely about Croke Park. I was speaking about things from the Rory Gallagher festival to Marlay Park gigs to racecourse gigs to a gig in a small town's sports fields.

There are many artists gigging in the UK and Ireland who simply cannot engage in contractual undertakings so many months in advance. I'm personally glad the Oireachtas has taken note of this by amending the legislation. Whether or not boards.ie users agree is irrelevant, thankfully.

JRant

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

No he didn't. He asked logical questions based on the fact that DCC refused to licence five concerts in a row and publicly released a statement claiming they did this on the grounds that it would be unprecedented and an over intensification for the area. Both of these would have been blindingly obvious from the get-go and so it's rather bizarre then for DCC to "broadly support" them.



The answers were not sufficient, that's why they were repeated.

For example, when asked if they made it clear to Croke Park that they needed to do more, he starts the sentence "We would have.." rather than "We did.." or "I did..". 'Would' is a word you would use when guessing, or to describe what you would do in the future or describing what you would do in general. It's not a word to be used use when asked if you have done something during quite a specific time frame. Yet more grounds for claiming him to be a liar.



Yes, it's:

http://www.commonbloodysense.com/

The only logic Dooley was involved in was logical fallacy. He just couldn't get it into his noggin that DCC never agreed to a fourth concert. They agreed to review a proposal for it. Fairly basic stuff that was just way over Dooley's comprehension levels and that happened time and again.

Your second point is pure guff and has no basis in reality.

As for the ticketmaster point. You basically just made it up. Presenting no link that states they use the physical addresses over IP addresses yet saying it's their blood addresses.

JRant

conorh91 wrote: »

Do you even have a point to make or are you engaging in pointless back-and-forth?

You asked me to name a smaller performer who could sell out Croke Park. You got your answer. I also said I wasn't speaking solely about Croke Park. I was speaking about things from the Rory Gallagher festival to Marlay Park gigs to racecourse gigs to a gig in a small town's sports fields.

There are many artists gigging in the UK and Ireland who simply cannot engage in contractual undertakings so many months in advance. I'm personally glad the Oireachtas has taken note of this by amending the legislation. Whether or not boards.ie users agree is irrelevant, thankfully.

If you think the process will be fixed because of this I suspect you will be sorely disappointed.

No doubt they'll try set up some sort of quango to oversee the process. Thereby adding more red tape to the process.

conorh91

JRant wrote: »

If you think the process will be fixed because of this I suspect you will be sorely disappointed.

I didn't say the process will be fixed because I don't think it needs any fixing in respect of the application timeline. Ten weeks, down from what used to be sixteen weeks, is fair and reasonable.

Six months is idiotic.

JRant wrote: »

They agreed to review a proposal for it

The implication was obvious, or why raise it in the first place? Keegan himself said he can be rightly criticized for the offer, and he said he regrets making the offer.

There are people here defending Owen Keegan in a way that even Owen Keegan himself is not doing.

muddypaws

conorh91 wrote: »

It's a hypothetical point to demonstrate the absurdity of what is being proposed, but of course outdoor entertainment events with 5,000 people or more happen up and down the country throughout the Summer, and I gave Marlay Park gigs as an example and Johnny Marr will be playing at Leopardstown Racecourse later this year.

I simply think that some reasonably well-known singer or dance troupe or magician or pianist or other performer should be able to be booked 3 or 4 months in advance, as opposed to the 6 or 9 months suggested.

Even reasonably well known bands often won't know where in these islands they will be in 6 or 9 months.

I'm not sure why I'm even giving this attention because the Oireachtas obviously disagrees with you, having recently amended the application process from 16 weeks down to 10 weeks.


I'm not talking about Croke Park, although smaller performers have performed at Croke Park in the sense that they'd be less popular and would only manage to sell one night, like the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, as a fairly recent example.

You've changed the parameters of your argument again. You initially said an artist wanted to put a festival on in a field themselves, now you're talking about artists being booked to appear in festivals, and which aren't actually built around a particular artist. The festival is going to happen, they then find artists that are available and that would like to play there. I can't find anywhere that says the Johnny Marr gig at Leopardstown is subject to licence, so I'm assuming the licences are all in place. Obviously a completely different scenario as its an evening of racing and a gig. The suggestion was made a long time ago on this thread that a sporting event was put on in CP on the Monday and Tuesday - ping pong was a good suggestion as it takes up so little space - and then Garth just comes on as half time entertainment that lasts a long time

I'm not sure how the committee could disagree with me, when I didn't say anything about 16 weeks I actually said that you didn't need to take 6 to 9 months, as, once the licence was granted, you could get the organising done.

I think, although I can't really speak for anyone else, but maybe the idea of the 6 months was so that if the licence wasn't granted, refunds etc could be sorted quickly, and everything wasn't being done last minute, like it is in this case.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

JRant wrote: »

The only logic Dooley was involved in was logical fallacy. He just couldn't get it into his noggin that DCC never agreed to a fourth concert. They agreed to review a proposal for it. Fairly basic stuff that was just way over Dooley's comprehension levels and that happened time and again.

Again incorrect.

Dooley said, and I quote:

"You were prepared to give four if Mr.Keogan acted.."

'Mr.Keogan' is the planner

Secondly, and most importantly, Keegan and Keogan work hand in hand and there is not a chance of him asking Brooks to guarantee to do a concert which he doesn't know in his heart that Keogan would approve of. You'd want to be extremely naive now to think otherwise.

As for the ticketmaster point. You basically just made it up. Presenting no link that states they use the physical addresses over IP addresses yet saying it's their blood addresses.

You're embarrassing yourself.

IPs are a webmaster issue. The management in ticketmaster might request that information from time to time where for example, a stolen credit card used to purchase tickets and they needed that information for the authorities, or there was a geographical limitation put on ticket sales for example, which sometimes happens with sporting events but otherwise, Ticketmaster would have no interest in know the IP address which their customers use. When they announce ticket sales in different locations, it is based on the billing address.

In any case.. even if you are correct and TM use IP address to determine customer location. That would just solidify my point, not negate it, because those people abroad using proxies, that you suggest are all Irish people, would just bump up my 315,000 to 400,000 and so would mean almost 9% of the population were going to attend. According to your proxy nonsense at least

conorh91

muddypaws wrote: »

You've changed the parameters of your argument again. You initially said an artist wanted to put a festival on in a field themselves, now you're talking about artists being booked to appear in festivals, and which aren't actually built around a particular artist.

I'm talking about both. The relevant provisions of the Planning and Development Act (and the associated Regulations) don't distinguish between music festivals and music gigs, so I refer to both.

The example of a band playing a gig in a small town is just that, an example.

I am simply saying that if a community-minded group get together in February and they decide they want to energize their town by holding musical and dancing performances at an event in the coming June, they shouldn't be subjected to the wild and capricious demands made by anonymous internet busybodies.

JRant

conorh91 wrote: »

I didn't say the process will be fixed because I don't think it needs any fixing in respect of the application timeline. Ten weeks, down from what used to be sixteen weeks, is fair and reasonable.

Six months is idiotic.


The implication was obvious, or why raise it in the first place? Keegan himself said he can be rightly criticized for the offer, and he said he regrets making the offer.

There are people here defending Owen Keegan in a way that even Owen Keegan himself is not doing.

So you think the process is fine as is then. No problem with that but I'd say the ticketing side needs addressing.

JRant

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Again incorrect.

Dooley said, and I quote:

'Mr.Keogan' is the planner

Secondly, and most importantly, Keegan and Keogan work hand in hand and there is not a chance of him asking Brooks to guarantee to do a concert which he doesn't know in his heart that Keogan would approve of. You'd want to be extremely naive now to think otherwise.

You're embarrassing yourself.

IPs are a webmaster issue. The management in ticketmaster might request that information from time to time where for example, a stolen credit card used to purchase tickets and they needed that information for the authorities, or there was a geographical limitation put on ticket sales for example, which sometimes happens with sporting events but otherwise, Ticketmaster would have no interest in know the IP address which their customers use. When they announce ticket sales in different locations, it is based on the billing address.

In any case.. even if you are correct and TM use IP address to determine customer location. That would just solidify my point, not negate it, because those people abroad using proxies, that you suggest are all Irish people, would just bump up my 315,000 to 400,000 and so would mean almost 9% of the population were going to attend. According to your proxy nonsense at least

Again, nothing but conjecture and your opinion dressed as fact.

Try re-read my numbers again will you. I suggested 150,000 individual people made up the 400,000 concert goers. Do the arithmetic yourself.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

JRant wrote: »

Again, nothing but conjecture and your opinion dressed as fact.

Well, at least I'm using direct quotes and not making stuff up, such as claiming the chairman said he maintained Keegan did "nothing wrong" or that Dooley doesn't understand that Keogan had to approve of a 4th night. Both of these claims by you.. very easily shown to be false.

Try re-read my numbers again will you. I suggested 150,000 individual people made up the 400,000 concert goers. Do the arithmetic yourself.

I understand what your assertion is.. what I'm saying is that it makes zero sense to say that only 150,000 people would have attended those five nights. It's farcical and you undermine all your opinions when you make such a ridiculous statement.

bumper234

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Well, at least I'm using direct quotes and not making stuff up, such as claiming the chairman said he maintained Keegan did "nothing wrong" or that Dooley doesn't understand that Keogan had to approve of a 4th night. Both of these claims by you.. very easily shown to be false.

I understand what your assertion is.. what I'm saying is that it makes zero sense to say that only 150,000 people would have attended those five nights. It's farcical and you undermine all your opinions when you make such a ridiculous statement.

But you can claim that 400,000 individuals or 7% of the population of Ireland would have attended and think it's ok to claim that:rolleyes:

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

bumper234 wrote: »

But you can claim that 400,000 individuals or 7% of the population of Ireland would have attended and think it's ok to claim that:rolleyes:

Firstly, I never claimed 400,000 Irish citizens were to attend.
330,000 was the official figure of tickets purchased in Ireland.
15,000 of which I am willing to accept would be repeat attendees.
315,000 is 7% of the population.
In any case, even if that was reduced greatly, to say 5% - that is still a hell of a lot of people and so it is quite understandable for it to have received the attention which it did (to bring us back to the original point, for anyone that had forgotten it ).

muddypaws

conorh91 wrote: »

I'm talking about both. The relevant provisions of the Planning and Development Act (and the associated Regulations) don't distinguish between music festivals and music gigs, so I refer to both.

The example of a band playing a gig in a small town is just that, an example.

I am simply saying that if a community-minded group get together in February and they decide they want to energize their town by holding musical and dancing performances at an event in the coming June, they shouldn't be subjected to the wild and capricious demands made by anonymous internet busybodies.

And nor would they be, they would subjected to the laws of the land and their local council.

Everytime I counter your argument and do it politely, you come back and change your argument, and do so with sarcasm or rudeness somewhere in the post. Internet busybody? :rolleyes:

bumper234

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Firstly, I never claimed 400,000 Irish citizens were to attend.
330,000 was the official figure of tickets purchased in Ireland.
15,000 of which I am willing to accept would be repeat attendees.
315,000 is 7% of the population.
In any case, even if that was reduced greatly, to say 5% - that is still a hell of a lot of people and so it is quite understandable for it to have received the attention which it did (to bring us back to the original point, for anyone that had forgotten it ).

Everyone i know who had tickets had tickets for multiple nights. You reckon only 15000 had tickets for multiple nights, i would.say it's more so 80% had tickets for multiple nights. I can't prove that no more than you can prove your 15% theory, I'm just going on what i have learned from talking to many GB fans in work and family.