Croke Park residents to seek concert injuctions.....your opinions?

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 12:49AM

JRant wrote: »

Surely this is the biggest emergency in the states history since 'The Emergency'

Technical point, JR - it's not strictly an 'emergency' until Pat Rabbitte breathlessly informs us 'it will rock the state to its very foundations'...

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 12:59AM

JRant wrote: »

Second. The license is for the venue, not the act playing in it. If you're booking an 80,000 seater stadium is not because you expect 400 people to turn up. You plan for it's capacity and then scale back if needs be.

That's the gist of it and how the likes of MCD and Aiken Promotions earn their corn.

They will be offered various acts by credible international agents who they have long-standing track records with.

Their job is then to decide which venue is the most appropriate and make their pitch based on a capacity or the largest possible audience.

Which explains why Irish ticket prices are usually among the highest in Europe as the companies are not competing against each other to deliver a properly priced end product to the customer, but instead to maximize the return to the artist (and consequentially themselves), therefore securing the services of said artist onto their roster and keeping them away from the other company.

But that's another day's topic...

Muahahaha · 08-07-2014 01:01AM

So what do people think is going to happen from here ?

For me I can't see DCC backing down and if they did not only would they lose face they'd also leave themselves open to legal challenge. They are just not going to reverse their decision to increase the number of Brooks concerts to five. It's not going to happen IMO.

So that leaves Aiken/Brooks making an announcement on Thursday. This can go either one of two ways. Either Brooks does a climb down and agrees to do the three gigs now and with a promise to come back for a further two, perhaps even at Slane instead next summer. Or he can stick to his cowboy guns and not do any gigs at all and instead announce a world tour as planned.

I reckon we're going to see a Brooks/Aiken climb down on Thirsday and the three gigs will be fulfilled. Brooks PR will backtrack and 'on mature reflection' will agree to the three. I think at the end of the day whatever Brooks and his production team wanted to achieve filming wise of the gigs can still easily be achieved over 3 nights, other acts manage it when making live DVDs so I'm sure Brooks will still leave with the footage he needs from three nights.

The one thing that could throw all that into jeopardy though is the application to the High Court for an injunction against all five concerts. Aiken will of course fight this. If they win we could be looking at an appeal to the Supreme Court and a potential application for a judicial review. In any case I don't think we'll be getting to Supreme Court stage by Thursday when Brooks/Aiken make their announcement. So although Aiken\Brooks currently have permission for three of the gigs one must ask if they would go ahead and promise to play them when there is a pending legal action against the holding of any of them. Are Brooks/Aiken going to take a risk by pushing on, sending the ship with the stage from the US and then spend 10 days constructing the stage only for the Supreme Court to injunct all five concerts from taking place ?

Remains to be seen, lots of twists and turns left in this story yet.

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 01:07AM

hynesie08 wrote: »

I think peter aiken might be reading this thread.
http://www.goldenplec.com/aiken-release-clarification-garth-brooks-concerts/?utm_campaign=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter

Garth Brooks response to the licence for the 3 rather than the 5 concerts was not an ultimatum, it was simply an expression of genuine concern for his fans.

The complete misrepresentation of Garth Brooks as a person and as an artist is ill informed and is scandalous.

Thanks for posting, Hynesie.

Unfortunately, the pressure must be getting to Peter Aiken as those Garth Brooks comments are extremely ill-judged.

The default position with most Irish operators seems to be to play the submissive when dealing with any kind of famous foreign politician, dignitary, celebrity, etc.

Peter needs to be strong on this one and tell Brooks he has a duty to travel and respect the 240,000 fans who have tickets for the first 3 shows and allow him to get on with the job of finding a solution for the other 160,000 at a later date, probably next year as part of a broader tour.

Blaming those who dissent from their stated position is just mediocrity...

Fred Swanson · 08-07-2014 01:09AM

This post has been deleted.

NightOfTheHunt · 08-07-2014 01:11AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

So what do people think is going to happen from here ?

For me I can't see DCC backing down and if they did not only would they lose face they'd also leave themselves open to legal challenge. They are just not going to reverse their decision to increase the number of Brooks concerts to five. It's not going to happen IMO.

So that leaves Aiken/Brooks making an announcement on Thursday. This can go either one of two ways. Either Brooks does a climb down and agrees to do the three gigs now and with a promise to come back for a further two, perhaps even at Slane instead next summer. Or he can stick to his cowboy guns and not do any gigs at all and instead announce a world tour as planned.

I reckon we're going to see a Brooks/Aiken climb down on Thirsday and the three gigs will be fulfilled. Brooks PR will backtrack and 'on mature reflection' will agree to the three. I think at the end of the day whatever Brooks and his production team wanted to achieve filming wise of the gigs can still easily be achieved over 3 nights, other acts manage it when making live DVDs so I'm sure Brooks will still leave with the footage he needs from three nights.

The one thing that could throw all that into jeopardy though is the application to the High Court for an injunction against all five concerts. Aiken will of course fight this. If they win we could be looking at an appeal to the Supreme Court and a potential application for a judicial review. In any case I don't think we'll be getting to Supreme Court stage by Thursday when Brooks/Aiken make their announcement. So although Aiken\Brooks currently have permission for three of the gigs one must ask if they would go ahead and promise to play them when there is a pending legal action against the holding of any of them. Are Brooks/Aiken going to take a risk by pushing on, sending the ship with the stage from the US and then spend 10 days constructing the stage only for the Supreme Court to injunct all five concerts from taking place ?

Remains to be seen, lots of twists and turns left in this story yet.

You make it sound like an episode of coronation street

Raphael · 08-07-2014 01:17AM

It'll come down to money, in the end. They did their accounts based on 5 nights. If they can still turn a profit at 3, they'll run. If they'll make a loss, they compare that loss to the cost of refunding all tickets, travel, etc. If that's a smaller loss, then no gig. (imo)

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 01:23AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

For me I can't see DCC backing down and if they did not only would they lose face they'd also leave themselves open to legal challenge. They are just not going to reverse their decision to increase the number of Brooks concerts to five. It's not going to happen IMO.

That's the way it's looking.

Muahahaha wrote: »

come back for a further two, perhaps even at Slane instead next summer.

Unlikely as Slane has been an MCD 'lock-out' since Aikens effectively abandoned it, roughly 20 years ago.

Muahahaha wrote: »

I reckon we're going to see a Brooks/Aiken climb down on Thirsday and the three gigs will be fulfilled. Brooks PR will backtrack and 'on mature reflection' will agree to the three. I think at the end of the day whatever Brooks and his production team wanted to achieve filming wise of the gigs can still easily be achieved over 3 nights, other acts manage it when making live DVDs so I'm sure Brooks will still leave with the footage he needs from three nights.

If I had to make a book, that's the one I'd price up as favourite, alright!

Muahahaha wrote: »

The one thing that could throw all that into jeopardy though is the application to the High Court for an injunction against all five concerts. Aiken will of course fight this. If they win we could be looking at an appeal to the Supreme Court and a potential application for a judicial review. In any case I don't think we'll be getting to Supreme Court stage by Thursday when Brooks/Aiken make their announcement. So although Aiken\Brooks currently have permission for three of the gigs one must ask if they would go ahead and promise to play them when there is a pending legal action against the holding of any of them. Are Brooks/Aiken going to take a risk by pushing on, sending the ship with the stage from the US and then spend 10 days constructing the stage only for the Supreme Court to injunct all five concerts from taking place ?

Remains to be seen, lots of twists and turns left in this story yet.

That's an interesting point. I would just add that the GAA are getting off lightly in the coverage of all this as it's their primary responsibility to liaise with the residents and ensure that all points of view are respected, which they have dismally failed to do. It's their wilful decision to interpret 3 concerts as 3 multi-concert events that lies at the root of all this. With the amount of power, money and media access available to them, it's an asymmetrical contest between themselves and the residents and one which they have exploited for all its worth. At the moment, you may notice they have made virtually no public comment but use their PR representatives to attempt to control the debate, behind the scenes...

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 01:35AM

OldGoat wrote: »

Thursday 10th Apr 2014

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2014041000032?opendocument

Particularly fond of this from the last paragraph.
"Politically, Deputies in this House have got into a fair amount of trouble during the years for intervening in planning matters which did not get us anywhere."

Thanks for posting, Old Goat.

I'd love to know how many of those bandwagoning politicos shouting loud about this situation right now were even in the Dail chamber when M O'S made this enquiry?

Or even know that she asked about it??

Or how many have campaigned for a change in the law to change the ludicrous situation where tickets are sold en-masse before a license is considered or granted???

Something deep inside tells me the answer is probably zero...

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 01:50AM

Raphael wrote: »

It'll come down to money, in the end. They did their accounts based on 5 nights. If they can still turn a profit at 3, they'll run. If they'll make a loss, they compare that loss to the cost of refunding all tickets, travel, etc. If that's a smaller loss, then no gig. (imo)

They'll turn a profit on three gigs, no problem.

They were absolutely delighted when they sold out 2 initially and if you recall Peter Aiken was all over the media when the third one was announced almost declaring it as the 4th miracle of Fatima!

All the significant costs are the same for 1 gig as for 3 or 5.

Even allowing for Aiken's statement that Brooks has 'upscaled' the event spend because of the amount of revenue generated over 5 nights, it still won't effect the fact that a healthy profit being made.

What has them on the back foot at the moment is losing control of events, as for them it's usually just a case of having their plans rubber-stamped by the relevant authorities, and away they go to plan and organise.

If they can psychologically get over that 'bump on the road', then they'll announce the 3 shows will go ahead and they'll work hard with all parties to get more shows next year to compensate the other, unlucky ticket-holders.

If Brooks decides to pull the other 3 shows, however, Aikens will be with left with significant local losses and a fractured relationship with the artist, so there's a lot at stake for them.

(Maybe not unlike their situation with U2 when the projected 'free concert' for 100,000 people in Phoenix Park some years ago went 'belly up' and U2 and McGuinness decamped to MCD, despite all their previous gigs being with Aiken).

I also believe that public opinion will move against GB if he reneges on the first 3, so there's a lot at stake for all parties.

Hopefully, they'll swallow some pride and fulfil their professional obligations...

end of the road · 08-07-2014 01:51AM

smellmepower wrote: »

Public transport and less environmentally damaging modes of transport (cycling) deserve priority in the city centre,as the place is a traffic choked shambles currently.Rather Keegan over some idiot like Vradkar or one of the culchie 'yes man' government types who have never had to cycle or get the bus into the city centre daily,making decisions about things they know nothing about.

cycling should not be allowed in the city, cyclists are a dangerous nucence and the likes of Keegan shouldn't be able to encourage it, lots of green spaces where cyclists can go and do what they like but not in dublin thanks at least until such time as they pay tax have ensurence and face the same punishments as other vehicle owners for acting the magget

ardle1 · 08-07-2014 02:00AM

muddypaws wrote: »

Bless. Perhaps because we care more about the country than about a country singer?

Can you tell us why, if you are an adult, and capable of rational thought, you think that 2 concerts are more important than the law? A rational argument, not a fan based rant. Its a gig, my friends will be disappointed but they will get over it, nobody died.

Well the law is an ass in this case, WHAT so the law is 'just sit there and let 150,000 people buy tickets for a concert to see their idol'! and then have a meeting a few weeks later and tell those same 150,000 people that 'nah sorry we've decided not to let your concerts go ahead'?! and you have to concern yourself about whether or not I'm an adult,
You my friend are having a laugh.
And what was that other nonsense about caring for your Country? if you cared about your Country, you would be more concerned about the 150,000 people(of which most probably come from Ireland), you would also be quite concerned about the negative effect it will have on your Country from other countries.. And also you would be a little concerned about the loss off revenue into Ireland, never mind the loss off retail sales through merchandising, Hotel stays, Social activity etc etc...

Funny how it's a law but yet DCC was able to make a decision on the matter!?
Who could make such a decision!

Immediately after the licence decision Aiken Promotions sought alternatives that might facilitate the two cancelled shows. However this show has been specifically designed for Croke Park and it was unsuitable to any other venue. We also looked at sites such as Phoenix Park but these sites were not feasible because of the 10 week requirement for the licencing process.

hynesie08 · 08-07-2014 02:07AM

ardle1 wrote: »

Well the law is an ass in this case, WHAT so the law is 'just sit there and let 150,000 people buy tickets for a concert to see their idol'! and then have a meeting a few weeks later and tell those same 150,000 people that 'nah sorry we've decided not to let your concerts go ahead'?! and you have to concern yourself about whether or not I'm an adult,

Actually the law is that you can't sell tickets without a license, unfortunately the system works easier if you ignore the law, and if aiken put their application in earlier, this woulda been announced earlier

you my friend are having a laugh.
And what was that other nonsense about caring for your Country? if you cared about your Country, you would be more concerned about the 150,000 people(of which most probably come from Ireland), you would also be quite concerned about the negative effect it will have on your Country from other countries.. And also you would be a little concerned about the loss off revenue into Ireland, never mind the loss off retail sales through merchandising, Hotel stays, Social activity etc etc...

none of that will be as bad as the loss if Garth pulls the plug.

And yes, we care about our country, which is ABSOLUTELY why DCC's decision should stand.

Steam Roller · 08-07-2014 02:13AM

Been snooping on the facebook page of the residents in favour of the concerts.

That Duff fella who lodged the injunction application doesnt live in the area. Can that be thrown out?

And some very very small hope. Its unconfirmed report but I dont know where they got their information from but the ship in Europe has left for Dublin. Will three go ahead?

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller · 08-07-2014 02:27AM

I can't believe people are still thinking Garth could decide to play none of the concerts or that he was foolish to say what he did.

There is not a chance he won't play the three concerts, no matter what the DCC decide and forget the nonsense regarding the residents going to High Court to prevent the three which have got the licences as they are completely wasting their time.

As to him being foolish to say what he did. This has to be the most idiotic thing that is currently being said and written. Almost every hour, on the hour, some twit on the radio says it, yet, had he said anything else, even suggestive for a single moment that he would play the three gigs and take the refusal for the other two on the chin.. then none of the talks would now be taking place to grant the licences for the remaining two gigs as it would have been considered done and dusted and the matter would have been closed.

Aitken is a bigger cowboy than Brooks fo God sake. He's been in the promotion game donkey years. He'd give Don King a run for his money. The guy is nobody's fool though and he knew damn well that creating this big drama about how Garth may not play any gigs unless he gets the five was the perfect thing to say, as it made a drama out of the whole thing and so started the 'will he, won't he' saga, with all and sundry attempting to save the day.

tl;dr

Brooks and Aitken are playing a blinder and the three concerts will be going ahead, come rain, hail or shine, with the last two most likely days later thanks to the bluff of the century form Butch and Sundance.

hynesie08 · 08-07-2014 02:36AM

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Brooks and Aitken are playing a blinder and the three concerts will be going ahead, come rain, hail or shine, with the last two most likely days later thanks to the bluff of the century form Butch and Sundance.

I agree the 3 will go ahead (complete with statement from Garth that's complete bollix but people will lap it up) but how do you see the other 2 going ahead? I'd say they're completely off the table.

goz83 · 08-07-2014 02:37AM

Steam Roller wrote: »

And some very very small hope. Its unconfirmed report but I dont know where they got their information from but the ship in Europe has left for Dublin. Will three go ahead?

I am sure there is more than country music and wooden floors on the ship, so it ain't turning round.

Gergiev · 08-07-2014 02:44AM

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Brooks and Aitken are playing a blinder and the three concerts will be going ahead, come rain, hail or shine, with the last two most likely days later thanks to the bluff of the century form Butch and Sundance.

The 'last two' won't be going ahead 'most likely days later', as you state.

Maybe some time in the future, but not now.

As for B&A playing a blinder, the situation is exactly as originally decided a few days ago and their protestations and tactics haven't altered the outcome by one iota...

ardle1 · 08-07-2014 02:48AM

goz83 wrote: »

I am sure there is more than country music and wooden floors on the ship, so it ain't turning round.

It has 400,000 Stetsons on-board, and they don't say 'KISS ME QUICK I'M IRISH'
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-HAWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

ColeTrain · 08-07-2014 02:52AM

It would be tremendous if Brooks pulled the plug on the three shows. Can you imagine the rage? It would be a fitting end to painfully insignificant story..

Steam Roller · 08-07-2014 02:54AM

ColeTrain wrote: »

It would be tremendous if Brooks pulled the plug on the three shows. Can you imagine the rage? It would be a fitting end to painfully insignificant story..

He kinda prepared us already. 5 or nothing. So im expecting it at this stage.

ColeTrain · 08-07-2014 02:56AM

Steam Roller wrote: »

He kinda prepared us already. 5 or nothing. So im expecting it at this stage.

I think he will fulfill the dates, he's too much of a cowboy to give up the cash.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller · 08-07-2014 03:18AM

hynesie08 wrote: »

I agree the 3 will go ahead (complete with statement from Garth that's complete bollix but people will lap it up) but how do you see the other 2 going ahead? I'd say they're completely off the table.

The fact the tickets are sold for those shows, many hotels and flights booked.. is a big factor here and without question is the main bargaining chip they have. If we were months away from the concerts, I would say refunds and people having to cancel flights would not be seen as much as a big deal, but because we are now under three weeks away, it is. I'm calling it as a large amount being put into the local projects fund (somewhere around the €750,000 mark), a promise of no concerts until 2016 and in exchange for that, the two (so far unlicensed) concerts to take place within a week of their scheduled dates.

ardle1 · 08-07-2014 03:22AM

Jaysus, back in da day we would have been glad off a bag of spuds....
And now we could potentially turn down the biggest entertainment gig off the decade! if not the century, I know someone mentioned the Beatles or Elvis!
Bit sad really, where did it all go wrong

Not to over dramitise the situation, but like where is all this 'cockiness' coming from!?

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime · 08-07-2014 06:42AM

Id laugh if all 5 got pulled but the gb fans would straight away blame the residents for it.

lazygal · 08-07-2014 07:02AM

leahyl wrote: »

I have to say, I have tickets myself, but it's got to the stage now where I'm finding all this highly entertaining! It's like the cliffhanger in a soap opera, you wait patiently to see what's going to happen in the next episode ;-)

Yes me too! I'm nearly having more craic with the run up than I would have at the concert. Plus I'm getting great fun out of referring to himself as a "devastated Garth Brooks fan" at every opportunity. He's hoping we get our money back and have a night away.

Reformed Character · 08-07-2014 08:09AM

ardle1 wrote: »

Jaysus, back in da day we would have been glad off a bag of spuds....
And now we could potentially turn down the biggest entertainment gig off the decade! if not the century, I know someone mentioned the Beatles or Elvis!
Bit sad really, where did it all go wrong

Not to over dramitise the situation, but like where is all this 'cockiness' coming from!?

It went wrong when Aiken, Brookes and the GAA decided the law didn't apply to them, they were too important to be stopped in the quest for greed by anything as mundane as regulations or planning!
As for cockiness well the only one acting the prick is the fat over the hill crooner Brooks!

Reformed Character · 08-07-2014 08:12AM

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

The fact the tickets are sold for those shows, many hotels and flights booked.. is a big factor here and without question is the main bargaining chip they have. If we were months away from the concerts, I would say refunds and people having to cancel flights would not be seen as much as a big deal, but because we are now under three weeks away, it is. I'm calling it as a large amount being put into the local projects fund (somewhere around the €750,000 mark), a promise of no concerts until 2016 and in exchange for that, the two (so far unlicensed) concerts to take place within a week of their scheduled dates.

Cannot happen, the law is clear, 10 weeks notice for the licence application!
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/garth-brooks-concert-licences-cannot-be-fast-tracked-1.1858671
Efforts focused on reaching agreement that the singer would play the three permitted dates on July 25th, 26th and 27th, with the two remaining shows held a number of days later, to give residents respite. However, the proposal required the agreement of Mr Keegan to “fast-track” the licence process to allow the two additional events to go ahead.
Timescale

Legislation requires that licence applications are made at least 10 weeks prior to an event. Mr Keegan last night told councillors: “we have to keep to the timescale”.

ekimiam · 08-07-2014 08:25AM

just heard on morning ireland that a newspaper is reporting that about 100 letters sent to DCC about the gigs were forged! interesting spanner to get thrown in

Reekwind · 08-07-2014 08:30AM

ColeTrain wrote: »

It would be tremendous if Brooks pulled the plug on the three shows. Can you imagine the rage? It would be a fitting end to painfully insignificant story..

I wouldn't say insignificant. 400,000 people is a substantial percentage of the State's population. Obama may not be losing any sleep over Dublin licencing procedures but it's clearly of major local interest.

Croke Park residents to seek concert injuctions.....your opinions?

Comments