Barnyb

Team UK

Recommended Posts

 

In the case of Team New Zealand their argument against change is purely focused on their desire to host part of the qualifying series in NZ, at huge expense and competitive disadvantage to all of the other teams.

 

This is the key line in the BA interview. I have heard this from a number of different people over the last few months and i have to agree. Holding the part of the challenger series in NZ is totally unfair on all teams except for ETNZ. If some of the challenger series is held in NZ all teams except for ETNZ will

 

1. Have to set up base and house their team in NZ, as well as ship all their gear. This is not like a weekend ACWS event. I have been told that the expense of this makes it one of the real big ticket items for a campaign. Yet ETNZ won't have any of that expense, because they already have a base, fully equiped, and housing for their whole team.

 

2. All teams except for ETNZ will lose their boats for a significant period of time while they are being shipped. Even if a no sail period was enforced against ETNZ (although there is no suggestion of that), they would still have the advantage of being able to work on their boat when others couldn't.

 

3. ETNZ would be sailing part of the challenger series on home water. Why should they have that advantage? This again feeds back to setting up in NZ. Teams will have no option to get the right people out there doing venue studies.

 

Bottom line is that on this one point, BA is right and is saying what other teams have been saying in private for a while. Of course, Grumpy wants to get the biggest advantage he can for his team and anyway, it wouldn't be the AC without Grumpy getting grumpy about something.

Can you even hear yourself over the sound of your own self pitty? Crying its not fair? wtf Since when AC is about fair? And how is it fair on team nz to travel and ship their ship to all the venues in Europe and US? That's like football team refusing to travel around Europe to play the cup. I lost my respect for team nz after that DB debacle but now I just want them to win and then host all of the next WS in NZ only. Hope that saves you money. You want to save money? Where is the spending limit then? How about you throw in nationality rules. BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke. If team NZ can't pull of this victory I hope it will be someone who will say FU to all the cup rules implemented by Oracle and redesign new series that actually mean something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Can you even hear yourself over the sound of your own self pitty? Crying its not fair? wtf Since when AC is about fair? And how is it fair on team nz to travel and ship their ship to all the venues in Europe and US? That's like football team refusing to travel around Europe to play the cup. I lost my respect for team nz after that DB debacle but now I just want them to win and then host all of the next WS in NZ only. Hope that saves you money. You want to save money? Where is the spending limit then? How about you throw in nationality rules. BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke. If team NZ can't pull of this victory I hope it will be someone who will say FU to all the cup rules implemented by Oracle and redesign new series that actually mean something.

--------------

 

Have to say my sympathies are with TNZ in this case - so they have to do all the travelling and no hometown event to garner support?

 

Any respect one might have had for BA's achievements in the past has gone - he's joined the Russel and Larry bandwagon for his own personal gains and bollocks to everything else.

 

The whole debacle has soured the AC, and possibly fatally - expect to see it die and eventually get resurrected a few years down the line by the sort of people that it was all about in the first place.

Just another dog and pony show. Run by muppets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke.

 

Grow up. It's BAR because 1. there's no headline sponsor at present and 2. Ben Ainslie is a well-known name for marketing purposes. If a headline sponsor comes along offering $Ms, do you seriously believe the name wouldn't change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke.

Grow up. It's BAR because 1. there's no headline sponsor at present and 2. Ben Ainslie is a well-known name for marketing purposes. If a headline sponsor comes along offering $Ms, do you seriously believe the name wouldn't change?

So you think that while waiting for main sponsor Team UK wouldn't suffice? Does UK not have marketing value? Is it worth less than marketing value of BA? I bet more people in UK would get behind them. Even sponsors would be able to say they support team UK and not team BAR. Everybody knows BA is the reason why the team exists. He is a brilliant sailor (no one is disputing that). He just likes to look in a mirror little too much. IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In the case of Team New Zealand their argument against change is purely focused on their desire to host part of the qualifying series in NZ, at huge expense and competitive disadvantage to all of the other teams.

 

This is the key line in the BA interview. I have heard this from a number of different people over the last few months and i have to agree. Holding the part of the challenger series in NZ is totally unfair on all teams except for ETNZ. If some of the challenger series is held in NZ all teams except for ETNZ will

 

1. Have to set up base and house their team in NZ, as well as ship all their gear. This is not like a weekend ACWS event. I have been told that the expense of this makes it one of the real big ticket items for a campaign. Yet ETNZ won't have any of that expense, because they already have a base, fully equiped, and housing for their whole team.

 

2. All teams except for ETNZ will lose their boats for a significant period of time while they are being shipped. Even if a no sail period was enforced against ETNZ (although there is no suggestion of that), they would still have the advantage of being able to work on their boat when others couldn't.

 

3. ETNZ would be sailing part of the challenger series on home water. Why should they have that advantage? This again feeds back to setting up in NZ. Teams will have no option to get the right people out there doing venue studies.

 

Bottom line is that on this one point, BA is right and is saying what other teams have been saying in private for a while. Of course, Grumpy wants to get the biggest advantage he can for his team and anyway, it wouldn't be the AC without Grumpy getting grumpy about something.

Can you even hear yourself over the sound of your own self pitty? Crying its not fair? wtf Since when AC is about fair? And how is it fair on team nz to travel and ship their ship to all the venues in Europe and US?

 

First, the challenger series has always been fair, giving each challenger an equal chance of progressing to the main match. I agree that the Cup itself isn't fair, but that is because the defender holds all the cards. This is different.

 

As for NZ having to travel, the costs of doing the ACWS are very different from what is being talked about with holding part of the challenger series in NZ. If it were a leg of the ACWS, I would totally agree that it was reasonable for all the other teams to travel to NZ. But it is not.

 

To start with, the ACWS was only for the glory of the dubious title of ACWS World Champion. This proposed series forms part of the challenger selection series. Stakes are rather a lot higher.

 

For the ACWS, you have a temporary base that is set up for just under 2 week. For the challenger series, each team would need a (semi) permanent base for months.

 

For the ACWS, teams sent very small teams of people - the sailors plus a few support staff. For this proposed event, teams will have to move the majority of their team to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, each team gets the same opportunities to train (assuming they have the boats). With this series, ETNZ would have be able to train while all the others were shipping their boats to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, nobody bothered to train at the venue before hand (other than a few days) while with this event, teams will need to train extensively to get used to conditions. They will also need to reconnoiter the venue properly, which takes considerable time and effort.

 

Finally, there is the issue of home water advantage. Why should any one challenger team have any home water advantage for any of the challenger series?

 

The bottom line is simple. Holding part of the challenger series in NZ adds a very significant cost to all teams except NZ while it also gives ETNZ a significant sailing advantage. Only an ETNZ suporter could play all of that down. So, I will say it again - if this was a leg of the ACWS, I would agree that it is fair that the teams should travel to NZ. For part of the challenger series, it is totally wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

In the case of Team New Zealand their argument against change is purely focused on their desire to host part of the qualifying series in NZ, at huge expense and competitive disadvantage to all of the other teams.

 

This is the key line in the BA interview. I have heard this from a number of different people over the last few months and i have to agree. Holding the part of the challenger series in NZ is totally unfair on all teams except for ETNZ. If some of the challenger series is held in NZ all teams except for ETNZ will

 

1. Have to set up base and house their team in NZ, as well as ship all their gear. This is not like a weekend ACWS event. I have been told that the expense of this makes it one of the real big ticket items for a campaign. Yet ETNZ won't have any of that expense, because they already have a base, fully equiped, and housing for their whole team.

 

2. All teams except for ETNZ will lose their boats for a significant period of time while they are being shipped. Even if a no sail period was enforced against ETNZ (although there is no suggestion of that), they would still have the advantage of being able to work on their boat when others couldn't.

 

3. ETNZ would be sailing part of the challenger series on home water. Why should they have that advantage? This again feeds back to setting up in NZ. Teams will have no option to get the right people out there doing venue studies.

 

Bottom line is that on this one point, BA is right and is saying what other teams have been saying in private for a while. Of course, Grumpy wants to get the biggest advantage he can for his team and anyway, it wouldn't be the AC without Grumpy getting grumpy about something.

Can you even hear yourself over the sound of your own self pitty? Crying its not fair? wtf Since when AC is about fair? And how is it fair on team nz to travel and ship their ship to all the venues in Europe and US?

First, the challenger series has always been fair, giving each challenger an equal chance of progressing to the main match. I agree that the Cup itself isn't fair, but that is because the defender holds all the cards. This is different.

 

As for NZ having to travel, the costs of doing the ACWS are very different from what is being talked about with holding part of the challenger series in NZ. If it were a leg of the ACWS, I would totally agree that it was reasonable for all the other teams to travel to NZ. But it is not.

 

To start with, the ACWS was only for the glory of the dubious title of ACWS World Champion. This proposed series forms part of the challenger selection series. Stakes are rather a lot higher.

 

For the ACWS, you have a temporary base that is set up for just under 2 week. For the challenger series, each team would need a (semi) permanent base for months.

 

For the ACWS, teams sent very small teams of people - the sailors plus a few support staff. For this proposed event, teams will have to move the majority of their team to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, each team gets the same opportunities to train (assuming they have the boats). With this series, ETNZ would have be able to train while all the others were shipping their boats to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, nobody bothered to train at the venue before hand (other than a few days) while with this event, teams will need to train extensively to get used to conditions. They will also need to reconnoiter the venue properly, which takes considerable time and effort.

 

Finally, there is the issue of home water advantage. Why should any one challenger team have any home water advantage for any of the challenger series?

 

The bottom line is simple. Holding part of the challenger series in NZ adds a very significant cost to all teams except NZ while it also gives ETNZ a significant sailing advantage. Only an ETNZ suporter could play all of that down. So, I will say it again - if this was a leg of the ACWS, I would agree that it is fair that the teams should travel to NZ. For part of the challenger series, it is totally wrong.

Doesn't look like we will agree. Its not always about money. Especially not in AC. Teams agreed to it and signed the protocol. Why change now? Thanks for the civilised reply though. That's appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke.

Grow up. It's BAR because 1. there's no headline sponsor at present and 2. Ben Ainslie is a well-known name for marketing purposes. If a headline sponsor comes along offering $Ms, do you seriously believe the name wouldn't change?

So you think that while waiting for main sponsor Team UK wouldn't suffice?

 

 

Team UK would be obnoxious. It's a private venture, he doesn't represent the UK.

 

Not all Americans seem delighted about the team previously known as Oracle Racing called themselves "Team USA", come to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke.

Grow up. It's BAR because 1. there's no headline sponsor at present and 2. Ben Ainslie is a well-known name for marketing purposes. If a headline sponsor comes along offering $Ms, do you seriously believe the name wouldn't change?

So you think that while waiting for main sponsor Team UK wouldn't suffice?

Team UK would be obnoxious. It's a private venture, he doesn't represent the UK.

Ok that's one thing I agree with. Wondering if guys on his boat know that. Hope they will get BAR flag flying soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Team UK would be obnoxious. It's a private venture, he doesn't represent the UK.

 

Of course he represents the UK. He has some government money to prove it (a constant thorn in your side), or are you saying that he would need to be 100% 'public' money funded to represent the UK in the same way he did when the national anthem was being played for his latest Olympic gold medal?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the building had government money, not the team. Money isn't the point. In the Olympics he did represent Britain. He went through a recognised selection process to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the building had government money, not the team.

 

In the Olympics he did represent Britain. He went through a recognised selection process to do so.

 

With the Duchess of Cambridge and the Prime Minister happy to back the team I'd say that they do represent the UK in the America's Cup.

Who do you suppose the government cheque was sent to for the team base contribution? The contractor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

In the case of Team New Zealand their argument against change is purely focused on their desire to host part of the qualifying series in NZ, at huge expense and competitive disadvantage to all of the other teams.

 

This is the key line in the BA interview. I have heard this from a number of different people over the last few months and i have to agree. Holding the part of the challenger series in NZ is totally unfair on all teams except for ETNZ. If some of the challenger series is held in NZ all teams except for ETNZ will

 

1. Have to set up base and house their team in NZ, as well as ship all their gear. This is not like a weekend ACWS event. I have been told that the expense of this makes it one of the real big ticket items for a campaign. Yet ETNZ won't have any of that expense, because they already have a base, fully equiped, and housing for their whole team.

 

2. All teams except for ETNZ will lose their boats for a significant period of time while they are being shipped. Even if a no sail period was enforced against ETNZ (although there is no suggestion of that), they would still have the advantage of being able to work on their boat when others couldn't.

 

3. ETNZ would be sailing part of the challenger series on home water. Why should they have that advantage? This again feeds back to setting up in NZ. Teams will have no option to get the right people out there doing venue studies.

 

Bottom line is that on this one point, BA is right and is saying what other teams have been saying in private for a while. Of course, Grumpy wants to get the biggest advantage he can for his team and anyway, it wouldn't be the AC without Grumpy getting grumpy about something.

Can you even hear yourself over the sound of your own self pitty? Crying its not fair? wtf Since when AC is about fair? And how is it fair on team nz to travel and ship their ship to all the venues in Europe and US?

First, the challenger series has always been fair, giving each challenger an equal chance of progressing to the main match. I agree that the Cup itself isn't fair, but that is because the defender holds all the cards. This is different.

 

As for NZ having to travel, the costs of doing the ACWS are very different from what is being talked about with holding part of the challenger series in NZ. If it were a leg of the ACWS, I would totally agree that it was reasonable for all the other teams to travel to NZ. But it is not.

 

To start with, the ACWS was only for the glory of the dubious title of ACWS World Champion. This proposed series forms part of the challenger selection series. Stakes are rather a lot higher.

 

For the ACWS, you have a temporary base that is set up for just under 2 week. For the challenger series, each team would need a (semi) permanent base for months.

 

For the ACWS, teams sent very small teams of people - the sailors plus a few support staff. For this proposed event, teams will have to move the majority of their team to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, each team gets the same opportunities to train (assuming they have the boats). With this series, ETNZ would have be able to train while all the others were shipping their boats to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, nobody bothered to train at the venue before hand (other than a few days) while with this event, teams will need to train extensively to get used to conditions. They will also need to reconnoiter the venue properly, which takes considerable time and effort.

 

Finally, there is the issue of home water advantage. Why should any one challenger team have any home water advantage for any of the challenger series?

 

The bottom line is simple. Holding part of the challenger series in NZ adds a very significant cost to all teams except NZ while it also gives ETNZ a significant sailing advantage. Only an ETNZ suporter could play all of that down. So, I will say it again - if this was a leg of the ACWS, I would agree that it is fair that the teams should travel to NZ. For part of the challenger series, it is totally wrong.

Doesn't look like we will agree. Its not always about money. Especially not in AC. Teams agreed to it and signed the protocol. Why change now? Thanks for the civilised reply though. That's appreciated.

 

Can you show me where in the protocol it states that the challenger series will be sailed on the home waters of one of the challengers? It doesn't. I think you need to read the protocol on this one, because then you wouldn't make a comment like that. It doesn't even state a venue. What it actually says is that the venue will be decided on by ACEA after consultation with the challenger committee and will be announced by 15th April 2015. So when they signed up they didn't know they would be sailing on the home waters of one of the challengers. I believe that as soon as it became known that NZ was in the running, teams began to look to get that changed. I heard about this about a month ago and I cannot believe that is when the discussion started.

 

And in this case it is primarily about the money and a bit about the actual venue. As I was told it, the costs of setting up and competing in NZ are very similar to doing it in Bermuda. Why do it twice? Why should ETNZ be excused such a significant item from the budget when others aren't. And based on what i have been told, the savings from not going to NZ are in the region than the savings from what they are doing to the boats. This really is a big ticket item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

First, the challenger series has always been fair, giving each challenger an equal chance of progressing to the main match. I agree that the Cup itself isn't fair, but that is because the defender holds all the cards. This is different.

 

As for NZ having to travel, the costs of doing the ACWS are very different from what is being talked about with holding part of the challenger series in NZ. If it were a leg of the ACWS, I would totally agree that it was reasonable for all the other teams to travel to NZ. But it is not.

 

To start with, the ACWS was only for the glory of the dubious title of ACWS World Champion. This proposed series forms part of the challenger selection series. Stakes are rather a lot higher.

 

For the ACWS, you have a temporary base that is set up for just under 2 week. For the challenger series, each team would need a (semi) permanent base for months.

 

For the ACWS, teams sent very small teams of people - the sailors plus a few support staff. For this proposed event, teams will have to move the majority of their team to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, each team gets the same opportunities to train (assuming they have the boats). With this series, ETNZ would have be able to train while all the others were shipping their boats to NZ.

 

For the ACWS, nobody bothered to train at the venue before hand (other than a few days) while with this event, teams will need to train extensively to get used to conditions. They will also need to reconnoiter the venue properly, which takes considerable time and effort.

 

Finally, there is the issue of home water advantage. Why should any one challenger team have any home water advantage for any of the challenger series?

 

The bottom line is simple. Holding part of the challenger series in NZ adds a very significant cost to all teams except NZ while it also gives ETNZ a significant sailing advantage. Only an ETNZ suporter could play all of that down. So, I will say it again - if this was a leg of the ACWS, I would agree that it is fair that the teams should travel to NZ. For part of the challenger series, it is totally wrong.

Doesn't look like we will agree. Its not always about money. Especially not in AC. Teams agreed to it and signed the protocol. Why change now? Thanks for the civilised reply though. That's appreciated.

 

Can you show me where in the protocol it states that the challenger series will be sailed on the home waters of one of the challengers? It doesn't. I think you need to read the protocol on this one, because then you wouldn't make a comment like that. It doesn't even state a venue. What it actually says is that the venue will be decided on by ACEA after consultation with the challenger committee and will be announced by 15th April 2015. So when they signed up they didn't know they would be sailing on the home waters of one of the challengers. I believe that as soon as it became known that NZ was in the running, teams began to look to get that changed. I heard about this about a month ago and I cannot believe that is when the discussion started.

 

And in this case it is primarily about the money and a bit about the actual venue. As I was told it, the costs of setting up and competing in NZ are very similar to doing it in Bermuda. Why do it twice? Why should ETNZ be excused such a significant item from the budget when others aren't. And based on what i have been told, the savings from not going to NZ are in the region than the savings from what they are doing to the boats. This really is a big ticket item.

 

The original version of the protocol, Artcile 27.3 states that 'The Commercial Commissioner (on behalf of ACEA) shall publish the Host City, Venue and dates of the America's Cup Qualifiers as soon as the details are finalized, but no later than February 15, 2015.' The protocol also states that a host venue bid process will be conducted by ACEA. BA knew that the qualifiers could be hosted in the Southern Hemisphere when he entered, there was also nothing stopping him from bidding to host the qualifiers in the UK, perhaps to prevent having to travel to the Southern Hemisphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why all the beating up on BA on this issue? From what I know, the only team happy about going to NZ was ETNZ. Just because BA happens to say what others haven't doesn't mean he is the only one who thinks that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why all the beating up on BA on this issue? From what I know, the only team happy about going to NZ was ETNZ. Just because BA happens to say what others haven't doesn't mean he is the only one who thinks that way.

 

Why are you making it sound like it was ETNZ's idea to hold a "qualifiers" in the first place, and to cut the field down to four, at a venue other than where the Cup was going to be held?

 

Why is ETNZ responsible for Schiller signing a document that said the Auckland event was going to be held? Did Dalton hold a gun to his head?

 

This whole thing could have been avoided, and everyone would have been in a much stronger position financially if Coutts wasn't such an asshole.

 

Neither Ainslie or Dalton are the problem. Coutts is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

BA is the most arogant prick there is. He is the only one naming his "UK" entry with his ownname. What a joke.

Grow up. It's BAR because 1. there's no headline sponsor at present and 2. Ben Ainslie is a well-known name for marketing purposes. If a headline sponsor comes along offering $Ms, do you seriously believe the name wouldn't change?

So you think that while waiting for main sponsor Team UK wouldn't suffice?

Team UK would be obnoxious. It's a private venture, he doesn't represent the UK.

 

Not all Americans seem delighted about the team previously known as Oracle Racing called themselves "Team USA", come to that.

Well - at least he put Oracle first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Can you show me where in the protocol it states that the challenger series will be sailed on the home waters of one of the challengers? It doesn't. I think you need to read the protocol on this one,

Simon, I think you should read the protocol on this one. It does not say it will but all the probabilities are that it will be the case.

 

25.3. Challengers may apply to stage event(s): Each Challenger whose

challenge for AC35 has been accepted by GGYC prior to July 8, 2014 may

apply to host one (1) or more America’s Cup World Series event(s) in the

country of its challenging yacht club. ACEA shall provide hosting criteria to

Challengers promptly upon request, and applications must be delivered to

ACEA by no later than the end of the Entry Period. ACEA will contract

directly with a Challenger if terms are agreed for the Challenger to host an

America’s Cup World Series event or events in its country. A host venue

agreement would be required to be signed between ACEA and the

Challenger, which will require a separate performance bond to be issued by

the Challenger in a form acceptable to ACEA to secure its performance of

its obligations under the host venue agreement with respect to the

contracted event(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://m.bbc.com/sport/sailing/32169089

--

 

Ainslie, 38, believes the new regulations are a step towards making the America's Cup more appealing and easier to stage on a regular basis.

"We're trying to move away from the days of it being a billionaire's open chequebook - one event every five or six years - to something which is a sustainable, continuous event," he said.

"This move to a smaller boat is very much part of that and it makes it more likely for newer teams to come in and take part and for us to create a global circuit, which is what we all want."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://m.bbc.com/sport/sailing/32169089

--

 

Ainslie, 38, believes the new regulations are a step towards making the America's Cup more appealing and easier to stage on a regular basis.

"We're trying to move away from the days of it being a billionaire's open chequebook - one event every five or six years - to something which is a sustainable, continuous event," he said.

"This move to a smaller boat is very much part of that and it makes it more likely for newer teams to come in and take part and for us to create a global circuit, which is what we all want."

So BA believes the RCFC clusterfuck is the new, sustainable AC? Good luck with that, sunshine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take it easy on the Brits. I mean last time they held the cup,..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take it easy on the Brits. I mean last time they held the cup,..........

Back in 1851 you mean? That friendly challenge to prove yacht building supremacy between nations?

 

You've got to admit, it was a great sounding ideal, but sadly unsustainable apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"This move to a smaller boat is very much part of that and it makes it more likely for newer teams to come in and take part and for us to create a global circuit, which is what we all want."

 

No, it's not what we all want. We want an America's Cup, one challenger, one defender, every 3-4 years. Fuck you, Ainslie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://m.bbc.com/sport/sailing/32169089

--

 

Ainslie, 38, believes the new regulations are a step towards making the America's Cup more appealing and easier to stage on a regular basis.

"We're trying to move away from the days of it being a billionaire's open chequebook - one event every five or six years - to something which is a sustainable, continuous event," he said.

"This move to a smaller boat is very much part of that and it makes it more likely for newer teams to come in and take part and for us to create a global circuit, which is what we all want."

Gtran , shit this trying to raise money is bloody hard and I want a long term paycheck so Russell and I have a plan. I let him win this time, but I win next time, then rinse and repeat. And if you don't like it I'll just punch your lights out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

from http://m.bbc.com/sport/sailing/32169089

--

 

Ainslie, 38, believes the new regulations are a step towards making the America's Cup more appealing and easier to stage on a regular basis.

"We're trying to move away from the days of it being a billionaire's open chequebook - one event every five or six years - to something which is a sustainable, continuous event," he said.

"This move to a smaller boat is very much part of that and it makes it more likely for newer teams to come in and take part and for us to create a global circuit, which is what we all want."

Gtran , shit this trying to raise money is bloody hard and I want a long term paycheck so Russell and I have a plan. I let him win this time, but I win next time, then rinse and repeat. And if you don't like it I'll just punch your lights out.

 

 

You'd have to think that BA is still being paid by Larry the way he barks and rolls over...

 

But dead right, its all about 'I want a nice long term lifestyle paycheck please' and who cares about what the Americas Cup is supposed to be.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have to think that BA is still being paid by Larry the way he barks and rolls over...

Thinking is good and reminds us that BAR has the £££ for an AC48 campaign but did not for an AC62.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You'd have to think that BA is still being paid by Larry the way he barks and rolls over...

Thinking is good and reminds us that BAR has the £££ for an AC48 campaign but did not for an AC62.

 

Or in either case, has he sufficient £££ to win AC35, rather than simply turning up as a challenger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I think he now has enough money to win. There's no sign anybody else can and wants to throw unlimited money into AC35, including LE. If that's the case, the budget he already has is likely to comparable to what other teams will be spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The numbers get interesting now. BAR has said they were looking for funding of 80million pounds IIRC. And they are somewhere along the road to gathering that much.

They have been dished out 7 million pounds in public money just to build their opera house, plus they have been granted 10 years free rent for that site.

Now along comes Cammas and says that thanks to the TF/BAR amendment and having the General renege on the Auckland agreement, the whole thing can be done for as little as 10 million $/€?

Any talk of refunds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 million euros my arse!

 

BAR sponsors have just walked as they are no longer sponsoring a prestige event. Now it is just another regatta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 million euros my arse!

 

BAR sponsors have just walked as they are no longer sponsoring a prestige event. Now it is just another regatta

And one in BDA at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^

I'm sure nobody's surprised, but if you read the amended Prot it's obvious a team needs far more to be competitive: namely, building and operating two 45Turbos with a full daggerboard development program. And those boards cannot be switched to the 48

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BAR sponsors have just walked as they are no longer sponsoring a prestige event.

Is that so? Which "BAR sponsors have just walked"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 million euros my arse!

 

BAR sponsors have just walked as they are no longer sponsoring a prestige event. Now it is just another regatta

 

Links or I call BS.

 

Not saying it couldn't happen, but I tend to not believe any message board heros know the inside workings and events of BARs sponsor efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The numbers get interesting now. BAR has said they were looking for funding of 80million pounds IIRC. And they are somewhere along the road to gathering that much.

They have been dished out 7 million pounds in public money just to build their opera house, plus they have been granted 10 years free rent for that site.

Now along comes Cammas and says that thanks to the TF/BAR amendment and having the General renege on the Auckland agreement, the whole thing can be done for as little as 10 million $/€?

Any talk of refunds?

 

 

FC is mentioning 7 mio euros per year for three years, or 21 mio euros for a competitive campaign, based on OTUSA's boat design...

 

cfr interview mentioned on the 'Team France' thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 million euros my arse!

 

BAR sponsors have just walked as they are no longer sponsoring a prestige event. Now it is just another regatta

 

Links or I call BS.

 

Not saying it couldn't happen, but I tend to not believe any message board heros know the inside workings and events of BARs sponsor efforts.

 

Total BS I recon.

 

BARs "sponsors" are well aware of what this is about. A member of said "club" was the one who originally replied "there is no seconds" to Queen Victoria when the America got the gun

 

When you start showing the Princess of Cambridge round the site of your new base, conveniently located in the head quarter dock yard of the Royal Navy and challenge out of the Royal Yacht Squadron rather than the Royal Thames we're entitled to make some assumptions about the nature of the "team". So, no doubt, are a few fellows looking for progression through the peerage.

.

Ben Ansile has one task. "Bring it home". The 'it' in question being the 100 Guinea Cup.

 

As with RC and LE. BAs price is the commercialization of the event. Shouldn't think that will be a problem. The shininess of the pickle dish will dull considerably once it's back on British (don't know where this Team UK thing comes from) shores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

challenge out of the Royal Yacht Squadron rather than the Royal Thames we're entitled to make some assumptions about the nature of the "team".

On that point, not really. If you are looking for the establishment link, try "Chipping Norton set".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a tour of Ben Ainslie Racing’s new base as it nears completion
Read more at http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/take-a-tour-of-ben-ainslie-racings-new-base-as-it-nears-completion-63380#csI7x7yxxpvb2Re0.99

 

In 13 years of covering the modern America’s Cup I have seen and been inside of plenty of impressive America’s Cup, bases but this one is something very different. The size of a shopping centre, the BAR base is no temporary structure designed for a couple of years’ lead up to the 35th AC in 2017, this building is here to stay

 

 

Pretty impressive for a 62 - I mean 52 - I mean 48 - or what the bloody hell it will end up as.

post-33465-0-87667200-1428909751_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang, that really is one nice facility.

 

In the BBC radio segment there's mention of a 'virtual' tour coming to the BAR web site, that could be fun too. I hope they also do some live streaming on occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very confusing that BAR keeps crying poor, yet they have this ridiculous building? Other teams are in reasonably modest old hangers (Artemis) or container buildings (TNZ). Why spend all that on that "facility"? Is it going to be use by some other sailing body once they move to Bermuda? And if they don't challenge again? Or even this time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"For "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" it all started to go wrong..."

with a gold show(er) ticket

 

24710-1-1000.jpg

 

 

Ainslie has been a major player in moving the Cup into a more commercial, on-going regular event with smaller more affordable boats. The withdraw of Italy has moved his home event into prime position and set to garner all the media attention for a new event.

 

So, how far can it go? British owners have failed to win the America's Cup in all its monohull formats under the old rules. If Ainslie and his BAR team were to win the new America's Cup light in 2017, they would surely want to turn it into a money spinning franchise that will keep the teams together and provide a focus for the commercial backing. If not why are they bothering?

 

http://www.sailweb.co.uk/Americas%20Cup/24710/americas-cup--disgusted-of-tunbridge-wells

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief, that piece reads as if written by a fourteen year old. One who is too excited by their own verbosity to check how the players names are spelled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Being Italian it's hard for me to be objective, but I cannot help thinking Lords Sopwith and Lipton must be turning in their graves. Meaning they didn't win, but what dignity ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I think Lipton is having a nice cup of breakfast tea. Sopwith, well, he was a darker character. Maybe he is spinning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BA talks about why BAR voted in favor the new boat

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/today/today_20150416-1243a.mp3

 

Soft questions, disingenuous and self-serving answers.

Simply a ridiculous about face by all concerned. "We fucked up, again, so are going into full-spin-cycle once more...."

The long term viability - of the oldest international competition! Duh!

There's clearly one future he's concerned about - and it ain't the good of the America's Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But he's honest about the Cup as it would be good from his perspective. He says just exactly what you'd expect him to say, although most of the other players are saying much the same.

 

This link may work better for mobile forum-browsers:

@BBCr4today: LISTEN:@BenAinslieRacin told @RobBonnet :'@americascup changes are positive for sailing.'http://t.co/Q1vbA6hfeIhttp://t.co/yxA73dANgy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As posted to BAR moments ago (shall be asked of the others ASAP) you should ask all the teams too

 

Mr DA-WOODY.COM
Today at 9:35am
Ben I have 1 question for you as I ponder picking a team to cheer for: ............ Should you Win AC35 what country will you chose to Defend it in ??? (No, being from California - USA I'm NOT going to assume Anything) I Love going to the AC in person w me YACHT, and so far it looks like TNZ would Host their Defense closer to my home in San Diego. I have Many other questions But as the Cup NEEDS to Go to Someone else This is the Biggest Concern Any & All Fans of Any team Need to know "In Advance"
Anyone want to guess the answer (any given or correct) ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Timely Response:

 

Ben Ainslie Racing Hi Dennis. Great Britain of course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too... they are planning to hold it on land!?

 

That's novel.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too... they are planning to hold it on land!?

 

That's novel.....

Ah.....finally Ben's F1 connection is explained!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And the Timely Response:

 

Ben Ainslie Racing Hi Dennis. Great Britain of course!

Colour me amazed....
Umm - Is Bermuda part of GB? :)

 

--

@BenAinslieRacin: A week into his new job, CEO Martin Whitmarsh talks about how he got here & where he sees BAR going http://t.co/eSOx98qxck

 

 

Regardless it's better than some other Country Yacht Club Dog & Pony Show likcin the Bermuda Landit for a Buck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And the Timely Response:

Ben Ainslie Racing Hi Dennis. Great Britain of course!

Colour me amazed....
Umm - Is Bermuda part of GB? :)

--

@BenAinslieRacin: A week into his new job, CEO Martin Whitmarsh talks about how he got here & where he sees BAR going http://t.co/eSOx98qxck

This is probably the best thing you have seen on BAR ever...you'll be 'Martin this and Martin that for weeks'...

He's a good guy but remember some of us have known him for many years and he's good at toeing the company line...unlike you, he's good at it and also has a sense of humour...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so happy you consider to make that article as much about me as about Whitmarsh, you silly fool.

Unlike you he also has a sense of humour ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm so happy you consider to make that article as much about me as about Whitmarsh, you silly fool.

Unlike you he also has a sense of humour ...

 

Don't you get tired of stalking SR ? Give it a frigging break loser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm so happy you consider to make that article as much about me as about Whitmarsh, you silly fool.

Unlike you he also has a sense of humour ...
Don't you get tired of stalking SR ? Give it a frigging break loser.

Seriously....from the ubertroll ..give it a break loser...you guys are funny..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too... they are planning to hold it on land!?

 

That's novel.....

 

Stadium sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Again:

 

Mr DA-WOODY.COM Sorry Stupid Question But I had to ask watching from the sidelines 500 miles from GGYC & The entire width of the USA + 600 miles across the Atlantic Ocean from AC35 that I thought We (with Your Help) Won the right to defend again. If I may ask one more question Should you Win AC35 what would expect of Your Country/Yacht-Club Men should you Shop the event around the World to the Highest Bidder - Or would you say that is Inconceivable <-- That shall be my last Question And Thank You !!!
  • Ben Ainslie Racing Our home base is in Portsmouth, and we have always planned to run the event there.

 

Well that's a Start at getting the MUG back on track

 

No Way in HELL would I dare ask in what they would chose to defend should they win

 

Or the Tribe will be Forced to Rubber Stamp the RC Format as a condition of the defense for any winner for the next 10 cycles

 

To not get the Flick from AC35

 

 

Well as yet I have received Nothing back from TNZ :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hey the poms are on a roll:

- Cricket - thumped the Aussies

- Tennis - actually won their own tournament (even tho it was a guy from Scotland which wants independence)

- Olympics - excellent London event. Good results in sailing for UK

- Rugby - actually won the world cup (back a few years)

- Football - actually won the world cup (back a few years- well actually before I was born) but hey they are still talking about it!

- war - actually won one in the 40's

 

Maybe it is their time for the oldest trophy in sports

i think you blinked and missed one .....

 

Actually, they won that war with the substantial help of the Americans. Could history repeat, maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hey the poms are on a roll:

- Cricket - thumped the Aussies

- Tennis - actually won their own tournament (even tho it was a guy from Scotland which wants independence)

- Olympics - excellent London event. Good results in sailing for UK

- Rugby - actually won the world cup (back a few years)

- Football - actually won the world cup (back a few years- well actually before I was born) but hey they are still talking about it!

- war - actually won one in the 40's

 

Maybe it is their time for the oldest trophy in sports

i think you blinked and missed one .....

 

Actually, they won that war with the substantial help of the Americans. Could history repeat, maybe?

 

 

Not to mention the Russians, who managed to tie up most of the enemy's forces on the Eastern Front

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but a bit more than that. What happened on the western front was a side-show compared to the scale of battles in the east. For example the largest tank battle in history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk of which most in the west have barely heard. I guess Hollywood never made a film of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our team won and it cost us all more than the fight was worth. Anything more is just sticking it through a glory hole and waving it about.

 

The few veterans prepared to talk about their experience of war quietly told me they didn't give a shit where the lad next to them in the trench was from so long as they had their back and they both made it to the next morning alive, and neither should I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misrepresenting history causes us to misunderstand the present. Perhaps quite significantly as we slide into a new cold war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To true. The sacrifice is being forgotten. The social contract unwound. Only in the 20th century war created socialism. In the 21st it creates ISIS.

 

Of course there's an alternative interpretation to "USA USA, we won it for you". And that's that...

 

In the first: The US sat on the sidelines while everyone blugoned each other to a bloody pulp, turned up with a cocky attitude and then got blugened to a bloody pulp them selves. The whole thing only ending when the German people realized what a shitfest their leaders had got them into and called a halt to the madness.

 

In the second: The US contribution during most of the western campaign was to run suicidal daylight raids while "supporting" their alies by shagging their women. Beyond that they kept the Brits on the drip (the debt from which eventually cost them the last vestiges of empire) until it became clear that, if they didn't act, Europe would be entirely over run by the "Commies". Mean while in the east they only overcame stale mate by unleashing a civilian genocide against the "yellow slit eyed bastards" (better them than us eh?) that would of made the Nazi ans Stalin proud.

 

Very little about the Russian Meet Grinder to be impressed about either.

 

Not much for anyone to be proud of all round really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freddie completed the London Marathon, pretty cool

--

 

@dcarrsailing: Race with the Design Office today. Finished within 5 mins. Thankfully I won so still have a job! @BenAinslieRacin http://t.co/UshSpfoTEO

 

--

 

@BenAinslieRacin sailor Freddie Carr finished in 3.52.03 ! For the @1851Trust in the @LondonMarathon #thenextcrew pic.twitter.com/XjRVYHwt0C

8:53am - 26 Apr 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ was driving and so only listened but a very interesting bit was where he talks about using the aero on the platform to boost righting moment. Glanced at the phone at that point, think it was in the 21st minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/sailing/giles-scott-wins-gold-at-the-sailing-world-cup-10207517.html

--

The domination of Giles Scott in the heavy Olympic singlehanded Finn class brought another gold medal at the inaugural re-launch of the Sailing World Cup in Hyeres. Another Brit, Ed Wright, secured the bronze, sandwiching Vasilij Zbogar of Slovenia and confirmed Britains authority in the class which started with Iain Percy winning gold in Sydney and Ben Ainslie taking up the baton for three more. ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Key point:

we went and talked to the design team about how much power we thought we could give them with the four guys in June 2017 (the date of the next America's Cup). They will use that number; so the amount of power the sailors can deliver is central to the design of the boat."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. Along the same lines it's been interesting to watch how the Turbo (AR) or Test (BAR) or Sport (OR) boats and the obvious use of stored energy in their eXperimental boats (Jack G), presumably as just for testing systems and controls before they go manual powered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Andy Claughton in a 24m video. Haven't watched it yet but may soon.

 

http://www.develop3dlive.com/videos/andy-claughton-ben-ainslie-racing/

 

 

That's a good listen. A transcript from part of it:

 

"We can rake the daggerboards forwards and aft so we can increase or decrease the lift it's producing by changing the angle of attack. That can happen on the main daggerboard and also there's a T foil on the end of the rudder which lets us adjust the relative force on the daggerboard and the in the rudder. All of these things are adjustable with hydraulics. This boat here is set up to use batteries and a hydraulic motor so the helmsman is basically just pressing buttons to make the adjustments. We've got bateries in the boat. For the America's Cup boats all of that goes out of the window and we have to generate all of the power for trimming the wing and adjusting the daggerboards from human generated power. That brings its own challenges."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Key point:

we went and talked to the design team about how much power we thought we could give them with the four guys in June 2017 (the date of the next America's Cup). They will use that number; so the amount of power the sailors can deliver is central to the design of the boat. control systems"

fixed.

boat is OD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. The control systems are not, and it's a very big area where the boats will differentiate. That includes wing control systems, the differences being apparent even on the eXperimental boats we've seen so far already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yes. They are figuring out the systems using stored power, and the crew will have to adapt to it, take over, later. But the designers obviously do have to take that to-come human power limitation into consideration, including for the choreography during maneuvers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yes. They are figuring out the systems using stored power, and the crew will have to adapt to it, take over, later. But the designers obviously do have to take that to-come human power limitation into consideration, including the choreography during maneuvers.

So if saving money is so important why do we need to remove the power pack. Leave it in and dump most of the crew and save their wages for 3 years. Maybe this will encourage more teams to enter. Then we could have one design boat with one design power pack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites