WMiller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTF else do you think would suffer if Mick
> couldn't sing, dumb-ass.


well you know what then, THEY WILL JUST HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT LIKE YOU TOLD ALL THE AC FANS TO DO, DUMB ASS

melillo, i understand how you feel, when the stones go to Oakland and Dodger Satdaium and see Thousands of empty seats, they are going to think about AC..Some of the best tickets in the house are being retunred daily! Seeing the Stones is just not a priotiry any more...sad but true.

I don't recall telling the AC fans to "deal with it". Can you post the link to my posting.

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> well you know what then, THEY WILL JUST HAVE TO
> DEAL WITH IT LIKE YOU TOLD ALL THE AC FANS TO DO,
> DUMB ASS

Was Mick not sick last night either? Or was he only faking it for the AC crowd?

Please consider that they didn't cancel AC, they postponed it.

And please don't shout your answer, I'm right here.

MicknSteven Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> melillo, i understand how you feel, when the
> stones go to Oakland and Dodger Satdaium and see
> Thousands of empty seats, they are going to think
> about AC..Some of the best tickets in the house
> are being retunred daily! Seeing the Stones is
> just not a priotiry any more...sad but true.


oh that would be sweet

camper88 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stickyfingers101 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For those of you mocking the woman who sued
> > McDonalds for the coffee incident....
> >
> > do your research before you mock people....or
> at
> > least try dumping scalding hot coffee on your
> > balls and/or vagina and see how it feels...
>
> sticky,
>
> If that's aimed at me, I'm not mocking the woman,
> I'm answering the question about how I'd feel if
> it were my (already dead) grandmother.
>
> Jed knows, I assume, that a lawyer does best to
> know in advance the answer to any question that a
> lawyer asks.
>
> You neglect to mention that
>
of this woman's.
>
if it's still hot.
>
> 5. The jury found the woman to be 20% guilty for
> the accident, because she held a hot cup of coffee
> between her legs in a moving car while attempting
> to add cream and suger, reducing her compensatory
> damages from 200k to 160k because of her own
> liability in the event.
>
> trying to add cream/sugar to a hot coffee in a moving car...............that idiot had no one to blame but herself (i'm sorry she was hurt, but it's her fault that it spilled, not Mickey-D)........anyone else besides me getting a tad fed up with "scapegoat for dollars" mentality?...........don't get me wrong....McDonald's sucks with a capitol "S"..........but they shouldn't be expected to "baby-sit" their idiotic customers



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2006-11-02 02:38 by Leonard Keringer.

AC would have happened, but the next two or three shows would haven been cancelled .. if the next two shows would not haven been "very important". That's how it looks like FOR ME. It's MY opinion. An "outsider" . Maybe it's not reality. But.. and next year - if Europe happens I don't buy a ticket for a "not important" show or not "exotic enough" show. I don't book flights to places which could be "dangerous". Because I have to earn my money. And I don't like to loose it. Not even for the Stones. That's my consequence. Maybe Mick was really more ill at AC show day. But how they handled all this (RS.com.. no excuses).... no .. after loosing 6 flights in Europe this year.. i have to protect myself from "stones-mania" harr harr lol



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-11-02 01:51 by mariannerl.

they better cancel AC altogether, cause if they think they are gona get anyone to go in november they are crazy, besides it wasnt even sold out anyway before mick got uh uhmmmmmmm, sick



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-11-02 02:58 by melillo.

I posted this on another thread but thought it fits here, too.

I don't know what to believe, if the Stones are telling the truth or not or didn't cancel the gig right away or not. However, if we give them the benefit of the doubt and to play devil's advocate for a minute, it is perhaps possible for them to have been thinking that there might be a chance they have to cancel AC 4 or how many days before, rumors spread through their organization/crew members and someone thought they heard that it was off when it was just a wait and see deal. I think that rehearsals aren't as grueling as a show, so maybe they were rehearsing and watching Mick's voice to see how it was doing. Then, they decide on Friday morning that the show is off, send out the info, and then Ticketmaster or whoever sends out the emails is slow in sending it out.
I don't know if this is true or not, don't necessarily believe this, but think it may be a possibility, or at least some of it. Haven't heard anyone else say this so thought I would mention it as a possibility.

The case did not settle out of court. It went to verdict. The jury awarded her around a million bucks, half of which went to medical bills. Whether or not you agree with the verdict, the facts are that home office warned the store not to superheat the coffee due to this very danger. Drip coffee for drive thrus is not supposed to be served anywhere near 200 degrees due to the inherent spillage danger involved in the physical transfer of the beverage through a drive thu window to a car occupant. The forseeability could not have been clearer. This was a case where they were warned by the entity that sets the rules, and the warning was purposefully ignored for the sake of profit. The fact that the water was superheated to increase the coffee output was conclusivly proven at trial. This is public record. The restaurant got what it deserved, whether or not you agree with the result.


camper88 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jed Clever Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If this was your grandmother that
> > this happened to, would you consider it
> > “frivolous”?
>
> If this were my grandmother? Yes I'd consider it
> frivolous; she's been dead for 40 years. No harm,
> no foul.
>
>
> Of course I'd wonder what she was doing at a
> McDonald's, the food can kill ya.
>
> But all kidding aside . . .
>
> Espresso coffee is prepared at temperatures of
> about 203 degrees F, and drip coffee is often
> prepared at slightly below that temperature for
> flavour extraction (it tastes better), not to
> produce more coffee--coffee packages used in
> restaurants are premeasured and you can only fill
> the pot so much.
>
> In brief, customers know that coffee is served
> hot, or at least they should.
>
> By the way, what what was the damages (payment) to
> the elderly woman who held a styrofoam cup of
> coffee between her knees in a moving vehicle in an
> attempt to remove the lid and add cream and
> sugar?
>
> My understanding is that we don't know because the
> case was (secretly) settled out of court.

This is an interesting question. If it can be proved that the band knew that it would be canceling the concert four days prior, ticket buyers who bought tickets in that four day period could argue that they were fraudulently induced into buying a ticket for a concert that the sellers knew was not going to happen (“fraud in the inducement”). Those who already had their tickets can't make this argument. The problem is of course proving the pre-planned cancellation. Who in the Stones organization with actual knowledge ( a smoking gun as opposed to hearsay) is gonna rat out Mick 'n Keith?

WMiller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice post Jed.
>
> I'm wondering though. If the band did know that
> they were going to be cancelling 4 days or so
> prior to the concert date, but waited until the
> concert date to make an announcement, does that
> change anything in categorizing this as a
> frivoulous case?
>
> I'm not interested in debating the validity of the
> rumors, I'm just curious about how, if they were
> true, the case would be viewed by the courts.

Performers get sick. Especially in the cold Autumn, when you're over 60, and pushing too hard. The band, if they continue with this Spinal Tap-like tour should do fewer dates, with more space in-between.

Of course, that would mean less millions for them. If they scaled back the 'spectacle' and played indoor arenas, at $100 0r $125 a ticket, with a normal light show, they'd probably still do just fine, financially, playing 20 or 25 gigs over a 3 month period....and probably face a lot slimmer chance of cancelling shows because of a strained voice...or playing to half-empty stadiums.

But like the persion suing, the Stones ar greedy too, so it'll never happen.

By the way, I purchased four tickets to Oakland, only to find the show moved from Sunday to Monday. Like many others, I'm pissed as hell! This is by far the most screwed up Stones tour ever!

Go rent Spinal Tap. The Stones and that fictitious band are beginning to have some similarities....

What's next? Charlie spontaneously combusting?

Thank to stupid people going to court for nothing, litigation lawyers can fly their onw jet, like the Stones......

Grichka >> [collateral-interference.blogspot.com]

Gricha Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank to stupid people going to court for nothing,
> litigation lawyers can fly their onw jet, like the
> Stones......


You don't know what you are talking about. People do not go to court "for nothing". They may sue over nothing, but the litigation system works quite well at weeding out the bogus cases from the ligitimate cases prior to trial. What happens a lot more often are people getting screwed over by insurance companies and having no recourse because they cannot meet their burden of proof. Why don't you educate yourself before talking out of your ass? That way you won't sound quite as stupid as you obviously are.

This is the most absurd lawsuit that I've ever heard of....including the McDonald's coffee incident, I think. I've personally had the same thing happen, in which we were informed of a concert cancellation an hour before an out of town show. I too had booked a non-refundable hotel room. Yes, we were disappointed - but considering a lawsuit??? I don't care if she's been to fifty or one-hundred shows - no one that is a true fan would consider this measure. Maybe she should consider keeping better company if the "boring" weekend that she spent with friends is being blamed on a cancelled concert. We managed to make the best of our weekend, enjoy the time together, and let it go. Maybe someday there will be another show that we can enjoy. What kind of message does this send to countless fans of other bands? Is this going to become a new practice?? If so, we can all count on bands booking fewer tours to protect themselves. There are letdowns in life - face them and move on!

2 concert tickets - $575
hotel room - $300
travel costs/childcare - $150?
The look on her foolish face when she loses - PRICELESS

and the look on the stones face when they play an empty friggin AC in november,
EVEN BETTER



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-11-02 05:28 by melillo.

BOYCOTT AC IN NOVEMBER, ANYONE WHO HAD TIX OR IS THINKING OF GETTING TIX TO THIS SHOW, DONT DO IT , BOYCOTT THE AC SHOW LIKE THE STONES DID TO US

Jed Clever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The case did not settle out of court. It went to
> verdict. The jury awarded her around a million
> bucks, half of which went to medical bills.

That's a fabrication. McDonald's appealed and eventually the case was settled out of court. That's been documented.

[www.lectlaw.com]


> Whether or not you agree with the verdict, the
> facts are that home office warned the store not to
> superheat the coffee due to this very danger.

The "facts" of a warning does not in and of itself mean that the store was liable, surely you must recognize that. By the way, I have no opinion on the case.

> This was a case where they were warned by the entity that sets the rules,

Actually, McDonald's system (or Corporate) doesn't "set the rules" for their owner/ operators at the store level, the owner/ operators do. They don't even have to buy McDonald's products, promotions, or systems--and some don't. But as one might imagine, they have good reason to use the system if they want to profitably leverage a system that has worked for decades in over 100 markets.

By the way, I'm not defending McDonald's or the owner operator responsible for serving the coffee, I'm simply offering a corrective on how that organization operates what it calls a 3-legged stool, of suppliers, systems, and owner operators. McDonald's is a real-estate company that leases a site to an owner operator for 20 years at a time, and the owner operator agrees to pay them so much $ per month for the spot and equipment, and at the end of 20 years McDonald's owns the real estate and the O/O has made millions in profit from partaking in a supplier system where the most expensive food products cost less than 35 cents to produce are sold for as much as ten times that amount. End result, McDonald's owns more real estate than any other organization in the world except the Catholic Chuch.


> the warning was purposefully ignored for the sake
> of profit.

Equally untrue. The coffee was heated to extract flavor, not to create additional volume of coffee. The testimony is clear in this regard (see link above).

By the way, drip coffee is already the highest margin product in the restaurant business, and the cost of "superheating" (as opposed to just "heating") the water would offset any increased margin gained by creating an additional volume of coffee. Heat isn't free.

More importantly, the coffee packages are premeasured to decrease the labor cost or inefficiency of measuring coffee. Additional labor would also further offset any margin increase available from saving an ounce of grinds.

Take a look at a site like coffeegeek.com to see the (flavor) value of brewing coffee at just over 200 degrees F. Ironically, the restaurant could have increased its margins more by selling colder coffee brewed for a longer period of time rather than by serving hotter coffee--but it simply would have tasted worse than McDonald's coffee already tastes.

Should the woman have waited before placing a hot cup of coffee between her legs while the car was in motion?

Probably.

I know that I'd never do what she did, and if I did, I'd only blame myself for spilling the coffee.

Should the coffee have been cooler? Either that or the lid should have been impossible to remove, to idiot-proof the item. Given that you can't idiot-proof the cup, I suppose McDonald's should a) have refused to sell her the coffee (as a bar would refuse to serve a drunk), or b) McDonald's must take responsibility for the actions of careless customers who spill coffee on themselves.

Jed Clever:

>All these tickets contains disclaimer language stating that all shows are subject to cancellation, and that should that occur, consequential damages (e.g., travel expenses) are not recoverable by a ticket holder.<

All very fine, but just one thing.

I don't recall exactly how it goes, but don't you just get your ticket and everything only ONCE you have paid your money? I have never bought mines off Internet, so I ignore how it works. But in person, it's not like you get a chance to READ such "contract" fineprint beforehand at all...

Am I wrong in assuming this?

I think Cosmo Kramer prevailed in a similar lawsuit against Starbucks....of course he had Jackie Chiles for an attorney. He was awarded a lifetime supply of free coffee.

All of this lawsuit talk makes me wonder...

How nervous must Axl Rose be while awaiting the outcome of this litigation???
Just think of the possibilities?

regarding the coffee..it was over 800 complaints in 1 year...not over 10 years...my fault for not clarifying....

I don't think the woman had balls....

good luck w/ your boycott Mellilo...

Axl sucks....ruined my favorite band.

The Stones Charging $150....only in our dreams...they are already used to getting $450.00 per ticket here in LA