We'll be back vow organisers of Let's Rock concert on Southampton Common

Daily Echo: We'll be back vow organisers of Let's Rock concert on Southamptn Common We'll be back vow organisers of Let's Rock concert on Southamptn Common

LET’S do it all again next year!

That’s the message after more than 12,000 music fans packed on to Southampton Common for a pop concert for the first time in more than a decade.

Today the Daily Echo can reveal that the team behind the successful Let’s Rock! event, which featured a host of stars from the 1980s, are already in talks with council bosses to hold a similar event next year.

From luminous leg warmers to denim dungarees, a feast of neon lycra and even the odd shell suit, there were no holds barred when it came to the fashion stakes for one of the biggest parties in the park in years.

Daily Echo: Click here for more pictures, banner

Daily Echo: Go West

For ten-and-a-half hours revellers were entertained by a top class line-up of 1980s greats as they basked in sunshine and non-stop music.

And as the mercury rose, so did the excitement inside the arena as the crowd was transported back to an era in which most had grown up, and artists including Heaven 17, Go West, Brother Beyond, ABC and Nick Heywood graced the stage.

There was also a warm welcome for homegrown Howard Jones, who, despite a few technical glitches, went down a storm – especially when he greeted fans with a rendition of When The Saints Go Marching In.

But as the sun started to go down the party was ramped up when Bananarama took to the stage – with six lucky fans joining them towards the end of their set for a rendition of Venus like never before.

Daily Echo:

And then it was down to singing legend Billy Ocean to close the spectacular show with hits including Get Outta My Dreams, When The Going Gets Tough, Love Really Hurts Without You and a finale of Caribbean Queen.

Related links

Today organisers hailed the one day festival as a huge success and say final numbers attending the first ever Let’s Rock! gig in Southampton tipped the 12,000 mark with a final flurry of ticket sales on the day.

Already they are in talks with Southampton City Council, who had representatives on the site throughout the day, to return next year.

Any fears that of traffic issues in the immediate roads around Southampton Common appeared unfounded as those attending largely made their way to the venue by special bus services, a park and ride facility from Eastleigh and on foot.

Yesterday as the dust settled, workers were busy restoring the park to its former glory and clearing rubbish, dismantling stages, tents and toilets and removing the barriers from the site.

Organiser Matt Smith said: “The city of Southampton absolutely embraced the event.

Daily Echo:

Everybody who attended was there to have a good time and enjoy themselves and that’s what they did.

“We get feedback from a variety of channels and everything we have heard so far has been fantastic.

Daily Echo:

It’s all been so positive.

“The shuttle bus service we provided and the park and ride facility were both used really well, the stewards did a great job clearing the site and the whole thing was very slick.

“We are already in talks with the council about returning next year – 100 per cent we are coming back.”

Comments (45)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:49am Mon 14 Jul 14

Rockhopper says...

Great event and good to hear the organisers want to return.
One area for improvement would be to provide some areas of seating.
Great event and good to hear the organisers want to return. One area for improvement would be to provide some areas of seating. Rockhopper
  • Score: 8

1:06pm Mon 14 Jul 14

garlic says...

Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer. garlic
  • Score: -16

2:18pm Mon 14 Jul 14

ecuk268 says...

garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
So you never go to plays at The Nuffield or opera or ballet at the Mayflower or live screenings at the Harbour Lights of Shakespeare from The Globe or opera from the Royal Opera House.
[quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]So you never go to plays at The Nuffield or opera or ballet at the Mayflower or live screenings at the Harbour Lights of Shakespeare from The Globe or opera from the Royal Opera House. ecuk268
  • Score: 8

2:45pm Mon 14 Jul 14

elvisimo says...

does make you think that they should come up with a series of concerts etc. Not sure why St Marys stopped but great boost to local economy and a massive market to tap into.
does make you think that they should come up with a series of concerts etc. Not sure why St Marys stopped but great boost to local economy and a massive market to tap into. elvisimo
  • Score: 2

2:48pm Mon 14 Jul 14

CHIMPANZEE says...

It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land? CHIMPANZEE
  • Score: -35

2:52pm Mon 14 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
Maybe, as this has proven such a success, we'll see more of this in the future.
[quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]Maybe, as this has proven such a success, we'll see more of this in the future. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Mon 14 Jul 14

CHIMPANZEE says...

