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

rubadub

HardLuckWoman wrote: »

What 3 gig limitation ?

Jaysus, you're nearly as bad as Aiken, you have made 100's of posts in these threads and are claiming not to have heard about the "3 gig" issue yet?

This was the limit after which you could expect strong opposition from the residents.

They were attempting to have 9 events that year. The legality of having more than 3 is not what I am talking about, its a moot point. Both Aiken and Garth were giving the impression that they were surprised at the opposition/complaints. I would have been utterly amazed if there were no complaints, the limit at which to expect complaints was VERY well known. I posted several links before about all the hassle U2 faced, and these were going for 5 more events in the year than them.

There is probably no legal setting for the amount of gigs in Slane, the most before were 2 and had to get special intervention from the Taoiseach for this to happen. If Aiken tries to put on 7 nights in a row in Slane I have my suspicions that the residents might also complain.

Cienciano

HardLuckWoman wrote: »

The sad part of that currin_02, thats bus companies up and down the country.

Well, the bus companies could be doing 4 gigs, but Brooks refuses. But fair play to him, sticking to his principles :pac:

nxbyveromdwjpg

bumper234 wrote: »

Lol you really have no clue. You do realise that Temple bar pubs that consistently rip off tourists are all owned by a select few people right?

Of course I do. What's it got to do with this concert ruling or this thread? Nothing

bumper234

nm wrote: »

Of course I do. What's it got to do with this concert ruling or this thread? Nothing

Am pointing out to the whingers who are stating that pubs will lose all that money that a fair chunk of it would be going into the pockets of multimillionaires. Better that money stays in their towns and villages and keep their local pubs open.

JRant

currins_02 wrote: »

The prices in TB are scandalous at all times. When driving tourists or groups in the city I advise them to steer clear and direct them to the non-ripoff hostelries.

On the 3 gig limit, has it not been played out here to death and on plenty other forums that while an "agreement" existed between residents and GAA/CP that is not legally enforceable in any sense, so as such there is no limit. There are 3 events allowed without any need for additional licence under the incumbant planning and any over that needed licensed. As such Brooks/Aiken/GAA were perfectly entitled to apply for and allude to having the shows. No one on the DCC, promoter or venue sides dispute that. I'm the first to say 5 was probably too much but the process wasn't fit for such a large event in the sense of I don't believe it should have allowed a partial pass.

If, subject to any independent review or litigation, Aiken/GAA are found to have been truthful regarding the level of "support" they were getting from DCC etc then they are right to feel aggrieved. If it is found that DCC were wholly truthful and professional then f**k Aiken/GAA. I am trying to keep an open mind personally but have been open to admit as time goes on I am doubting how professionally DCC handled the process. No contact, to vague calls to current stand of calls with "support" but no assurance. Shouting about potential conflicts of interest re committee members when the biggest POTENTIAL conflict of interest was sitting at their table, in light of an inevitable s**tstorm I feel Keogan, even at a late stage, should have stepped back to protect DCC and the process from those accusations. No notes or minutes of ANY meeting produced at first hearing. For me the professional standpoint would have been minuted meetings throughout and a completely neutral standpoint. If there is no change in the process I do feel those lessons have probably been learned. On the other hand Keegan was only appointed weeks prior to the kick off of those so maybe there was initial naivety.

I all of that light I can't see any reason why they weren't perfectly entitled to apply for the gigs with associated risk as there, in any legal sense, does not seem to have been any "limit". I don't think, in terms of risk, they would ever have predicted "we'll get some of this", once the train was in motion I reckon they could have/should have dealt with an all or nothing planning decision, but that's an opinion of my own, grounded in nothing but my own analysis of the info to hand.

Do we really need another independent review to go along with the Oureachtas review, not to mention 2 documentaries already.

It's beyond a joke at this stage. We have a housing crisis happening in Dublin and people seriously want to waste more of the city managers time with this guff.

Happyman42

nm wrote: »

Of course I do. What's it got to do with this concert ruling or this thread? Nothing

There would have been a mass exodus out of the CP area to the pubs and clubs of Temple Bar thanks to the work of vintners and Failte Ireland who never (that I have seen) warn tourists (you know those people whose welfare everybody was oh so concerned about earlier) about.
Hotels where also at it.

JRant

All you GB lovers out there, never fear, your man can expect a huge windfall in the next couple of weeks.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2014/07/21/garth-brooks-digital-sales-could-be-huge/12948879/

Seems he had more pressing matters to concern himself with this week than a few silly concerts. Wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing was a ruse to drum up free publicity for his digital launch.

nxbyveromdwjpg

This gets more and more bizarre in the justification of costing the economy money. Now it's some sort of class-war or something is it? Temple Bar is the new target due to the pubs successful owners and high prices, although they have nothing to do with the concerts whatsoever and probably attract money into the country on balance.

Do you have specific pubs in mind or is it the whole postcode you want to take down?

Has Brian Duff been notified?

currins_02

JRant wrote: »

Do we really need another independent review to go along with the Oureachtas review, not to mention 2 documentaries already.

It's beyond a joke at this stage. We have a housing crisis happening in Dublin and people seriously want to waste more of the city managers time with this guff.

100% with you on that. But without anyone putting themselves on the line interms of a minister or such the reality is it has been widely published that TD's far & wide have called for an independent review, Keegan has asked for one, the chair of the committee hinted at one ("not for us to decide..."). So I think, whether any of us like it, it is probably enevitable. It is, on the other hand, an industry worth 100's of millions and GB is a sideshow in the whole thing. The damage done to the reputation of Ireland in terms of the large event industry needs to be offset by some kind of action. Many big acts will now be nervous about committing to Ireland (even MCD, Aiken's nemesis has gone on record with this), the partial approval presents issues for the traditional Irish festivals, if we don't have the big acts, we don't get the revenue, the tax take on such events could sort out the Dublin homeless problem in one go (we all know that's not how it's spent but it was an analogy used, I think on Primetime, to highlight the value of such events to the exchequer), we have the affect on perihperal industries such as mine.

That is not to endorse trampling on the neighbours, abuse of process or such. To me, it wouldn't matter if it was a U2, Sawdoctors, Aslan (or Madonna, Green day, Pink Jean Michael Jarre, Mickey Bubbles... for that matter) gig that kicked this off, that's a side show, it's the affect on the industry that interests/worries me.

Promoters/Venues are not all angels, but nor are the officials they are dealing with being perceived to act "professionally" in my mind.

Given the money involved, not on this one event, but on the event industry as a whole on an annual basis, I would expect some kind of review will happen. I don't necessarily personally believe it will be of value or the best/easiest approach but that's still how our powers that be seem to love doing things.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

JRant wrote: »

Do we really need another independent review to go along with the Oureachtas review, not to mention 2 documentaries already.

LOL.

The aim of the Oireachtas review was to establish the chain of events, nothing more. John O'Mahony, chairperson of the Oireachtas hearing has called for an Independent review since and stated the following during his closing statements:

"This whole episode has been an unholy mess. It's also clear from the evidence that we have heard over the last week that there is a major conflict between the evidence of the Dublin City manager Owen Keegan and GAA, especially Peter McKenna. Who is right or wrong is not the function of this this committee to decide and it may have to be decided at another forum".

Happyman42

JRant wrote: »

All you GB lovers out there, never fear, your man can expect a huge windfall in the next couple of weeks.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2014/07/21/garth-brooks-digital-sales-could-be-huge/12948879/

Seems he had more pressing matters to concern himself with this week than a few silly concerts. Wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing was a ruse to drum up free publicity for his digital launch.

Good to see he has stopped depriving his fans of digital downloads even if he is still trying to milk it for every cent he can make.

bumper234

nm wrote: »

This gets more and more bizarre in the justification of costing the economy money. Now it's some sort of class-war or something is it? Temple Bar is the new target due to the pubs successful owners and high prices, although they have nothing to do with the concerts whatsoever and probably attract money into the country on balance.

Do you have specific pubs in mind or is it the whole postcode you want to take down?

Has Brian Duff been notified?

You don't find it ironic that Pro concert side have been lamenting about how the poor publicans will lose all this money when a very large % of it will go into the pockets of already multi millionaires? I don't begrudge them their money and i am on first name terms with most of the bar owners in TB. What is being pointed out is that the money would be better off staying in the small towns and villages country wide where there are bars closing every week.

Happyman42

nm wrote: »

This gets more and more bizarre in the justification of costing the economy money. Now it's some sort of class-war or something is it? Temple Bar is the new target due to the pubs successful owners and high prices, although they have nothing to do with the concerts whatsoever and probably attract money into the country on balance.

Do you have specific pubs in mind or is it the whole postcode you want to take down?

Has Brian Duff been notified?

400,000 people where only going to socialise in one area of Dublin?

nxbyveromdwjpg

Happyman42 wrote: »

400,000 people where only going to socialise in one area of Dublin?

Well you're saying they were, not me.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Happyman42 wrote: »

It is up to the professionals to evaluate the legitimacy of objections...doesn't matter where they come from or what motivates them. You can't be asking planners to second guess or run investigations every time an objection comes in.

What?

After seeing that certain people are willing to fraudulently submit objections, you claim that the council can never be asked to confirm their legitimacy? Are you serious?If there is ANYTHING that this debacle has taught us (or should have) it is that objections need to be verified. If that means giving them more powers or insisting PPS numbers are included, so be it.

That very point was put to Keegan at the hearing and all he could do was 'attempt' to resort to his usually tactic of strawmanning by suggesting people were making points which they were not. He didn't get away with it here though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OsVBLsrcoI

Happyman42

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

What?

After seeing that certain people are willing to fraudulently submit objections, you claim that the council can never be asked to confirm their legitimacy? Are you serious?If there is ANYTHING that this debacle has taught us (or should have) it is that objections need to be verified. If that means giving them more powers or insisting PPS numbers are included, so be it.

That very point was put to Keegan at the hearing and all he could do was 'attempt' to resort to his usually tactic of strawmanning by suggesting people were making points which they were not. He didn't get away with it here though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OsVBLsrcoI

PPS numbers can be falsified too.

The answer back system is the most effective and less costly way of doing it and there is no doubt that over 50% of the objections where real in this case.

Allow professionals to do their jobs with all the checks and balances in place and there is no problem.
The 'forged objections' only helped Aiken/Croke Park here curiously enough as it was they who attempted to use them to pressurise for a review of the original decision, which would have been wholly wrong.

Happyman42

nm wrote: »

Well you're saying they were, not me.

400,000 people would spread all over the city.

currins_02

Happyman42 wrote: »

Good to see he has stopped depriving his fans of digital downloads even if he is still trying to milk it for every cent he can make.

In the interest of fairness a couple of points.

Firstly, I doubt many of Brooks fans have grasped digital downloads yet.... LOL

Secondly, it is a matter of record for at least 5 years if not a decade that Brooks wouldn't allow digital sales for one reason - he believes his albums should only be sold as a piece and not as individual tracks. In terms of revenue track sales are much more lucrative but it's another of his "principles". The reason he has to go it alone, and it was alluded to at the conference, is he wants to retain the right to only sell the Albums as an album as opposed to putting x number of tracks on sale. Buy an album on itunes and it's cheaper than buying the tracks separately, but the vast majority of people don't buy albums in digital format just the tracks they want/like. Yes he wanted price control no doubt too but market forces will control that. The reality is the "principles" he has have cut his nose of to spite his face in terms of those digital sales for years. I believe but haven't checked his Greatest Hits topped the Irish charts again in the last 6 or 8 weeks, years after it's release and was the first chart topper in a number of years on physical sales only.

A quick Google of "Garth Brooks No digital Music" got just some of the following (all from first page, google will give preference to newer articles but feel free to go through tha pages)

http://tasteofcountry.com/garth-brooks-itunes/
http://www.artistdirect.com/entertainment-news/article/garth-brooks-explains-why-he-won-t-sell-his-music-on-itunes/10857220
http://www.cmt.com/news/cmt-offstage/1723019/garth-brooks-gets-a-lecture-from-blake-shelton.jhtml


It's actually slightly familiar reading many of articles with the many quotes of "For me it's full albums or not at all" (paraphrased). LOL. I think he's scheduled to join Spotify in 2019 !!!!!

As I say before he is a sideshow in all this as far as I am concerned but I do think we're all getting tied up at this stage in attacking one or all of Brooks, Aiken, GAA or Keegan. Often, unjustified and can be clarified with quick checks on Google.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Happyman42 wrote: »

400,000 people would spread all over the city.

I am fully aware of that. You seem to be arguing with yourself now -

Happyman42 wrote: »

There would have been a mass exodus out of the CP area to the pubs and clubs of Temple Bar

bumper234

LOL, Check out the pictures as well

Garth Brooks' cowboy hats for €1 in Dunnes

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057255055

nxbyveromdwjpg

bumper234 wrote: »

LOL, Check out the pictures as well

Garth Brooks' cowboy hats for €1 in Dunnes

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057255055

Dunnes Stores.. another apparent enemy of the people if this thread is anything to go by, served and will take a massive loss. Good stuff eh? :rolleyes:

Power to the people.

bumper234

nm wrote: »

Dunnes Stores.. another apparent enemy of the people if this thread is anything to go by, served and will take a massive loss. Good stuff eh? :rolleyes:

Power to the people.

Posts are going beyond idiotic and into the realms of paranoid :cool:

muddypaws

bumper234 wrote: »

LOL, Check out the pictures as well

Garth Brooks' cowboy hats for €1 in Dunnes

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057255055

Those t-shirts would probably actually be worth buying and keeping, and end up being more valuable in the long run than if the concerts had gone ahead. I can't see any logo on the hats, again, they may be worth buying in bulk for €1 if you can take the logo off (i.e., if its a ribbon), blank ones would probably cost more than that wholesale.

nxbyveromdwjpg

muddypaws wrote: »

Those t-shirts would probably actually be worth buying and keeping, and end up being more valuable in the long run than if the concerts had gone ahead. I can't see any logo on the hats, again, they may be worth buying in bulk for €1 if you can take the logo off (i.e., if its a ribbon), blank ones would probably cost more than that wholesale.

I literally just said that in the bargain alerts thread, possibly future collectibles. :pac:

nxbyveromdwjpg

bumper234 wrote: »

Posts are going beyond idiotic and into the realms of paranoid :cool:

You're celebrating and rejoicing at the businesses losing money, pubs, stores, etc.

Garth Brooks or no, it's fairly twisted in fairness.

Nothing paranoid about it.

bumper234

nm wrote: »

You're celebrating and rejoicing at the businesses losing money, pubs, stores, etc.

Garth Brooks or no, it's fairly twisted in fairness.

Nothing paranoid about it.

Where have I "Celebrated and rejoiced" at stores and pubs losing money?

rubadub

muddypaws wrote: »

Those t-shirts would probably actually be worth buying and keeping, and end up being more valuable in the long run than if the concerts had gone ahead.

It'd be like those dublin millenium milkbottles you still see in some "auld lad" pubs, bit of a talking point amongst other tat.

Or they would work as a joke boobie prize.

but1er

Lads anyone still waiting on a refund?? Checked my bank and nothing put my receipt has a 0?? Any ideA

Happyman42

nm wrote: »

Dunnes Stores.. another apparent enemy of the people if this thread is anything to go by, served and will take a massive loss. Good stuff eh? :rolleyes:

Power to the people.

This guy lost a fortune on hats too I believe, but he saw the funny side, dusted himself off and turned disaster into triumph. Most businesses will do that...including Dunnes.

http://www.thescore.ie/ulster-final-clones-1580923-Jul2014/

Reformed Character

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

What?

After seeing that certain people are willing to fraudulently submit objections, you claim that the council can never be asked to confirm their legitimacy? Are you serious?If there is ANYTHING that this debacle has taught us (or should have) it is that objections need to be verified. If that means giving them more powers or insisting PPS numbers are included, so be it.

That very point was put to Keegan at the hearing and all he could do was 'attempt' to resort to his usually tactic of strawmanning by suggesting people were making points which they were not. He didn't get away with it here though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OsVBLsrcoI

More rubbish. Mr Keegan quite clearly stated that DCC has no legal power to compel anyone to verify an objection.
All they can do is acknowledge receipt of the objection and if the person then contacts them and says I didn't file an objection they act on that.
It is amazing that you continue to attempt to defame Mr Keegan because he insists on acting inside the law.