Woodville56 wrote: » Ok then, an "agreement" .Should all parties involved, GAA, Promoter, Brooks management and the city Manager not have revisited this agreement, rather than castigating a public servant as being the villain of the piece ? Or would you have him run the gauntlet of the residents in waving through the 5 concerts which were organised in full knowledge that only 3 such events were "agreed". Easy to scapegoat the public servant while excusing the "ah sure it will be all right on the night " attitude of the rest !
horseburger wrote: » You could try answering my question, rather than trying to be funny, on the issue of tickets being sold on by touts, considering the extra demand of people from the 4th and 5th shows looking for them. how could that be dealt with?
lordgoat wrote: » three events a year, but what classifies as an event is what causes the hassle. i.e. is Garth the event or are they 5 separate events?
Happyman42 wrote: » Aitken played fast and loose with the regs though, leaving it until the last minute until he applied for a licence.
8-10 wrote: No, I was asking if it was legal to make the offer of 4 nights. By legal I mean would it have met DCC regulations. When they announced the 3 it sounded like no more would have been possible but now it's coming out that it was possible.
Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: » He was offered four licences. No wonder he refused all of them. To cause all this crap over one concert?? It's scandalous. People saying he threw a tantrum couldn't be more off the mark. He and his management have been planning these concerts for months on end. This is not part of a tour. This is an five night event to play to 400,000 people over five nights, almost 5000 miles away and of course the stage was being designed for Croke Park, he hasn't toured in years. When wheels are set in motion for something on this scale, millions can be lost from the slightest hitch, which is why movies can go millions over budget when production is delayed for just a few days. I firmly believe that certain people in DCC were on a power trip here and how they have handled this has been a disgrace. More will come out in due course I would say. All DCC had to do was licence the concerts, award compensation for the residents (€500,000 was already offered for local projects) fine Aiken / GAA and perhaps ban them holding concerts during 2015 but instead what they did was leave it far too late to let the GAA / Aiken know not all five licences would be granted (just mere weeks before the cocerts, when 400,000 tickets have been sold) and then play bargaining games behind the scenes, the details of which where not made public. There is also good evidence that they lied to the public when they released statements saying that they told the GAA / Aiken that they would not be granting all five licences at an early stage, something both the GAA /Aiken insist is untrue. Add to that the fact that residents have received letters from the DCC confirming receipt of their objections to the concerts, which they never submitted and who have now signed statements to the Gardai to that effect, insisting their signutures were forged, and you really do have one hell of a mess here. Of all the people that deserve a share of the blame here, and the GAA /Aiken are not totally exempt perhaps (time will tell), one thing I do know is that the artist and the ticketholders should be the last people to have fingers pointed at them. No matter what you think of Garth Brooks, this is all one holy hell of a mess to have to deal with just week before you are due to take to the stage for your long awaited comeback. You wouldn't mind if the matter was at rest, but injunctions trying to stop the three licenced concerts have just been submitted to the courts and so I honestly can't say I blame him, or his management for saying enough is enough.
sydthebeat wrote: » Let's nip this in the bud because this mistake Is being made over and over again in this thread. There is NO law which restricts there to only being 3 events a year in croke park!! There is an agreement in place since 1998 which limited the events to three with an element of community gain in place for every event. This is not a law, neither aiken nor Garth Brooks was doing anything illegal
Happyman42 wrote: » Nor did the DCC. Aitken played fast and loose with the regs though, leaving it until the last minute until he applied for a licence. Garth cancelled 3 of the gigs...nobody else.
Reekwind wrote: » Again, as per above posts, there is no legally binding agreement that there must only be three nights in Croke Park. One Direction alone had three nights there in May.
Davie89 wrote: » TThey were granted a license for THREE shows and unfortunately that is all thats allowed.
OhHiMark wrote: » Jesus that's a fair embarrassing show from socal musiclover in this thread. Did she think that we'd drop to our knees and beg her to come for a little holiday in Ireland?
8-10 wrote: » Is this legal? Seems unfair on the residents to claim they did everything to the letter in getting only 3 licences and no more are possible while at the same time they were open to a 4th behind closed doors
jebus84 wrote: » What am I going to do with all these cowboy hats i was planning on selling ?
Davie89 wrote: » You sir have been spending far too much time at the church of' Brooks You would rather see 400,000 unhappy fans rather than 160,000 Yes it would be devastating to be in that 160,000 but unfortunately this is life
Duck Soup wrote: » Someone was asking previously for a link to where a 4 night option was discussed. The relevant bit:http://www.thejournal.ie/garth-brooks-concerts-cancelled-1560304-Jul2014/
hynesie08 wrote: » Honestly? "we tried everything we could etc, etc. DCC's decision is final etc etc Do not agree but respect decision etc etc Best of a bad situation blah blah blah" Honestly, considering the cult like nature of some Garth fans, he could threaten to pISS on your granny and they'd think it's adorable.
The ‘four night’ option Meanwhile, it’s emerged that the prospect of the country star playing four of the five nights originally booked was discussed earlier in the negotiation process. According to a brief statement from the Council press office this evening, “prior to a decision being made on the Garth Brooks concert event licence application a conversation took place between the Chief Executive of Dublin City Council and a senior representative from Aiken Promotions”. In the course of that conversation the Chief Executive advised the representative of Aikens (sic) that the likelihood was that only three concerts would be permitted. However, on being advised that Brooks would not perform just three concerts, the Chief Executive, Owen Keegan, “offered to discuss with the decision maker in the Planning Department the possibility of permitting a fourth concert if a guarantee was given by the promoter that Garth Brooks would fulfil the four events”.
horseburger wrote: » When I asked about a response, I meant, how is a promoter or artist to respond to the fans who had tickets to the 4th and 5th shows, in a situation where the artist was willing to play all five, but was only granted permission for three. If the first three went ahead, and you queued all night for tickets for the first three and was unsuccessful and then and managed to get tickets for either the 4th or 5th gigs, you'd feel very let down if they weren't held. There would then be the possibility of tickets for the first three shows being sold online at even more inflated prices, considering the extra demand.
latynova wrote: » We won't need to cancel them because they cannot legally proceed.
Can't understand why so many people are too stupid to understand that the promoter didn't have a licence. He's not *entitled* to one. The residents were correct, especially the one who took out the injunction. He should be hailed as hero for trying to uphold planning laws, but of course, here people who do the right thing are attacked. Nothing changes.
horseburger wrote: » When I asked about a response, I meant, how is a promoter or artist to respond to the fans who had tickets to the 4th and 5th shows, in a situation where the artist was willing to play all five, but was only granted permission for three.
Woodville56 wrote: » So tell me if this civil servant "making a mint"should have stood by and allow the laws he is paid to uphold be circumvented by greedy promoters ? Is the GAA & Aiken not at all culpable ?? And as for Mr Brooks- mercenary best describes his attitude !
Davie89 wrote: » The response would be what is all over the news They were granted a license for THREE shows and unfortunately that is all thats allowed. Apologies, refunds and general head bowing all round for those 160,000 unlucky fans Overall tough only 160,000 are left unhappy as opposed to 400,000 Logic prevails in this instance, its a pity it has been over ruled by the complete childish tantrum Gareth is throwing
DannySparks wrote: » Spare a thought for the poor lad currently staring at 400000 cowboy hats he bought to flog on the jones road. That fella is in a really dark place today
Davie89 wrote: » its a pity it has been over ruled by the complete childish tantrum Gareth is throwing