Is it not a breach of law by the council allowing the use of common land for profiteering at the expense of the public? At £42.00 x12000 there was huge profiteering. Meanwhile, we as residents were prevented from using this space for our quiet enjoyment of the common, dog walking etc.
.
Is it not a breach of law by the council allowing the use of common land for profiteering at the expense of the public? At £42.00 x12000 there was huge profiteering. Meanwhile, we as residents were prevented from using this space for our quiet enjoyment of the common, dog walking etc. . CHIMPANZEE
  • Score: -29

2:56pm Mon 14 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy? IronLady2010
  • Score: 13

3:07pm Mon 14 Jul 14

CHIMPANZEE says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent. CHIMPANZEE
  • Score: -16

3:25pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Dizzydezzy says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year!
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.[/p][/quote]I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year! Dizzydezzy
  • Score: 23

3:29pm Mon 14 Jul 14

elvisimo says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Is it not a breach of law by the council allowing the use of common land for profiteering at the expense of the public? At £42.00 x12000 there was huge profiteering. Meanwhile, we as residents were prevented from using this space for our quiet enjoyment of the common, dog walking etc.
.
The common is huge - if you couldn't plan a route to walk Rover that avoiding this bit then maybe you had best stay indoors.
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: Is it not a breach of law by the council allowing the use of common land for profiteering at the expense of the public? At £42.00 x12000 there was huge profiteering. Meanwhile, we as residents were prevented from using this space for our quiet enjoyment of the common, dog walking etc. .[/p][/quote]The common is huge - if you couldn't plan a route to walk Rover that avoiding this bit then maybe you had best stay indoors. elvisimo
  • Score: 14

3:36pm Mon 14 Jul 14

ecuk268 says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
So 12000 people had a good day but that shouldn't have happened because for one day you couldn't access all of the Common.

The northern part of the Common was unaffected or isn't that big enough for you?
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]So 12000 people had a good day but that shouldn't have happened because for one day you couldn't access all of the Common. The northern part of the Common was unaffected or isn't that big enough for you? ecuk268
  • Score: 9

3:39pm Mon 14 Jul 14

ToastyTea says...

Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc. ToastyTea
  • Score: -3

4:00pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Zexagon says...

ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
[quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah? Zexagon
  • Score: 3

4:09pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Leesylou67 says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
I am so sorry that you felt 'deprived' but 12,000 people including me had a really enjoyable day but one person has to moan about it because they couldn't find enough room to walk the dog! I could understand if it was every week but these events happen once in a blue moon so get over yourself. The event was well managed and no doubt a big clear up will have already taken place. Your normal dog walking routine can resume as I get the distinct impression you are someone who follows a strict routine!
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]I am so sorry that you felt 'deprived' but 12,000 people including me had a really enjoyable day but one person has to moan about it because they couldn't find enough room to walk the dog! I could understand if it was every week but these events happen once in a blue moon so get over yourself. The event was well managed and no doubt a big clear up will have already taken place. Your normal dog walking routine can resume as I get the distinct impression you are someone who follows a strict routine! Leesylou67
  • Score: 10

4:10pm Mon 14 Jul 14

ToastyTea says...

Zexagon wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
Yep, like that, but in Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?[/p][/quote]Yep, like that, but in Southampton. ToastyTea
  • Score: 2

4:18pm Mon 14 Jul 14

elvisimo says...

ToastyTea wrote:
Zexagon wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
Yep, like that, but in Southampton.
cant the "under 40's" manage to make it all that distance to Winchester
[quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?[/p][/quote]Yep, like that, but in Southampton.[/p][/quote]cant the "under 40's" manage to make it all that distance to Winchester elvisimo
  • Score: 3

4:34pm Mon 14 Jul 14

ToastyTea says...

elvisimo wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Zexagon wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
Yep, like that, but in Southampton.
cant the "under 40's" manage to make it all that distance to Winchester
Yes but would be nice for the city of Southampton to hold such an event. Can still go to Winchester events.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?[/p][/quote]Yep, like that, but in Southampton.[/p][/quote]cant the "under 40's" manage to make it all that distance to Winchester[/p][/quote]Yes but would be nice for the city of Southampton to hold such an event. Can still go to Winchester events. ToastyTea
  • Score: 2

4:35pm Mon 14 Jul 14

CHIMPANZEE says...

Dizzydezzy wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year!
If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?
[quote][p][bold]Dizzydezzy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.[/p][/quote]I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year![/p][/quote]If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage? CHIMPANZEE
  • Score: -13

4:44pm Mon 14 Jul 14

CHIMPANZEE says...

Zexagon wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
Would you be able to afford to pay a £42 fee to enter this land that belongs to you anyways. They might try to get back as their investment was very profitable and may attract huge crowds. Better still they might turn the whole public park into a large shopping parade and restaurants.
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?[/p][/quote]Would you be able to afford to pay a £42 fee to enter this land that belongs to you anyways. They might try to get back as their investment was very profitable and may attract huge crowds. Better still they might turn the whole public park into a large shopping parade and restaurants. CHIMPANZEE
  • Score: -7

5:53pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Radio Jammor says...

garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start?

"It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..."

By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country.

"We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. "

"We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you!

You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim.

"Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use."

In case you have not noticed, it still is.

"How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent."

The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet.

"If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?"

I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid.

As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc.

The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business.

Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you.

@ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those.

The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it.

I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians.

As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.
[quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start? "It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..." By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country. "We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. " "We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you! You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim. "Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use." In case you have not noticed, it still is. "How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent." The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet. "If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?" I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid. As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc. The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business. Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you. @ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those. The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it. I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians. As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside. Radio Jammor
  • Score: 15

5:55pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Dizzydezzy says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Dizzydezzy wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year!
If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?
There are bye laws limiting the use of the Common to less than 60 days per year for large events. Currently it is only a handful of events. I really can't see where there are "many such commercial events". And take a look at a map of the area used near the cemetery for the concert compared to the entire area of the common. Certainly less than 10% was used. It is an urban green space, ideal to use for special events like this. We have plenty of countryside on our doorstep to choose from too, so I suggest you explore further.
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dizzydezzy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.[/p][/quote]I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year![/p][/quote]If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?[/p][/quote]There are bye laws limiting the use of the Common to less than 60 days per year for large events. Currently it is only a handful of events. I really can't see where there are "many such commercial events". And take a look at a map of the area used near the cemetery for the concert compared to the entire area of the common. Certainly less than 10% was used. It is an urban green space, ideal to use for special events like this. We have plenty of countryside on our doorstep to choose from too, so I suggest you explore further. Dizzydezzy
  • Score: 3

5:57pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Radio Jammor says...

Duh! Sorry Garlic, quoted the wrong person above :P
Duh! Sorry Garlic, quoted the wrong person above :P Radio Jammor
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Cyber__Fug says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Dizzydezzy wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year!
If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?
You grumpy fecker !
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dizzydezzy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.[/p][/quote]I too use The Common almost daily and live close by. However only a portion of the land was used for this event which I attended. So to say you are deprived of its use is nonsense. We had a fabulous time at the event and I feel very lucky to live so close to the Common and wish it were used in this manner more frequently. The overheads would be huge for such an event and so I doubt profits would be hefty. I saw staff from the festival patrolling entire common this morning collecting litter so I can only praise the organisers. Bring it on next year![/p][/quote]If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?[/p][/quote]You grumpy fecker ! Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 5

6:19pm Mon 14 Jul 14

loosehead says...

I go to open door classical concerts & went to several at Netley near to the Hospital with the water as a background it was great with the cruise ships going past .
We have a great asset in Mayflower Park so why not hold concerts of all types of music there? especially when it's extended it could be a great revenue provider for the city or ABP who ever owns it.
you have gates so only ticket holders or young families going to the play facilities could get in & it's secure so less chance of rapes & assaults than up the common.
This is just a thought/idea from me & I'm happy this event went down so well & people enjoyed it.
But with Mayflower Park we could do so much more so why don't we?
I go to open door classical concerts & went to several at Netley near to the Hospital with the water as a background it was great with the cruise ships going past . We have a great asset in Mayflower Park so why not hold concerts of all types of music there? especially when it's extended it could be a great revenue provider for the city or ABP who ever owns it. you have gates so only ticket holders or young families going to the play facilities could get in & it's secure so less chance of rapes & assaults than up the common. This is just a thought/idea from me & I'm happy this event went down so well & people enjoyed it. But with Mayflower Park we could do so much more so why don't we? loosehead
  • Score: 5

6:35pm Mon 14 Jul 14

bullsbags says...

Chimpanzee you really are a sad individual GET A LIFE
Chimpanzee you really are a sad individual GET A LIFE bullsbags
  • Score: 3

6:59pm Mon 14 Jul 14

elvisimo says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Zexagon wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
Would you be able to afford to pay a £42 fee to enter this land that belongs to you anyways. They might try to get back as their investment was very profitable and may attract huge crowds. Better still they might turn the whole public park into a large shopping parade and restaurants.
Different planet
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?[/p][/quote]Would you be able to afford to pay a £42 fee to enter this land that belongs to you anyways. They might try to get back as their investment was very profitable and may attract huge crowds. Better still they might turn the whole public park into a large shopping parade and restaurants.[/p][/quote]Different planet elvisimo
  • Score: 3

7:54pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Angelbakes says...

Chimpanzee needs to get a life! Sad, sad individual! The common is clearly far too small cuz he/she must have one helluva big dog not to find a space to walk it in! Let's hope he clears its mahoosive poops up after himself!!!! (Maybe he/she should take it for a decent run out the New Forest?!!)

On a more interesting note, the event was fantastic and 12,000 people can't be wrong!
Bring it back next year - Please!!!!
Chimpanzee needs to get a life! Sad, sad individual! The common is clearly far too small cuz he/she must have one helluva big dog not to find a space to walk it in! Let's hope he clears its mahoosive poops up after himself!!!! (Maybe he/she should take it for a decent run out the New Forest?!!) On a more interesting note, the event was fantastic and 12,000 people can't be wrong! Bring it back next year - Please!!!! Angelbakes
  • Score: 2

8:12pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Charlie Bucket says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
You really are a moron. It isn't there JUST for you to enjoy. Plenty of people who DON'T wear grey cardigans and green cords were happy it went on.
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.[/p][/quote]You really are a moron. It isn't there JUST for you to enjoy. Plenty of people who DON'T wear grey cardigans and green cords were happy it went on. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 4

8:18pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Charlie Bucket says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Zexagon wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.
Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?
Would you be able to afford to pay a £42 fee to enter this land that belongs to you anyways. They might try to get back as their investment was very profitable and may attract huge crowds. Better still they might turn the whole public park into a large shopping parade and restaurants.
You DON'T own the common, I'm afraid. No doubt if this concert had been free, you would be here moaning about how "your taxes" had funded it. Some people - and I use that term loosely - just cannot stand to see anyone have a good time. Why not give up on life altogether? You clearly aren't using the gift wisely.
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Of course they'll be back, they made huge amounts of money. How's about something for those of us under 40 who don't like cheesy cr@p music. Be nice to have a dance music festival like creamfields, global gathering, glade etc.[/p][/quote]Like the one in Winchester that's only 20 minutes up the road yeah?[/p][/quote]Would you be able to afford to pay a £42 fee to enter this land that belongs to you anyways. They might try to get back as their investment was very profitable and may attract huge crowds. Better still they might turn the whole public park into a large shopping parade and restaurants.[/p][/quote]You DON'T own the common, I'm afraid. No doubt if this concert had been free, you would be here moaning about how "your taxes" had funded it. Some people - and I use that term loosely - just cannot stand to see anyone have a good time. Why not give up on life altogether? You clearly aren't using the gift wisely. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 3

8:30pm Mon 14 Jul 14

amelia75 says...

Christ its a good job these moaniny minnies dont live on the Isle of Wight with the Festivals and Cowes week happening every year. Bet these were the moaners who stopped power in the park. Im gutted i couldnt go as was working hope you all have a fab time who went :) and to all the moaners get a life and walk your dog elsewhere for god sake
Christ its a good job these moaniny minnies dont live on the Isle of Wight with the Festivals and Cowes week happening every year. Bet these were the moaners who stopped power in the park. Im gutted i couldnt go as was working hope you all have a fab time who went :) and to all the moaners get a life and walk your dog elsewhere for god sake amelia75
  • Score: 4

9:14pm Mon 14 Jul 14

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
It's common land looked after by the elected council in the commoners(me & you) best interest so it's a bit dodgy saying who's right?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]It's common land looked after by the elected council in the commoners(me & you) best interest so it's a bit dodgy saying who's right? loosehead
  • Score: -2

10:07pm Mon 14 Jul 14

wilson castaway says...

so can we have the balloon festival back now...pwetty pwease?
so can we have the balloon festival back now...pwetty pwease? wilson castaway
  • Score: 4

11:13pm Mon 14 Jul 14

andysaints007 says...

garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
PRATT
[quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]PRATT andysaints007
  • Score: 2

11:14pm Mon 14 Jul 14

andysaints007 says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Go away you tedious, boring individual
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Go away you tedious, boring individual andysaints007
  • Score: 2

11:15pm Mon 14 Jul 14

andysaints007 says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use.

How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.
boooooooooooring
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use. How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent.[/p][/quote]boooooooooooring andysaints007
  • Score: 2

2:00am Tue 15 Jul 14

Kerryx says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Not quite sure how you could not walk your dog I use the commo often as I to live nearby I managed to walk my dog whilst the event was underway and the atmosphere up there was amazing 1200 people can't be wrong and it was good to see something like this happen in Southampton I hope they bring it back next year
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Not quite sure how you could not walk your dog I use the commo often as I to live nearby I managed to walk my dog whilst the event was underway and the atmosphere up there was amazing 1200 people can't be wrong and it was good to see something like this happen in Southampton I hope they bring it back next year Kerryx
  • Score: 0

2:05am Tue 15 Jul 14

Radio Jammor says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
It's common land looked after by the elected council in the commoners(me & you) best interest so it's a bit dodgy saying who's right?
It's not so much a matter of who's right, as what do people want to use the common land for.

Clearly, there is a tremendous desire for more live music on a grander scale than has been seen in Southampton in recent years. So long as the event is properly managed (and most public and sporting events have been since Hillsborough), then why not use the common land for what a lot of people clearly want?

As for Chimpanzee, they can still walk their dog, so in this case, everyone can get what they want. Chimpanzee really has nothing justifiable whatsoever to complain about.

Chimpanzee is either an utterly selfish individual who thinks that the Common Land is theirs to control the use of because of their apparent regular usage, or is someone looking for an excuse to make a political mountain out of a few blades of grass, let alone a molehill.

If anything is 'wrong', here, that was it.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]It's common land looked after by the elected council in the commoners(me & you) best interest so it's a bit dodgy saying who's right?[/p][/quote]It's not so much a matter of who's right, as what do people want to use the common land for. Clearly, there is a tremendous desire for more live music on a grander scale than has been seen in Southampton in recent years. So long as the event is properly managed (and most public and sporting events have been since Hillsborough), then why not use the common land for what a lot of people clearly want? As for Chimpanzee, they can still walk their dog, so in this case, everyone can get what they want. Chimpanzee really has nothing justifiable whatsoever to complain about. Chimpanzee is either an utterly selfish individual who thinks that the Common Land is theirs to control the use of because of their apparent regular usage, or is someone looking for an excuse to make a political mountain out of a few blades of grass, let alone a molehill. If anything is 'wrong', here, that was it. Radio Jammor
  • Score: 0

6:55am Tue 15 Jul 14

loosehead says...

Radio Jammor wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense.

We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?
Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?
It's common land looked after by the elected council in the commoners(me & you) best interest so it's a bit dodgy saying who's right?
It's not so much a matter of who's right, as what do people want to use the common land for.

Clearly, there is a tremendous desire for more live music on a grander scale than has been seen in Southampton in recent years. So long as the event is properly managed (and most public and sporting events have been since Hillsborough), then why not use the common land for what a lot of people clearly want?

As for Chimpanzee, they can still walk their dog, so in this case, everyone can get what they want. Chimpanzee really has nothing justifiable whatsoever to complain about.

Chimpanzee is either an utterly selfish individual who thinks that the Common Land is theirs to control the use of because of their apparent regular usage, or is someone looking for an excuse to make a political mountain out of a few blades of grass, let alone a molehill.

If anything is 'wrong', here, that was it.
As I've already said I have nothing against out door concerts but would love to see them at Mayflower park.
[quote][p][bold]Radio Jammor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity. The charge of £42.00 each per day extracted from each of the 12000 participant's must have made a hefty profit at rate payers expense. We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. The common is now increasingly used by the greedy council for letting out to commercial venture's such as this. Is this not a breach of the law and failure to protect common land?[/p][/quote]Ahhhhhh so you were deprived of it for one day. Do you want me to wave a flag in sympathy?[/p][/quote]It's common land looked after by the elected council in the commoners(me & you) best interest so it's a bit dodgy saying who's right?[/p][/quote]It's not so much a matter of who's right, as what do people want to use the common land for. Clearly, there is a tremendous desire for more live music on a grander scale than has been seen in Southampton in recent years. So long as the event is properly managed (and most public and sporting events have been since Hillsborough), then why not use the common land for what a lot of people clearly want? As for Chimpanzee, they can still walk their dog, so in this case, everyone can get what they want. Chimpanzee really has nothing justifiable whatsoever to complain about. Chimpanzee is either an utterly selfish individual who thinks that the Common Land is theirs to control the use of because of their apparent regular usage, or is someone looking for an excuse to make a political mountain out of a few blades of grass, let alone a molehill. If anything is 'wrong', here, that was it.[/p][/quote]As I've already said I have nothing against out door concerts but would love to see them at Mayflower park. loosehead
  • Score: 0

11:24am Tue 15 Jul 14

Dizzybee says...

Wher are he Hi De Hi Girls ????? They were photographed and interviewed and so popular all day bt didn't make the paper ?????
Wher are he Hi De Hi Girls ????? They were photographed and interviewed and so popular all day bt didn't make the paper ????? Dizzybee
  • Score: 0

11:27am Tue 15 Jul 14

camerajuan says...

Chimpanzee, stay indoors and keep off the internet. People like you are the main cause of anything negative in this world and could find misery at a theme park.

So much of what you said reeks of selfishness and boredom. The common isn't your house or your back garden, therefore comparing the two is utterly pointless.

I hope this returns next year and I hope its at the common again.

Also ToastyTea, how about you don't generalise about an age bracket next time? I lived with 5/6 people for 4 years up until last month and we all loved the 80s music and had it on regularly before nights out - which usually had us ending up in Reflex/Popworld for more of the same! We all had friends outside of the house obviously and whoever came for parties/predrinks/wh
atever they all loved it also. Percentage of said people (I'd say close to 100 over 4 years) that are over 40? 1%! That's because my sister visited one weekend. She turned 40 in May last year. I'm 30 and I'm the 3rd oldest that has enjoyed the 80s from my group.

Thousands upon thousands of people love the 80s in Hampshire and many of them are under 40. Almost everyone I've met since moving here fits into that bracket. If you don't like it, don't go and stop your whining because other people had fun. You're pathetic if you can find gloom at an 80s concert.
Chimpanzee, stay indoors and keep off the internet. People like you are the main cause of anything negative in this world and could find misery at a theme park. So much of what you said reeks of selfishness and boredom. The common isn't your house or your back garden, therefore comparing the two is utterly pointless. I hope this returns next year and I hope its at the common again. Also ToastyTea, how about you don't generalise about an age bracket next time? I lived with 5/6 people for 4 years up until last month and we all loved the 80s music and had it on regularly before nights out - which usually had us ending up in Reflex/Popworld for more of the same! We all had friends outside of the house obviously and whoever came for parties/predrinks/wh atever they all loved it also. Percentage of said people (I'd say close to 100 over 4 years) that are over 40? 1%! That's because my sister visited one weekend. She turned 40 in May last year. I'm 30 and I'm the 3rd oldest that has enjoyed the 80s from my group. Thousands upon thousands of people love the 80s in Hampshire and many of them are under 40. Almost everyone I've met since moving here fits into that bracket. If you don't like it, don't go and stop your whining because other people had fun. You're pathetic if you can find gloom at an 80s concert. camerajuan
  • Score: 1

5:54pm Tue 15 Jul 14

CHIMPANZEE says...

Radio Jammor wrote:
garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start?

"It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..."

By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country.

"We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. "

"We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you!

You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim.

"Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use."

In case you have not noticed, it still is.

"How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent."

The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet.

"If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?"

I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid.

As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc.

The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business.

Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you.

@ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those.

The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it.

I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians.

As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.
You forget that even an inch of common land is not permitted for commercial purposes. Had we not stuck to that principle the common as we know it now would have long perished if left in the hands of city council and their vested interst or vultures
[quote][p][bold]Radio Jammor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start? "It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..." By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country. "We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. " "We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you! You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim. "Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use." In case you have not noticed, it still is. "How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent." The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet. "If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?" I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid. As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc. The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business. Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you. @ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those. The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it. I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians. As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.[/p][/quote]You forget that even an inch of common land is not permitted for commercial purposes. Had we not stuck to that principle the common as we know it now would have long perished if left in the hands of city council and their vested interst or vultures CHIMPANZEE
  • Score: 0

12:41am Wed 16 Jul 14

latitude19 says...

Charging for access to common land is wrong, Having a charitable donation bucket when you enter would bypass the common law. Those old enough to remember the Southampton show was also forced to stop charging an entrance fee for common land over 30 years ago. Its called a common for a reason. More like the organisers wanted a cheap venue with high returns
Charging for access to common land is wrong, Having a charitable donation bucket when you enter would bypass the common law. Those old enough to remember the Southampton show was also forced to stop charging an entrance fee for common land over 30 years ago. Its called a common for a reason. More like the organisers wanted a cheap venue with high returns latitude19
  • Score: 1

9:37am Wed 16 Jul 14

camerajuan says...

CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Radio Jammor wrote:
garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start?

"It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..."

By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country.

"We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. "

"We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you!

You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim.

"Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use."

In case you have not noticed, it still is.

"How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent."

The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet.

"If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?"

I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid.

As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc.

The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business.

Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you.

@ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those.

The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it.

I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians.

As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.
You forget that even an inch of common land is not permitted for commercial purposes. Had we not stuck to that principle the common as we know it now would have long perished if left in the hands of city council and their vested interst or vultures
If that's true, a permit for this concert would not have been given and the concert would not have happened.

As the concert went on as planned, with £42 entry per person, the commercial gain prior to artists fees and no doubt a substantial donation to the Council for allowing it to happen, stood at £504,000 and therefore your bitter whining is yet again incorrect.

Give up.
[quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Radio Jammor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start? "It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..." By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country. "We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. " "We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you! You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim. "Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use." In case you have not noticed, it still is. "How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent." The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet. "If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?" I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid. As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc. The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business. Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you. @ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those. The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it. I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians. As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.[/p][/quote]You forget that even an inch of common land is not permitted for commercial purposes. Had we not stuck to that principle the common as we know it now would have long perished if left in the hands of city council and their vested interst or vultures[/p][/quote]If that's true, a permit for this concert would not have been given and the concert would not have happened. As the concert went on as planned, with £42 entry per person, the commercial gain prior to artists fees and no doubt a substantial donation to the Council for allowing it to happen, stood at £504,000 and therefore your bitter whining is yet again incorrect. Give up. camerajuan
  • Score: 0

6:11pm Wed 16 Jul 14

loosehead says...

camerajuan wrote:
CHIMPANZEE wrote:
Radio Jammor wrote:
garlic wrote:
Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.
Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start?

"It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..."

By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country.

"We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. "

"We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you!

You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim.

"Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use."

In case you have not noticed, it still is.

"How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent."

The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet.

"If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?"

I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid.

As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc.

The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business.

Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you.

@ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those.

The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it.

I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians.

As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.
You forget that even an inch of common land is not permitted for commercial purposes. Had we not stuck to that principle the common as we know it now would have long perished if left in the hands of city council and their vested interst or vultures
If that's true, a permit for this concert would not have been given and the concert would not have happened.

As the concert went on as planned, with £42 entry per person, the commercial gain prior to artists fees and no doubt a substantial donation to the Council for allowing it to happen, stood at £504,000 and therefore your bitter whining is yet again incorrect.

Give up.
As Common land we have every right to access every part of it but the Council elected by us are there to maintain & look after it in other words they're our elected custodians of the common as they are of the Sports Centre.
If they feel it's beneficial to the city's people to hold functions on the common that's their right to do so.
I don't know if there's a clause where if enough commoners object to any event they can over rule the council on this matter.
Surely common land or public rights of way can't be blocked to the people can they no matter what financial gain there is?
Put it on at Mayflower Park where there are gates then I can't see any arguments being justified.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHIMPANZEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Radio Jammor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garlic[/bold] wrote: Embarrassing that this seems to be the main cultural event Southampton has to offer.[/p][/quote]Oh, dear, The NIMBYs have been let loose again. Where do I start? "It was said that this event on Common land was run for the benefit of an unknown charity..." By whom? That is a nonsense. This is a commercial venture that occurs at a number of venues across the country. "We live near the common and use it each day. We were deprived of its use as a large part of common was closed off for those of us who did not wish to spend this fee. " "We"? Oh no, there's more than one of you! You make it sound as though the whole common was sealed off. It was not. There was plenty of space for anyone wanting to use The Common for a walk, contrary to your claim. "Yes you must if you have any principles or sense of the heritage under which we were lucky enough to be provided common land and its lovely gardens for free public use." In case you have not noticed, it still is. "How would you feel if the council let out your house and garden to a noisy band, however artistic it was and deprived you of its use without your consent." The Common is not your home. It is not yours, but communally owned. Your comparison therefore fails. As for issues of consent and opposition, you appear to be in a tiny minority. 12000 people voted in favour with their feet. "If you give the promoters or business interests one tiny finger the next thing they will do is grab your entire body. There are many such commercial events on the common and if one does not object the whole common will be turned into a giant super market each day. Is that what the people want? What do our MP's say about this erosion of public heritage?" I'm not a kid any more ; Southampton Common has barely changed in my lifetime, and there would be a furore if there was any move to put any permanent fixtures ,such as those you fear, onto that land, so I'd say your fears are overwrought and paranoid. As for your comments about "profiteering", your simple take on book-keeping is deeply flawed. I won't even bother with the GBP42 figure, as there were quite a few different rates, but you are entirely missing the costs side of your increasingly pathetic argument. The artists did not come and perform for free, nor did the organisers, the security, the stage crews, etc, etc. The entry fee is not for use of the land as such - it is for the cost of the event(s) - and I do not begrudge the organisers making a reasonable profit out of it. That's business. Chimpanzee, your not liking an event like this is your privilege, but it is, by its very nature, a very temporary event, that places like Ashton Court in Bristol, for example, embrace. In my view, so should Southampton. There are very few places and opportunities for people in and about Southampton to see pop music, past and present, and that's probably due to the short-sighted and selfish views of someone like you. @ToastyTea, first of all, wait until you are older and the younger generation says that about your music :P However, I have some sympathy for your view. I remember that there were contemporary music events years ago on Southampton Common, but they were quite short-lived. I imagine that NIMBYs like Chimpanzee put paid to those. The artists have been saying on Twitter and the like how much they enjoyed being in Southampton because the audience really embraced it. I think that's great and I am not surprised, because with the lack of other such gigs in the area, the appearance of this one was that much more appreciated. And in my experience of gigs, I don't recall an audience up for one in quite the same way as this one. It was great. I loved it. I very much hope Let's Rock Southampton returns and does so for years to come, for the benefit of Sotonians. As for Chimpanzee, you ought to realise that you live in the middle of a city. Perhaps if events such as Let's Rock Southampton are such an issue for you, maybe you ought to consider moving out to the countryside.[/p][/quote]You forget that even an inch of common land is not permitted for commercial purposes. Had we not stuck to that principle the common as we know it now would have long perished if left in the hands of city council and their vested interst or vultures[/p][/quote]If that's true, a permit for this concert would not have been given and the concert would not have happened. As the concert went on as planned, with £42 entry per person, the commercial gain prior to artists fees and no doubt a substantial donation to the Council for allowing it to happen, stood at £504,000 and therefore your bitter whining is yet again incorrect. Give up.[/p][/quote]As Common land we have every right to access every part of it but the Council elected by us are there to maintain & look after it in other words they're our elected custodians of the common as they are of the Sports Centre. If they feel it's beneficial to the city's people to hold functions on the common that's their right to do so. I don't know if there's a clause where if enough commoners object to any event they can over rule the council on this matter. Surely common land or public rights of way can't be blocked to the people can they no matter what financial gain there is? Put it on at Mayflower Park where there are gates then I can't see any arguments being justified. loosehead
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree