Barnyb

Team UK

Recommended Posts

I know BAR calls it T1 but it can't be much different from an AC45F given the tiller, standard hulls and beams, no cockpits, etc.

 

Can't remember, will the AC45F include (maybe optionally?) the wing extension? They'd be slightly taller than the AC48 wing if so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point is the original wing extension was a failure: heavy, floppy, it filled immediately with water in the event of a capsize making righting difficult (ETNZ in Newport?) - something to do with air passages to cool electronics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyone able to go to this and report in?

 

Nothing of any interest to report. MM couldn't make it because there was some stuff to attend to at Bladerunner where they're currently sailing from. Team moving into new base soon when the contractors have finished burning the midnight oil.

We'll see sailing from here in about a month. The rest was just what's going on with the build - the original purpose of these drop-ins.

 

 

 

 

Ben Ainslie Racing

 

If you want to know what life's like at the sharp end of the Ben Ainslie Racing team, then come along to tonight's drop-in meeting at Portsmouth Sailing Club from 6-7pm. BAR boatbuilder, Ian Mucky McCabe will be speaking, along with the usual update on progress at the new HQ. Thanks Shaun Roster for another brilliant photo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T1 has batteries,pumps and stored energy to control foils (and wing?) that are not AC45F legal. While it LOOKS like a standard 45 with foils, it is quite a bit different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So stuck on pay TV at an ungodly hour and presumably not shown on YouTube in BT Sport territories. As with Cannal+ for the French that's shit. Hope to god they come up with some PPV channels for everyone who wants to watch the racing but doesn't give a rats arse about the rugby or football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd sooner it was just on YouTube, which I can readily cast to a TV.

However BT Sport is free (as an app) to BT Broadband customers which, as it happens, I am. So all I have to do is prevent Mrs Dogwatch from switching us to a different ISP as she periodically says we should and personally, it's not a bad announcement. At least it's not Sky, which is never, ever, getting my money, at least not while the Murdochs remain involved.

 

BT has of the order of 33% of the retail ISP market in the UK. BBC coverage seems to be "red button", so not entirely mainstream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RC likes it

Very good news for the America's Cup. This combines well with the already announced NBC and Canal+ agreements with other significant announcements coming soon. It's already apparent the coverage planned for AC 35 will create far more value and better viewing for the fans than any previous America's Cup. It hasn't taken long to disprove the naysayers on this point -)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd sooner it was just on YouTube, which I can readily cast to a TV.

 

However BT Sport is free (as an app) to BT Broadband customers which, as it happens, I am. So all I have to do is prevent Mrs Dogwatch from switching us to a different ISP as she periodically says we should and personally, it's not a bad announcement. At least it's not Sky, which is never, ever, getting my money, at least not while the Murdochs remain involved.

 

BT has of the order of 33% of the retail ISP market in the UK. BBC coverage seems to be "red button", so not entirely mainstream.

This might be the nudge I finally need to actually sign up to BT sport given I too am a (long-suffering) customer...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and same goes for me on Sky as well although eventually I will run out of sport I want to watch on TV that isn't pay per view...bastards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pay TV fronted by an ex professional athlete format makes me want to hurl.

 

Looks like it would cost me about Eur100 to watch the AC now and at a time that's not convenient (watching on record in the evening is not an option) vs watching it on YouTube on the way to work (1 race is the perfect length for door to door)

 

Mobile data volumes just passed fixed BB here in Ireland by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This might be the nudge I finally need to actually sign up to BT sport given I too am a (long-suffering) customer...

 

 

I'm going through the process. Up to 24 hours to activate, apparently. Long suffering, well yes but I was previously a Talk Talk customer so I know the true meaning of suffering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This might be the nudge I finally need to actually sign up to BT sport given I too am a (long-suffering) customer...

 

 

I'm going through the process. Up to 24 hours to activate, apparently. Long suffering, well yes but I was previously a Talk Talk customer so I know the true meaning of suffering.

 

 

Wow, luxury! It took our ISP 6 weeks to set up phone and internet access. Maybe because Germany has no AC team (yet)...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

 

All I'm doing is activating the BT Sport app. I'm already a BT internet customer.

 

At one time I got "business quality" broadband from another supplier. There was a nearby lightning strike and my router was fried. How long to replace? "Approximately 2 weeks sir". Of course I went out, bought one and configured it, which was entertaining as the required settings weren't documented. Business quality indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worst possible news for me, I'm not a BT customer, I've no interest in bladder kicking or English rugby or motorbikes. The only thing BT show for me is WRC and I've got that through the internet.

 

Also says BBC highlights are going to be red button, which I can't record.

 

Only saving grace is it's not a true cup match.

 

Bad bad move.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name - Nat if not British - sailing - made his money - net worth

 

Sir Charles Dunstone - Tp52 Rio and many others - mobile phone and telecoms

Chris Bake - NED/NZ - RC44 Team Aqua - oil trading

Peter Dubens - t-shirts, clothing distribution, founder of Oakley Capital - $127

Baron Laidlaw - conference and business centers - Highland Fling - £745

Sir Keith Mills - has done a Clipper - Air Miles

Ian Taylor - oil trading

Jon Wood - SRM Global hedge fund (heavily involved with the Norther Rock collapse)

 

Michael Grade has been chairman of the BBC and ITV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy hitters in the business world and several close & high-level connections to the Conservative party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I noticed the old blue tie as well. Chipping Norton as you said.

 

Not really much doubt they had the cash for a AC62 campaign in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This might be the nudge I finally need to actually sign up to BT sport given I too am a (long-suffering) customer...

 

I'm going through the process. Up to 24 hours to activate, apparently. Long suffering, well yes but I was previously a Talk Talk customer so I know the true meaning of suffering.

My deepest sympathies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name - Nat if not British - sailing - made his money - net worth

 

Sir Charles Dunstone - Tp52 Rio and many others - mobile phone and telecoms

Chris Bake - NED/NZ - RC44 Team Aqua - oil trading

Peter Dubens - t-shirts, clothing distribution, founder of Oakley Capital - $127

Baron Laidlaw - conference and business centers - Highland Fling - £745

Sir Keith Mills - has done a Clipper - Air Miles

Ian Taylor - oil trading

Jon Wood - SRM Global hedge fund (heavily involved with the Norther Rock collapse)

 

Michael Grade has been chairman of the BBC and ITV

SKM also the long-term backer of Alex Thomson (his skipper in the Clipper Race).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Worst possible news for me, I'm not a BT customer, I've no interest in bladder kicking or English rugby or motorbikes. The only thing BT show for me is WRC and I've got that through the internet.

 

Also says BBC highlights are going to be red button, which I can't record.

 

Only saving grace is it's not a true cup match.

 

Bad bad move.

 

I agree. Every damn Major Sporting Event is now on either SKY Sports or BT Sports....both PAY-TV Channels

F1 has lost quater of its tv audience, ironically it makes more money for the teams because of the paywall...but the sponsors are concerned....

No surprise that Russell is very happy with the his tv deals...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Name - Nat if not British - sailing - made his money - net worth

 

Sir Charles Dunstone - Tp52 Rio and many others - mobile phone and telecoms

Chris Bake - NED/NZ - RC44 Team Aqua - oil trading

Peter Dubens - t-shirts, clothing distribution, founder of Oakley Capital - $127

Baron Laidlaw - conference and business centers - Highland Fling - £745

Sir Keith Mills - has done a Clipper - Air Miles

Ian Taylor - oil trading

Jon Wood - SRM Global hedge fund (heavily involved with the Norther Rock collapse)

 

Michael Grade has been chairman of the BBC and ITV

SKM also the long-term backer of Alex Thomson (his skipper in the Clipper Race).

 

 

And he has a TP52 5deg West, ex Origin med boat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good day for BARs backers yesterday.

 

Suppose so. I know some dyed-in-the-wool Tories who were quietly happy to have Clegg keeping the party's right in check. Now I think we are into a 5 year replay of John Major versus the bastards, enabled by a wafer-thin majority that history says will keep getting thinner.

 

AC relevance - apparently Tory workers celebrated with beer. Said they don't do champagne any more. Remember what I keep saying about conspicuous consumption currently being uncool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forget which thread this belongs to, but it should be tons of fun regardless:

--

@djneilsackley: Why is Bob Fisher concerned about the America's Cup? His thoughts on H2O this Sunday at 5 http://t.co/n1Cg5v7ykmhttp://t.co/XucVLum4ov

Listened to it live a few minutes ago. His main beef is with his opinion that because the AC is supposed to be 'a champagne event,' one that you 'look up to,' that the 48fters are too small.

 

Also thinks DB is too old for these boats and should have taken the position TNZ offered him; thinks the ACWS is unnecessary because the Cup should draw enough interest without it; will be interviewing Patrizio B soon; is close to publishing Vol 3 of his AI book; and believes Vol 4 will be titled 'The Cup Comes Home' because BA will win AC35.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tend to agree.

 

The Unionists are rubbing their hands too.

Time to bring back the 'iron lady' mongrel maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tend to agree.

 

The Unionists are rubbing their hands too.

Time to bring back the 'iron lady' mongrel maybe?

 

 

Has a drawback as a working PM in that she's dead. It's different times anyway. After her the Tories tried three times in a row to win from the right and lost, lost, lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Tend to agree.

 

The Unionists are rubbing their hands too.

Time to bring back the 'iron lady' mongrel maybe?

 

 

Has a drawback as a working PM in that she's dead. It's different times anyway. After her the Tories tried three times in a row to win from the right and lost, lost, lost.

 

"Defeat? I do not recognise the meaning of the word"

And Cameron just won too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to a long period in power doing to the labour party what the thatcher years did to the conservatives.

 

Both gave their parties someone to galvanise behind in their lust for power but left behind monotheistic unelectable parties as their personal ideology held sway.

 

The big difference for me is that in unifying her party Thatcher divided the country. Interesting that camerons first public words where a complete rejection of Thatcherite policy in that regard as he's left grappling with the problems of a path she set the country down to where it is now. Falling apart internally with a parasite economy heavily exposed to the vagaries of the global financial markets and economic growth in Asia.

 

2010 and 2015 were both elections lost through poor choice of leadership and a failure to reestablish trust after Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Tend to agree.

 

The Unionists are rubbing their hands too.

Time to bring back the 'iron lady' mongrel maybe?

 

 

Has a drawback as a working PM in that she's dead. It's different times anyway. After her the Tories tried three times in a row to win from the right and lost, lost, lost.

 

A clarification may be required:

 

"Iron lady" mongrel - A combative quality capable of smashing the progressive's PC agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, take it to PA, but....

2010 and 2015 were both elections lost through poor choice of leadership and a failure to reestablish trust after Iraq.

Never read such rubbish.

 

2010 was lost because of the terrible way Labour (and Brown in particular) managed the GFC. Despite what they said, Labour had failed to put in place the regulatory controls that were needed to support the financial system. And once in crisis, they resorted to the well tried Labour tactic of trying to spend their way out of trouble irrespective of the deficit. All told, poor financial management by Labour destroyed the UK economy. Forget the excuses that all countries were in the same boat. Here in Oz we had the regulatory environment and the Labour government spent at a rate the country could afford, ensuring a reasonably stable time.

 

Come 2015, Labour failed on 3 scores. First, yes, the leader was somebody the electrate didn't really trust (if you can do that to your own brother....). Next, it had no idea about its true constituency - it was too far right for Scotland and too far left for England. Finally, the message was too complex and not pitched in a way the electorate could buy into. Add to that an incumbent government that has managed the economy better than anybody dared hope for and who ran a first class and easy to understand campaign, it is no surprise Labour lost.

 

The really worrying thing for Labour is that it is going to be unbelievably hard to turn this around. Their only chance is to make inroads into what is now Tory heartland. To achieve that they will need a leader of substance (are there any real candidates of the right caliber?) and for the Tories to drop the ball with the economy. Regrettably, I think we will not see another Labour government for at least 10 years.

 

Of course, this is all good for BAR, which I seem to remember is the subject of this thread :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, take it to PA, but....

2010 was lost because of the terrible way Labour (and Brown in particular) managed the GFC. Despite what they said, Labour had failed to put in place the regulatory controls that were needed to support the financial system. And once in crisis, they resorted to the well tried Labour tactic of trying to spend their way out of trouble irrespective of the deficit.

Labour had kept themselves in power that long by spending furiously for the previous 11 years, and using that spending to make the employment figures look good. They hid the spending by selling assets, primarily gold and land, but when the GFC hit they had nothing left to ride it out. The tradegy is that, once again, we are seeing a polarisation from left to right as a response, as we saw in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, with the centre being dumped. The conservative right may hold back for one parliament, giving Cameron another term, but I doubt for much longer, then we'll bounce back the other way. So stupid.

 

Still, at least it's not France!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are all fair comments and there's absolutely no doubt that they where factors but it's an analysis from the perspective of a (none swinging) conservative voter (not making any inference about your own voting patterns there). Of course the retention of a leader totally wedded to the economic policies of the Bambi years didn't help matters. Only a total reinvention would of given them any chance. Something they where as incapable of doing post Blair and the tories where post Thatcher.

 

I'm not convinced that's actually where Labour lost the 2010 election. I'm pretty convinced that they had already lost it by the time of the economic down turn and that they lost the 2010 election on a protest liberal vote in which the moral questions around the Iraq war where significant. Again the leadership election was the opportunity for the Labour party to draw a line under that error.

If the economy was the deciding factor then we would of seen a swing straight to the conservatives. Only my conservative friends are mentioning "continued stability for the economy" as a reason to be happy with last weeks result.

 

From what I'm picking up that left leaning liberal protest vote has not voted this time with 2 factors at play.

 

1/ Disgust at Cleg taking the liberals into coalition with the tories. The economic factors you highlight certainly played a part with the liberal leadership in that decision but as they've just discovered to their cost the right leaning liberal vote is small and wide open to attack by the conservative party (a large part of the tory campaign this time round was aimed at the remaining right leaning liberal vote).

 

2/ Insufficient differentiation between the leadership of the parties. No one can tell the difference between Milliband, Cleg and Cameron and they don't believe they and their for their parties offer a creadable alternative.

 

Labours challenge isn't to attach tories heartlands. It's to reattach that former vote estranged on the basis of social justice and mistrusting of their credentials as anything other than right wing on economic policy.

 

The failing of the now former Labour leadership was to run a campaign based on fear. Yes the tories put the shits up their own voters and the right leaning liberals with unjustified scare stories of economic melt down, but Labours "it will lead to the destruction of the NHS and the unwinding of the social system" did nothing to gain back the trust of the vote they lost in 2010. It's much easier to frighten people into staying than it is to frighten them into jumping ship.

 

...

 

Scottland is playing out as a repeat of Ireland in the late 19th century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A clarification may be required:

 

"Iron lady" mongrel - A combative quality capable of smashing the progressive's PC agenda.

 

The evil witch can f'ing well rot in hell. If you think the union driven Labour party of the 70s was in anyway progressive or PC your heads up the wazzoo. Definitely a case of a cunt taking on a bunch of pricks and winning to the cost of many (and the gain of others) including the long terms sanity of her own party.

 

The crime is that the fight was required.

 

That's just a personal opinion. I'm totally down with other people having a totally different view of thatchers sanctity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

--

@BenAinslieRacin: Today was the team's first day on the AC45F - our boat for the @ACWSPortsmouth! Stay tuned for more from the new Rita http://t.co/nIJM98ZM3Z

Well...I have to say those graphics are very bloody ordinary - or is it retro 70's.

 

Damn. Once is enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

--

@BenAinslieRacin: Today was the team's first day on the AC45F - our boat for the @ACWSPortsmouth! Stay tuned for more from the new Rita http://t.co/nIJM98ZM3Z

Well...I have to say those graphics are very bloody ordinary - or is it retro 70's.

 

Damn. Once is enough.

Looks good enough for my tastes.

 

Am a little surprised that very-British Breton didn't sponsor BAR but perhaps BAR have bigger ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pleeaase,

thread drift

 

The link between BAR and the Conservative Party is part of the AC35 narrative. You don't have to be interested in it but some of us are.

