Prendeville back on the airwaves. HOW??

urbanachiever1

I just got back from a few months abroad and accidentally tuned into Cuuurk's 96 FM to hear Neil Prendeville back on the radio! How did this happen? Who let this happen? And true to form within three minutes he had my blood boiling talking about tradesmen now working in the black market "...And I don't blame them for showing two fingers to the system that screwed them". He has to be the most ill-informed, ignorant and bigoted man on radio. Makes me want to leave the country again.

wandatowell

He hasnt been charged with any crime and 96fm need the rating that he pulls in.


Personally I think its shameful that he's back on but since I refuse to listen to the radio apart from a few non music stations it really doesnt bother me

trebormurf

Time to move on ... Nobody died

urbanachiever1

The masturbating in public episode doesn't bother me. It's having a bigot like him on the radio influencing the minds of his audience.

Show Time

Ahh shure it's not like he was taking Coke or that.

Daegerty

He tossed one off on a fooking plane. what gives?

at least he's alone in the studio he can pull the todger without anyone noticing.

Means Of Escape

It's all about ratings advertising and revenue and like it or not he generates huge revenue for the station
I think people don't like him because he says it as it is.

Show Time

Daegerty wrote: »

He tossed one off on a fooking plane. what gives?

at least he's alone in the studio he can pull the todger without anyone noticing.

No a journalist from a Cork paper claimed he did.

dave1982

he's lesson is learnt let him get back up ffs

pow wow

No-one died but it's hard to take him any way seriously these days, especially when he's riding his high horse about what some caller has done/had done to them. So I don't listen to him anymore - simples.

Sephiroth_dude

How did he get back on? he locked himself in the studio one day after PJ left and they haven't been able to get him out,so they left him there :pac:

sok2005

I'm delighted he's back. He has the most interesting morning show IMO.

He gives good radio!

fuerte1976

He's a gowl- can't stand him ... and that was b4 the hand shandy episode. In fact that don't bother me at all..:eek:

Dudess

Never liked him, but don't see why he should have been prevented from returning to the airwaves. However, I'm surprised he did - thought his own mortification would have stopped him. Is he still going on with his moralising sh1te though? Because I'd have thought he'd certainly tone that down.

I laughed the other day - heard him on the work canteen radio talking about "those awful dreams when you're naked in public". Hmmm... Nearly admired his neck to make himself a sitting target like that! :pac:

BUNK1982

Neil Prendeville has a loyal band of ass ignorant followers and he owns a stake in the radio station so he was always going get back on the airways.

Just cos no one died we should move on?!?

Maybe every sex offender should be pardoned as long as no one dies.....

Dudess

He's not a convicted sex offender and he got his manhood out in a semi-conscious state - it's not like he was intentionally flashing.

Show Time

BUNK1982 wrote: »

Neil Prendeville has a loyal band of ass ignorant followers and he owns a stake in the radio station so he was always going get back on the airways.

Just cos no one died we should move on?!?

Maybe every sex offender should be pardoned as long as no one dies.....

Neil is box office and tells it as it is. UTV are the main owners of 96FM and did sack Neil when the scandal broke first but to their credit took a chance on putting him back on air which has worked out for the best.

evilivor

Show Time wrote: »

No a journalist from a Cork paper claimed he did.

As did the cabin crew who also gave statements to the Gardai. He wasn't prosecuted because of a juristiction issue.

Show Time

evilivor wrote: »

As did the cabin crew who also gave statements to the Gardai. He wasn't prosecuted because of a juristiction issue.

In the eyes of the law he is a innocent man.

dave1982

Dudess wrote: »

I laughed the other day - heard him on the work canteen radio talking about "those awful dreams when you're naked in public". Hmmm... Nearly admired his neck to make himself a sitting target like that! :pac:

That was epic of all people to say it:D

BUNK1982

I could go on a diatrabe here but if the people of Cork are happy to listen to the bigoted and ill informed ramblings of alleged sex pest on his soap box then that is their right entirely.

I'm just disappointed is all.

Neil is very lucky to have a loyal following to give him a helping HAND

Show Time

Don't know what all the fuss is about. It's not like he is working for the national radio station and ingesting large amounts of Bolivian marching powder up his nose.

overmantle

He's not exactly on the National Airwaves - it's a local station with a limited number of followers. I've always considered him to be a rather dim individual who is consumed by his own importance. Whatever may or may not have happened on an airplane hasn't influenced me one way or the other. I didn't listen to him before and I don't intend listening to him now.
The one difficulty I have, however, is when I enter a local shop or business and his show is blaring. It's a bit like noisy neighbours imposing their dodgy taste in music on others who have no interest in that particular type of music. If they want to listen to it, let them off but don't expect others to be subjected to that trash.:cool:

Show Time

overmantle wrote: »

He's not exactly on the National Airwaves - it's a local station with a limited number of followers. I've always considered him to be a rather dim individual who is consumed by his own importance. Whatever may or may not have happened on an airplane hasn't influenced me one way or the other. I didn't listen to him before and I don't intend listening to him now.
The one difficulty I have, however, is when I enter a local shop or business and his show is blaring. It's a bit like noisy neighbours imposing their dodgy taste in music on others who have no interest in that particular type of music. If they want to listen to it, let them off but don't expect others to be subjected to that trash.:cool:

Neil has been pulling in great numbers for years and it is hardly "limited numbers" when most of Cork is tuned in to him in the mornings.

finbarrk

Suppose he was lucky with that juristriction thing.

scifi77

Show Time wrote: »

Neil has been pulling in great numbers for years and it is hardly "limited numbers" when most of Cork is tuned in to him in the mornings.

I admit I'm living in Dublin but I have to disagree. I spend quite a bit of time in Cork and have a number of contacts in Cork, everyone of whom seems to have no time for the man and give out about the kind of tactics he resorts to to try to pull in ratings. This was long before the controversy last year.

Since first reading this thread, I've been talking to a friend in Cork. He says that Prendeville appears to have a limited number of loyal followers but that the vast majority of people have little or no time for the man and don't listen to his show.

Any local station, is bound to have 'limited numbers', especially when everybody in that local area is clearly not listening to that one station. What about RTE Radio 1, 2FM, 103 FM, Red Fm, Newstalk, 4FM, to name but a few. You mean nobody in Cork is listening to any of them in the morning...? I really don't think that's likely.

scifi77

Sorry, How could I have forgotten Today FM? That is also a channel with a significant number of listeners, not to mention all the other local channels in Cork.

sok2005

It's a business not a charity, if he wasn't listened to and didn't pull in the numbers he simply would not have been re-employed. :rolleyes:

dave1982

sok2005 wrote: »

It's a business not a charity, if he wasn't listened to and didn't pull in the numbers he simply would not have been re-employed. :rolleyes:

Says it all really

scifi77

sok2005 wrote: »

It's a business not a charity, if he wasn't listened to and didn't pull in the numbers he simply would not have been re-employed. :rolleyes:

Am I right in saying that Prendeville has a stake in the Radio station? If he has, then I'm afraid it's not as simple as you suggest. I gather he also had a stake in another business (which shall remain nameless) but was asked not to appear there, as the public were turning away in their droves.

sok2005

scifi77 wrote: »

Am I right in saying that Prendeville has a stake in the Radio station? If he has, then I'm afraid it's not as simple as you suggest. I gather he also had a stake in another business (which shall remain nameless) but was asked not to appear there, as the public were turning away in their droves.

Can you back up your hearsay with any statements other than, "I was talking to someone who said" or "From what I gather"?

Gerriegirl

scifi77 wrote: »

Am I right in saying that Prendeville has a stake in the Radio station? If he has, then I'm afraid it's not as simple as you suggest. I gather he also had a stake in another business (which shall remain nameless) but was asked not to appear there, as the public were turning away in their droves.

Opinion is certainly divided but I agree with scifi. I know the businesses he or she is talking about and what he or she is saying is perfectly correct. I would imagine that as this is a public forum, people need to be mindful of quoting specifics, as I am.

On the subject of the man in question, I have always found him to be intensely annoying and just couldn't put myself through listening to him. Any body I have ever heard talking seems to say the same but that is not to say that he doesn't have his listeners. I think that the point that is being made is that a very large percentage of people do NOT listen to him but those who do, feel very strongly about him and would be inclined to be vocal about it. Let's be honest, he has a following but it IS 'limited'.

sok2005

Gerriegirl wrote: »

Opinion is certainly divided but I agree with scifi. I know the businesses he or she is talking about and what he or she is saying is perfectly correct. I would imagine that as this is a public forum, people need to be mindful of quoting specifics, as I am.

On the subject of the man in question, I have always found him to be intensely annoying and just couldn't put myself through listening to him. Any body I have ever heard talking seems to say the same but that is not to say that he doesn't have his listeners. I think that the point that is being made is that a very large percentage of people do NOT listen to him but those who do, feel very strongly about him and would be inclined to be vocal about it. Let's be honest, he has a following but it IS 'limited'.

This is a case of "The people I talk to say" once again. It just doesn't cut it. All Im asking for is the stats regarding the rise and fall of listeners since he came back. Not your buddies opinions! Regarding the restaurant, again its hearsay!

Gerriegirl

sok2005 wrote: »

This is a case of "The people I talk to say" once again. It just doesn't cut it. All Im asking for is the stats regarding the rise and fall of listeners since he came back. Not your buddies opinions! Regarding the restaurant, again its hearsay!

On the subject of stats and people who are actually listening to his show, do you have proof of the numbers of people involved or is it a case of radios being turned on with many not actually choosing to tune in? Inflated claims of the numbers of people actually listening can also be regarded as hearsay.

On the subject of the restaurant, seeing as you have mentioned it, that is very definitely NOT hearsay. There were several statements on the newspaper disassociating themselves with the man and clearly saying that his association with the restaurant had ceased. This was on the back of a host of cancellations.

He had been parading around the restaurant, going around to tables on the lead up to Christmas and a friend of mine (and her party) were so incensed that they were paying their hard earned money and having to be subjected to this circus. I also had a booking with a party there (which was made before we realised the man had any association with the place). I rang the restaurant and was assured that the man would be asked NOT to be there. It was abundantly clear that their greatest fear was that I was going to cancel the booking. As it happened, with that assurance, we went ahead with the booking but for what should have been a very busy night, it was clear that many others did not. So believe me, it is most definitely not not hearsay.

sok2005

Gerriegirl wrote: »

On the subject of stats and people who are actually listening to his show, do you have proof of the numbers of people involved or is it a case of radios being turned on with many not actually choosing to tune in? Inflated claims of the numbers of people actually listening can also be regarded as hearsay.

On the subject of the restaurant, seeing as you have mentioned it, that is very definitely NOT hearsay. There were several statements on the newspaper disassociating themselves with the man and clearly saying that his association with the restaurant had ceased. This was on the back of a host of cancellations.

He had been parading around the restaurant, going around to tables on the lead up to Christmas and a friend of mine (and her party) were so incensed that they were paying their hard earned money and having to be subjected to this circus. I also had a booking with a party there (which was made before we realised the man had any association with the place). I rang the restaurant and was assured that the man would be asked NOT to be there. It was abundantly clear that their greatest fear was that I was going to cancel the booking. As it happened, with that assurance, we went ahead with the booking but for what should have been a very busy night, it was clear that many others did not. So believe me, it is most definitely not not hearsay.

I haven't made any statements that need the backing of statistics so i'm unsure of what you are looking for there.

Again, just a story from you and your friends. But as you shared, I didn't realise his presence in his restaurant could be so off putting. Seriously, go to another restaurant, there is a restaurant appreciation thread on Boards that could be of some use in choosing an alternative.
Live and let live, dramatics such as going to the bother of ringing the restaurant beforehand to ensure he's not there is just too much.
Life is too short to spend stressing youself with such small trivial issues.

evilivor

sok2005 wrote: »

All Im asking for is the stats regarding the rise and fall of listeners since he came back.!

He's not back on air long enough to have been covered by any any reporting period yet. The latest JNLR figures, published last week, only cover the period up to the end of March

Gerriegirl

sok2005 wrote: »

It's a business not a charity, if he wasn't listened to and didn't pull in the numbers he simply would not have been re-employed. :rolleyes:

Well in fairness, this was the comment to which I was referring when I asked you about the listenership numbers which the man apparently enjoys, or any proof there of. Having a stake in the business was clearly a factor in the man returning to the station which would address part of the OP's question. The man has a listenership but it is certainly not as great as some people would seem to suggest. The man provokes extreme reaction (you either love or hate him) and has always done.

On principle, if the restaurant felt it necessary to issue statements in the media, disassociating itself with this man and categorically stating that he no longer had any association with the place, do you think it was right that he should have been in there after that, going around the place as if he owned it? Hardly surprising. It's called 'extreme arrogance', which is the quality that those of us who have no time for the guy, find off-putting. There are plenty of other good restaurants in Cork, so I won't be returning there any time soon and certainly won't be losing any sleep over it.

To be totally honest, I don't care who listens to him, so long as I don't have to be subjected to him. I was in a waiting room last year where I sat in silence. In the distance I could hear the said man 'pontificating'. A lady turned and made a derogatory comment about him and was clearly irked by having to listen to him, as he was obviously not her choice. At the risk of the blanket accusation of 'hearsay', I'm afraid I didn't ask this woman her name, so I cannot say who this woman was but I'm simply giving a truthful account of the kind of thing I have witnessed countless people saying about the individual concerned, ever before the infamous incident.

sok2005

Gerriegirl wrote: »

Well in fairness, this was the comment to which I was referring when I asked you about the listenership numbers which the man apparently enjoys, or any proof there of. Having a stake in the business was clearly a factor in the man returning to the station which would address part of the OP's question. The man has a listenership but it is certainly not as great as some people would seem to suggest. The man provokes extreme reaction (you either love or hate him) and has always done.

On principle, if the restaurant felt it necessary to issue statements in the media, disassociating itself with this man and categorically stating that he no longer had any association with the place, do you think it was right that he should have been in there after that, going around the place as if he owned it? Hardly surprising. It's called 'extreme arrogance', which is the quality that those of us who have no time for the guy, find off-putting. There are plenty of other good restaurants in Cork, so I won't be returning there any time soon and certainly won't be losing any sleep over it.

To be totally honest, I don't care who listens to him, so long as I don't have to be subjected to him. I was in a waiting room last year where I sat in silence. In the distance I could hear the said man 'pontificating'. A lady turned and made a derogatory comment about him and was clearly irked by having to listen to him, as he was obviously not her choice. At the risk of the blanket accusation of 'hearsay', I'm afraid I didn't ask this woman her name, so I cannot say who this woman was but I'm simply giving a truthful account of the kind of thing I have witnessed countless people saying about the individual concerned, ever before the infamous incident.

All I said was, from a business point of view, there is no way, whether or not he is a stakeholder, 96fm would keep him on the air if people were not tuning into the show and if the listenership was depleting daily. So it looks like despite all the people on here that cant stand him and despite all the people who mouth about how arrogant and conceited he is, he may just be doing the job he is employed to do and bring in the listeners.

overmantle

sok2005 wrote: »

All I said was, from a business point of view, there is no way, whether or not he is a stakeholder, 96fm would keep him on the air if people were not tuning into the show and if the listenership was depleting daily. So it looks like despite all the people on here that cant stand him and despite all the people who mouth about how arrogant and conceited he is, he may just be doing the job he is employed to do and bring in the listeners.

As somebody who commented on this thread earlier, I don't think that anybody has disputed the fact that Prendeville has an audience. The fact that it is a limited audience is without question. I threw this question out at work today, out of curiosity. Without exception, nobody claimed that they would listen to him. Perhaps they're ashamed to admit it, who knows?

overmantle

urbanachiever1 wrote: »

I just got back from a few months abroad and accidentally tuned into Cuuurk's 96 FM to hear Neil Prendeville back on the radio! How did this happen? Who let this happen? And true to form within three minutes he had my blood boiling talking about tradesmen now working in the black market "...And I don't blame them for showing two fingers to the system that screwed them". He has to be the most ill-informed, ignorant and bigoted man on radio. Makes me want to leave the country again.

Perhaps the OP's question has been answered now? Clearly he's not the only one whom Prendeville makes their blood boil though.

Show Time

overmantle wrote: »

Perhaps Prendeville makes their blood boil though.

That is why his numbers are so high.

cork_south

urbanachiever1 wrote: »

The masturbating in public episode doesn't bother me. It's having a bigot like him on the radio influencing the minds of his audience.

Don't listen. Problem solved.