 

However I have a simple solution for you. Post some hot AC news and people will talk about that instead. What do you mean, there isn't any right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been struggling to see where BAR are going to pick up the kind of sponsors that would of backed them in the past. The car brands are.in the hands of Indians and Germans. Air bus has gone to Team Oracle. Not sure how much of the energy industry is still in British hands. That leaves financial services and what else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been struggling to see where BAR are going to pick up the kind of sponsors that would of backed them in the past. The car brands are.in the hands of Indians and Germans. Air bus has gone to Team Oracle. Not sure how much of the energy industry is still in British hands. That leaves financial services and what else?

18078-oracle-logo-s-.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

morgan.png

 

The only downside is that their sponsorship will require a move back to wooden hulls...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

morgan.png

 

The only downside is that their sponsorship will require a move back to wooden hulls...

Eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to JP Morgan's sponsorship of BAR?

 

They could get some good exposure to East coast US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

{snip}

 

The only downside is that their sponsorship will require a move back to wooden hulls...

Eh?

 

 

Morgan make cars, quite often having a wooden chassis...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal sponsors of BBB rather than the team. Jo that is.

 

They've just picked upvyhe equivalent of Morgan cars as a watch sponsor and the Ac48 rules resemble a very British dinghy class standard. May be a plywood build isn't so fat fetched!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who needs sponsors when you've got the old boy's network, old chum!

 

I'm sure they'll find some new ways of throwing some more of the public purse their way as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone point out where the other ACWS teams will operate from? Think I read it was Navy property.

 

--

@BenAinslieRacin: HQ drop-in session 6-7pm, 14/5 at Portsmouth SC. Speakers Dave Powys (Base Manager) & Graham Goff (Crane Manager) http://t.co/8fc4IMoVA4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

--

Americas Cup World Series Portsmouth Clipper Events, the Gosport-based sister company of the Clipper Round the World Yacht Race, is offering front row on-the-water experiences this July, as the events Official Charter Package Supplier.

...

Yachts are available to charter from £6,000 each, for twelve people.

...

http://www.sail-world.com/America-s-Cup-World-Series--Clipper-Events-offers-front-row-experience/134299

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone point out where the other ACWS teams will operate from? Think I read it was Navy property.

 

--

@BenAinslieRacin: HQ drop-in session 6-7pm, 14/5 at Portsmouth SC. Speakers Dave Powys (Base Manager) & Graham Goff (Crane Manager) http://t.co/8fc4IMoVA4

Interesting session last night with Dave Powys and Graham Goff talking about the logistics of launch and recovery of the BAR boats for normal operations and ACWS. QHM also at the session and all set for accommodating the other teams for the events this year and next. The visiting teams will indeed be based at HMNB Portsmouth and they will be sited around the basin just aft (north) of HMS Victory. There will be moorings laid in this basin and it will be a colourful sight with the AC45s afloat in the shadow of Victory and the Mary Rose Museum. This basin forms the boundary between the Historic Dockyard (open to the public) and the active Navy (what's left of it).

 

BAR are hoping to lay a mooring over in Gosport in the area between the ferry and Haslar Marina where the Victory Class moorings are. This will give options in the event of Wightlink operations and weather giving any cause for delay in recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

& in pictures

m347_crop169014_1024x576_proportional_14

 

m331_crop169014_1024x576_proportional_14

 

m351_crop169014_1024x576_proportional_14

 

yandy119925.jpg

 

and in an already outdated video - scratch those 'stylish Italians'...scratch Dean Barker

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...scratch Dean Barker

 

Who says there will be no Barker-San?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hopefully they won't get clobbered by one of these or hovercraft, IOW ferries, ships and God knows everything else wot makes that place so enthralling for the tactician

agroundair

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a serious bit of hull there. Built for waterline length and speed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention that's HMS Vanguard visiting the Still & West pub in Portsmouth, which has or had, a photo from the Pubs POV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a serious bit of hull there. Built for waterline length and speed

 

Last battleship of the British Navy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Vanguard_%2823%29. On her way to the breakers when that photograph was taken in 1960. http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/nostalgia/what-really-happened-on-vanguard-that-fateful-day-in-portsmouth-harbour-1-6091906

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hopefully they won't get clobbered by one of these or hovercraft, IOW ferries, ships and God knows everything else wot makes that place so enthralling for the tactician

 

 

Do they still run a hovercraft service to the IOW?

 

I lived in East Cowes for a time in 1980 and remember the old SRN 5 (I think it was) going sideways as much as forward coming into Cowes and trying to dodge the moored yachts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, hovercraft Ryde to Portsmouth. Hydrofoil Cowes to Southampton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

pleeaase,

thread drift

 

The link between BAR and the Conservative Party is part of the AC35 narrative. You don't have to be interested in it but some of us are.

 

However I have a simple solution for you. Post some hot AC news and people will talk about that instead. What do you mean, there isn't any right now?

 

Part of the AC35 narrative? Total bs. For who apart from you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

me

 

as Dog said. if you don't like it provide some more interesting content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

me

 

as Dog said. if you don't like it provide some more interesting content.

Go on then. How is it part of the AC35 narrative? Business people backing BAR and RYS members are predominantly conservative - shock news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Review the list of BAR-related great and the good. You'll find prominent Conservative party donors - plural. You will find a member of the Chipping Norton set which, for the benefit of those outside the UK, is our Prime Minister's social circle. And then we find significant amounts of public cash flowing BAR's way.

 

If you don't consider that worth noting then fine. But some of us do. The irony is that you are re-raising a subject we'd already moved on from, in order to tell us we shouldn't be talking about it.

 

By the way, what's all the fascinating recent BAR-news that we should be talking about instead? Because I'm happy to talk sailing when there is sailing to talk about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Review the list of BAR-related great and the good. You'll find prominent Conservative party donors - plural. You will find a member of the Chipping Norton set which, for the benefit of those outside the UK, is our Prime Minister's social circle. And then we find significant amounts of public cash flowing BAR's way.

 

BAR got public money because the coalition government needed to be seen to be doing something in Portsmouth after the closure of shipbuilding. The money would not have been available had they gone to the alternative site in Southampton.

 

If you don't consider that worth noting then fine. But some of us do. The irony is that you are re-raising a subject we'd already moved on from, in order to tell us we shouldn't be talking about it.

 

I'm not telling anyone not to talk about it. I'm simply calling you out on the pompous original 'narrative' statement. You can tell me as fact that a Labour government won't have chipped in in the same circumstances?

 

By the way, what's all the fascinating recent BAR-news that we should be talking about instead? Because I'm happy to talk sailing when there is sailing to talk about.

 

A total red herring. By all means posters can explore who is behind BAR or any other team. My simple original point is that describing the 'link' between BAR and the Conservatives as part of the 'AC35 narrative' is bullshit. A Tory MP now sits in Portsmouth South, but that's because the disgraced former LD MP really dragged that party through it locally and most of the country shifted a little in the Conservatives direction at the election. In my opinion the coalition government were right to buy into a local vision as promoted by BAR. It's a dead rubber, but I bet you a Labour government in power would have been similarly persuaded because it's a good idea worth a little public investment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JarVah, have you stopped to wonder who the investors in the AC/OTAUSA/F/Js new timekeeping sponsor might be?

 

How does that play along side the as yet unconfirmed return of LV to cup boat competition, or the way in which LR was edged (perhaps soldered would be a better way of putting it) out of the event by a block vote lead publicly by BA.

 

Does subsequent ACEA/OTAUSA//BAR "I'm dead blue collar me, and proud" counter spin to "the beer and chips" flounce actually carry any weight when you look at the structure and backing of BAR or was it complete and utter bollocks?

 

Do we actually believe that BAR didn't have the money for an AC62 campaign? Or were there other motives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JarVah, have you stopped to wonder who the investors in the AC/OTAUSA/F/Js new timekeeping sponsor might be?

 

How does that play along side the as yet unconfirmed return of LV to cup boat competition, or the way in which LR was edged (perhaps soldered would be a better way of putting it) out of the event by a block vote lead publicly by BA.

 

Does subsequent ACEA/OTAUSA//BAR "I'm dead blue collar me, and proud" counter spin to "the beer and chips" flounce actually carry any weight when you look at the structure and backing of BAR or was it complete and utter bollocks?

 

Do we actually believe that BAR didn't have the money for an AC62 campaign? Or were there other motives?

You've lost me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm simply calling you out on the pompous original 'narrative' statement.

You don't entirely seem to grasp the meaning of the word "narrative". I might have written "story arc". You haven't been on SAAC very long. If you had, you'd have learned that it is common to make connections, to join the dots. It's part of what people do here. If you don't like it, ignore it. We all take what we choose from SAAC.

 

 

You can tell me as fact that a Labour government won't have chipped in in the same circumstances?

 

Obviously i can't tell you that as a fact. It is however, in my opinion, extraordinarily unlikely. For starters, BAR's backers would not have had the access to make their case in the same way. I'm not in the lobbying business but I know people who are and have some idea how it works. Apart from which, exactly how keen do you think a Labour minister would be to back a project whose board is packed with Conservative party donors? Apart from which, can you imagine what the Murdoch press, eager to find questionable spending decisions, could have made of a Labour government subsidising rich boys to go yachting? That might not be your view of BAR and it might not even be mine but the Sun could very easily present it that way. If I can imagine it, so could a minister and her advisers.

 

You've chosen to call me pompous. I think you are naive and brittle in your thinking. Try engaging with how the world really works. An awful lot of it is about people and their friends and connections.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm simply calling you out on the pompous original 'narrative' statement.

You don't entirely seem to grasp the meaning of the word "narrative". I might have written "story arc". You haven't been on SAAC very long. If you had, you'd have learned that it is common to make connections, to join the dots. It's part of what people do here. If you don't like it, ignore it. We all take what we choose from SAAC.

 

 

You can tell me as fact that a Labour government won't have chipped in in the same circumstances?

 

Obviously i can't tell you that as a fact. It is however, in my opinion, extraordinarily unlikely. For starters, BAR's backers would not have had the access to make their case in the same way. I'm not in the lobbying business but I know people who are and have some idea how it works. Apart from which, exactly how keen do you think a Labour minister would be to back a project whose board is packed with Conservative party donors? Apart from which, can you imagine what the Murdoch press, eager to find questionable spending decisions, could have made of a Labour government subsidising rich boys to go yachting? That might not be your view of BAR and it might not even be mine but the Sun could very easily present it that way. If I can imagine it, so could a minister and her advisers.

 

You've chosen to call me pompous. I think you are naive and brittle in your thinking. Try engaging with how the world really works. An awful lot of it is about people and their friends and connections.

 

 

You are inferring that BAR received money for the base because they have Tory party donors as shareholders/directors. I'm saying you're wrong and the non-availability of the money for a site in Southampton would support that. The all-party support for Portsmouth City Council chipping in their bit says you're wrong too. You can add condescending to pompous.

 

Your narrative is in your head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha

 

70% of what's written on SAAC is made up shit in peoples heads!

 

No convinced Sotton presents a suitable setting for "stadium racing" compared to Portsmouth. Where would you have put the course?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm saying you're wrong and the non-availability of the money for a site in Southampton would support that.

 

There was budget available for Pompey. That was a necessary but not a sufficient conditions for BAR to receive a junk of it and does not imply that BAR would have got the money under a different government.

 

I've never said PCC was influenced by party political considerations. For them, I agree it was money well spent and I believe I said that sometime earlier in this thread.

 

Condescending, well perhaps you shouldn't have started on the personal attacks. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Struggling to decipher your first sentence.

 

"I've never said PCC was influenced by party political considerations. For them, I agree it was money well spent and I believe I said that sometime earlier in this thread."

 

Show me where you ever said PCC had invested wisely and I really do promise to eat my hat. And I'm no Paddy Pantsdown.

 

Personal attacks come a lot more potent than describing statements as pompous or condescending! Interesting that you go back and edit posts too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion the coalition government were right to buy ...

(trying to extract something useful from the controversy)

 

Is this the proper form in English then? Same as family in that other example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would depend on whether it's it were intended as a faux norther inflection (see Fred Dibnah).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites