• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

rh 2600 is right, as per the protocol:

During the same periods of time, RNZYS shall also grant to COR, free of charge, adequate temporary space on which COR shall build at its own expenses its offices for the purposes of fulfilling its duties as Challenger of Record, other than sailing operations.

40.1         Team Bases Allocation - Team Bases shall be allocated applying the following order of priority :

a)      the Defender;

b )     the Challenger of Record;

c)      all the remaining Challengers in the order in which their challenges were accepted by RNZYS.

40.2         Team Bases Governing Principles - All Challengers must respect at all times the Governing Principles which will be set out in the Team Bases Licence Agreement and will be bound to comply with the terms and conditions set out in such agreement.

Each Competitor shall enter into a Team Bases Licence Agreement with COR/D prior to taking possession of the temporary space allocated for its Team Base in any Venue.

The vital word is allocate, which is quite different from building, or providing reclaimed space/tarmac etc. I don't think you will find that RNZYS is in the property development or project management business. This just gives RNZYS the right to allocate whatever space is made available by the parties they and ETNZ cut a deal with to provide the infrastructure. If indeed that happens. They could also give LR an office within RNZYS for use for their COR activities depending on how close they want to be.

In San Diego the Challenger of Record Committee cut a deal with Southwestern Yacht Club for Offices,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, robberzdog said:

The vital word is allocate, which is quite different from building, or providing reclaimed space/tarmac etc. I don't think you will find that RNZYS is in the property development or project management business. This just gives RNZYS the right to allocate whatever space is made available by the parties they and ETNZ cut a deal with to provide the infrastructure. If indeed that happens. They could also give LR an office within RNZYS for use for their COR activities depending on how close they want to be.

In San Diego the Challenger of Record Committee cut a deal with Southwestern Yacht Club for Offices,

Correct, allocating what they have available by priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pacice said:

 

We could build the grandstands on the sandbank

 

What could possibly go wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dogwatch said:

What could possibly go wrong?

I tell you one thing I've learnt from Pacice is that Tauranga must have some amazing weed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

I tell you one thing I've learnt from Pacice is that Tauranga must have some amazing weed!

Funny I was thinking the same thing 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, pacice said:

Tauranga would be the perfect location for the cup. We have a large sandbank in the middle of the harbour, with narrow deep water channels surrounding it.

We could build the grandstands on the sandbank, and have the boats racing around the sandbank, very much like race cars around a track.

Image result for tauranga harbour

Actually, it would be pretty awesome out off the main, or Papamoa beach. Ocean swells would add an exciting element (shades of Fremantle). Perfect for close to shore racing and the viewing vantage points would be endless. 

Might snag a few surfies on the foils though.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://www.sail-world.com/news/199958/The-Americas-Cup-at-Sail-Melbourne

While at Sail Melbourne over this past weekend there were a few opportunities to chat about the America's Cup with one behind the scenes of Bermuda forum with Chief Umpire Richard Slater and Jason Waterhouse who was with SoftBank Team Japan, as well as the chance to chat to Tom Slingsby (formerly with OTUSA) about Australia's progress in becoming involved with the next Cup.

You can check out the videos below, and I look forward to following the adventures leading into the next AC.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Xlot said:

 

  ^ The hosting fee question would remain the same, though

 

There would be such outrage from locals in Tga, if they stumped up a fee.

In any case, they don't have the infrastructure to host this event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Xlot said:

 

  ^ The hosting fee question would remain the same, though

 

Yup.

I don't understand why people expect the A.C. to be free when other events such as the Rugby World Cup are not.

Do the maths, figure out if the event is worth the fee and make a decision. 

Of course for the politicians, the real cost they are interested in is losing their gravy train if they lose hosting rights and the public punish them at the ballot box.

There is a World Of difference between what is right for the country and what is right for the pollies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I don't think nav's basic question has been answered:

- would the hosting fee go towards Cup running expenses (Defence and possibly Challenger series) or financing ENTZ's campaign or both?

I would add: has a certain amount been requested?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jaysper said:

I don't understand why people expect the A.C. to be free when other events such as the Rugby World Cup are not.

 

Because the international audience for the AC is tiny and has been decreasing. Convincingly demonstrated by the pitiful viewing figures of the last two cycles.

 

Demonstrated if you like here also. There's probably fewer than 20 non-Kiwis still posting with any frequency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Xlot said:

Again, I don't think nav's basic question has been answered:

- would the hosting fee go towards Cup running expenses (Defence and possibly Challenger series) or financing ENTZ's campaign or both?

I would add: has a certain amount been requested?

 

I would guess that the hosting fee would be similar to the Appearance Fee paid to the likes of Tiger Woods to play in an event - we paid $4-mil for him to play in the 2002 NZ Open. I think this is a media beat-up. I'm ambivalent over this issue: if we paid a hosting fee in 2000 and 2003, then suck it up and negotiate a reasonable fee which I would not be surprised if it happens to be the amount of the government contribution to AC35 which was withheld.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dogwatch said:

Because the international audience for the AC is tiny and has been decreasing. Convincingly demonstrated by the pitiful viewing figures of the last two cycles.

 

Demonstrated if you like here also. There's probably fewer than 20 non-Kiwis still posting with any frequency.

That's fine, if it doesn't make sense then don't pay.

My point is that just because etnz won this thing, people in nz seem to think the event should have no cost, which is absurd. 

There are real costs to hosting the A.C. and if you want to host it, then you should get used to stumping up the money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a competition organised by a global body with a history of farming out the hosting to whoever bids highest.

When teams enter the AC they enter as representative of a Yacht Club.

By winning that Yacht Club earns the right to Defend.

The expectation in the DoG is clearly that the Defense is run in the home waters of that Yacht Club unless they aren't suitable to hold the competition.

 

Team New Zealand are representatives of the Royal New Zealand Yacht Club which is head-quartered in Auckland.

As previous holder RNZYS Defended in Auckland.

The expectation when entering AC35 is clearly that they would again Defend in Auckland if they win.

 

Nobody is saying there should be no cost to hosting, the Govt & Council are clearly planning to spend literally hundreds of millions of $$$ on hosting & most people are OK with that.

Maybe we'd be OK with a low double-digit $million hosting fee or even a bigger number if it covers a bunch of stuff that was already being planned to spend on the hosting.

But demands of over $100m 'just because' is what is being objected to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hoom said:

This is not a competition organised by a global body with a history of farming out the hosting to whoever bids highest.

When teams enter the AC they enter as representative of a Yacht Club.

By winning that Yacht Club earns the right to Defend.

The expectation in the DoG is clearly that the Defense is run in the home waters of that Yacht Club unless they aren't suitable to hold the competition.

 

Team New Zealand are representatives of the Royal New Zealand Yacht Club which is head-quartered in Auckland.

As previous holder RNZYS Defended in Auckland.

The expectation when entering AC35 is clearly that they would again Defend in Auckland if they win.

 

Nobody is saying there should be no cost to hosting, the Govt & Council are clearly planning to spend literally hundreds of millions of $$$ on hosting & most people are OK with that.

Maybe we'd be OK with a low double-digit $million hosting fee or even a bigger number if it covers a bunch of stuff that was already being planned to spend on the hosting.

But demands of over $100m 'just because' is what is being objected to.

^agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hoom said:

But demands of over $100m 'just because' is what is being objected to.

I am not aware that ETNZ have ever demanded $100m .. they have passed on some information that other venues have offered large sums to host the event but that is completely different.

Unless you can substantiate your claim you are just throwing fuel on the fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Terry Hollis said:

I am not aware that ETNZ have ever demanded $100m .. they have passed on some information that other venues have offered large sums to host the event but that is completely different.

Unless you can substantiate your claim you are just throwing fuel on the fire.

Crap, ETNZ are looking for $100 mil or close.

There are no other contenders to host the event.

The numbers do not simply stack up.

Infrastructure $200 mil minimum, host fee $100 mil so where the are you going to find a taker at those costs.

Auckland is saddled with this and the less the hosting theft fee is the happier the ratepayers bare cupboard will be.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

Crap, ETNZ are looking for $100 mil or close.

There are no other contenders to host the event.

The numbers do not simply stack up.

Infrastructure $200 mil minimum, host fee $100 mil so where the are you going to find a taker at those costs.

Auckland is saddled with this and the less the hosting theft fee is the happier the ratepayers bare cupboard will be.

I am sure you are right .. ETNZ will need about $100m to defend the cup that is not in dispute .. the claim that ETNZ are demanding $100m hosting fee is in dispute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell Green says all up ETNZ Bermuda costs washed out at $78 mil. That sum included the buy in costs to come and play.

Dalts publically barfs on about cost reduction but as Big Den and Farmer point out that this next cycle is going to be exhaustively costly for any potential participants.

From my perspective if the "hosting fee" was being solely allotted to defraying ETNZ costs incurred to defend then that is a dead rat we will have to swallow.

However I am never going to accept that the main players within the ETNZ organization are the recipients of some sort of massive public donation.

Lets clear the decks and seek some clarity from ETNZ as to exactly what is the destination of the hosting fee.

This whole matter has deglossed the event in my view and requires a large dose of public sunshine before we commit to further expenditure.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2017 at 5:28 PM, dogwatch said:

What could possibly go wrong?

Invasion by stingrays. I've windsurfed over that sandbar at low tide, it can be covered with stingrays wing tip to wing tip in 0.5m of water. Sunbathing while avoiding the orca I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, dogwatch said:

Because the international audience for the AC is tiny and has been decreasing. Convincingly demonstrated by the pitiful viewing figures of the last two cycles.

 

Demonstrated if you like here also. There's probably fewer than 20 non-Kiwis still posting with any frequency.

The statistics put out by the PwC Report commissioned by the Bermudan Government paint a different picture:

Broadcasted in 163 countries by 31 broadcasters to 452m people, Dunkley said hosting the Cup put the island on the map

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. What does "to 452m people" actually mean? In the USA, where there are known audience estimates, IIRC the maximum audiences were around 1-2M. In the UK broadcasting was on BT Sport which has only a few million subscribers. I very much doubt the number actually watching the final Match race made it far into 7 figures and most of those were probably in NZ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the question about hosting fees coming up, and the hand wringing by the locals that is associated, why doesnt someone at the NZ Herald get someone high ranking at the RNZYS on the record?  ETNZ represents them ultimately.  

Having said all that, it is humorous to read that good old Dalts maybe putting the financial stones to NZ the way he is.  Very Couttsesque even if the odds of ETNZ defending outside NZ is miniscual.  Absolutely idiotic on Dalts part if true. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Farmer almost links the ambitious fee ask, to the ambitious AC75. 

Audio at http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/audio/james-farmer-team-nz-are-holding-taxpayers-to-ransom/

Farmer believes Team NZ shouldn't hold an America's Cup it can't afford and the syndicate should scale back on its America's Cup plans, before demanding more money from the public purse.

"Very strange that they should really promote a new type of boat, which is going to be extremely expensive, to not only develop but also support the crew."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DayTripper said:

Invasion by stingrays. 

We get that a lot in these here parts too.

And sometimes, when he's not trolling, he makes sense. ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ~Stingray~ said:

As seen by Pelicans...

 

Lots of belly flops there. But, as I said before, A+ for enthusiasm. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Lots of belly flops there. But, as I said before, A+ for enthusiasm. ;)

To tie that in, yes I was enthused about tourist-helming NZL 82 in Cabo (Sea of Cortez like in the video too), where I also saw those flying stingrays jumping enthusiastically every morning all around me, out just past the gentle break line. Look around, everyone’s flying these days!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would like to see the underwater side of that, they must get up some good speed to get that kind of airtime & rays seem to normally be seen just cruising when filmed underwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

Lots of belly flops there. But, as I said before, A+ for enthusiasm. ;)

Reckon we'll be seeing some belly flops on the AC75s too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

From FB. Shit Towns New Zealand

https://www.facebook.com/shittownsofnewzealand/photos/a.225979491072799.1073741828.225896257747789/549536572050421/?type=3

Comments from natives seem to verify the observation

 

"Auckland’s Maori name is Tamaki Makaurau, The City of a Thousand Lovers, but a better translation might be The City of a Million Fuckwits. The so-called super city – also known as Orkland, Dorkland, Jafatown, Fuckland, Wankland, Dickland, Shit City, Super Shitty, Wanker City, Arsehole City, Big Bag of Dicks City and pretty much any other combination of derogatory words – is a sprawling beige suburban shitropolis built on top of 50 volcanoes, demonstrating the sort of foresight that has led to twin housing and traffic crises. 
The city is inhabited largely by coked-up Wall Street wannabes wrecking the economy while their tracksuited soccer mom wives pick up their spoilt video game-addicted sugar-guzzling fat kids in their off-road SUVs that never leave the paved streets of Remuera. These same vehicles clog up Auckland’s chronically congested roads as they drive to the gym to use a walking machine, while spitting out their soy lattes in frustration at the smug lycra-clad cyclists bringing entire lanes to a halt as they weave amongst traffic with their balls hanging out. Meanwhile, the people who mow their lawns retreat to the Police Ten 7 principal filming location of South Auckland to sleep in their cars and dream of winning enough at the TAB to pay rent to a baby boomer property investor landlord for a studio do-up in an outer suburb such as Thames or Huntly. In the west, the bogans and hippies stick to the bush, while the central city is populated by beggars and wardrobe-sized apartment dwellers on dodgy student visas. Auckland’s most iconic landmark is the Sky Tower, a casino-owned structure shaped like a giant hypodermic needle as a tribute to the homeless junkies who sleep beneath it. 
Popular activities in the seaside “City of Sails” include pumping sewage onto beaches while simultaneously complaining about farmers dumping effluent, and watching their favourite local sports team lose. Not content with fucking up their own home, Dorklanders are now spreading their wankiness to the rest of the country, with Tauranga in particular having been taken over by jafugees. Auckland: City of Fails."
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gladwell needs to get his head out of his arse.

The scoring he constantly refers to did not include HHW, it was Halsey & Lot 18 which is a much different prospect and I disagree pretty strongly with a bunch of the scores they give particularly to the Halsey only option, my bet is HHW would have outscored Halsey only on a proper scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ~Stingray~ said:

A separate company has already been formed to run the regattas, called America's Cup Events’

and from the Dana J article,

‘Having gone to ground over the last week since the storm erupted, what Team NZ have failed to effectively communicate is the huge event management costs of running the regatta. UK firm Influence Sports and Media have been contracted to handle all commercial aspects of the event.’

Is GD in the business of ‘running’ the event, or is it supposed to be the ACE/ISM figuring out the budget on ‘A3 sheets of paper’ and then how to pay for it? If ACE then perhaps that is who should instead be dealing with the Govt?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Xlot said:

 

  ^ A clarification, at long last. But isn't BDA's quoted hosting fee wrong?

Yes, most of the BDA money was spent on facility construction, like Cross Island. BDA paid about $15M in direct cash to ACEA to run the event plus some extra to guarantee a portion of the sponsorship, and BDA eventually came in under their projected budget on the whole thing, at around $65M. It’s all posted.

Auckland is obviously more expensive a city to do construction in, the crowds and event management costs will be larger too, but you’d think that ISM’s specialty is to make a profit or at least break even running the event - or else what are they there for?

Anyway, yes it’s good GD is clarifying some things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From here, bold mine https://www.influencesportsmedia.com/about.html

Since launching the agency in 2008, our clients have included British Cycling, Team Sky, the 35th America's Cup, Oman Sail, Team Origin, Jaguar Land Rover, Formula E, Formula One Teams Association, Google/ YouTube, Rolex and Bloodhound SSC - the World Land Speed Record challenger.

Influence Sports & Media was founded by Alistair Watkins, the former Marketing Director of America’s Cup team, Alinghi

and from https://www.influencesportsmedia.com/americas-cup.html

America's Cup

Influence Sports & Media has worked with most of the major teams at some point over the last 15 years and has excellent knowledge of the unique world of the America’s Cup – its history, the key players and the intricacies. 

We have conducted extensive sales programmes and have full understanding of the commercial rights available, their value and and how to maximize ROI.

During the 35th America's Cup we were involved in the global America's Cup World Series and the culmination of the event on the Great Sound in Bermuda in the summer of 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Yes, most of the BDA money was spent on facility construction, like Cross Island. BDA paid about $15M in direct cash to ACEA to run the event plus some extra to guarantee a portion of the sponsorship, and BDA eventually came in under their projected budget on the whole thing, at around $65M. It’s all posted.

Auckland is obviously more expensive a city to do construction in, the crowds and event management costs will be larger too, but you’d think that ISM’s specialty is to make a profit or at least break even running the event - or else what are they there for?

Anyway, yes it’s good GD is clarifying some things.

"plus some extra" was a budget figure of $25million for event sponsorship underwrite  of which $19.3million was drawn down by ACEA. Making a total contribution by Bermuda to ACEA of $34.3million - more than the cost of building Cross Island and other infrastructure necessary for the event but with a legacy use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, robberzdog said:

plus some extra" was a budget figure of $25million for event sponsorship underwrite  of which $19.3million was drawn down by ACEA. Making a total contribution by Bermuda to ACEA of $34.3million

Thanks.

On (free to air) NBC in the US some of the commercials were about Bermuda, maybe the $19.3 was spent in part to get those aired?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ETNZ is a private team who had to go out and look for funding to challenge in AC35 when the government of the day abandoned them, after previously investing $36m of Tourism NZ money in the team for AC34 - an investment which from all accounts was very successful, which is why they were willing to repeat in AC35.

Now that ETNZ have won, everyone now wants a share of the spoils of an event which would not be happening had ETNZ not won - off their own belt-tightening efforts. The investment in the infrastructure to host AC36 in Auckland should be met by the entities benefiting the most from it: central government and Auckland City. The economic success of AC36 depends on multiple Challengers and world-wide exposure. HOWEVER, ETNZ's obligations to defend only needs one Challenger (which they've already got), a course which RNZYS can set and run the racing. I am perfectly happy for ETNZ to ask for a hosting fee - had the government not backed out of their AC36 undertaking, the hosting fee would not be an issue now as I doubt ETNZ would be asking for one. Whatever funds they raised to Challenge have been expended, and they are fully justified in replenishing some of those funds from a hosting fee - designing & building a new boat (or 2) and preparing the Defence has to be paid for from their own resources.

I would be quite happy for ETNZ to defend elsewhere if the politicians keep jerking them around, and I will still continue to support them. For all non-Kiwi posters, please don't pay too much heed to our so-called "media" - the NZ Herald used to be a reliable publication 'til O'reilly bought it, staffed it with second-rate pommie tabloid rejects and then flogged it off to someone else,  and Stuff simply regurgitates the Aussie view of what they think is topical in NZ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Positive new doesn't sell papers and generate clicks, which is why the benefits of hosting the two successful cups wasn't hugely broadcast by NZ media. Bad news, doom and gloom and drama is what sells papers and generates clicks, which is why the NZ media chose to broadcast the hosting fee as "lining Daltons and ETNZ's pockets. The Herald doesn't care whether what they choose to print and broadcast is true or not, they can always apologise for it later if its not, so as long as they make the money at the time of print, thats all that matters. The Herald also knows the Kiwi public will get behind the Team when the racing starts, and all the nonsense they have printed/ broadcasted will be forgotten, so they make their money and generate clicks now while they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Farmer is 100% on the money.

I guess these Dalton articles are an attempt to partly follow his advice to clarify the situation but whatever the intention the message has not come through as clear as Farmer is suggesting.

 

Especially if Bermudas '$75M' fee was actually mostly spent on base infrastructure & underwriting poor event revenue.

 

Govt & Council are clearly planning on fronting over $200M on base infrastructure as well as a bunch of hosting stuff.

At the same time Prada is supposed to be fronting for running the Challenger Series & supposedly Team entry fees are going to running the event too.

So what the fuck else do they expect to spend this Hosting Fee on???

 

How about: Hosting Fee $200M paid by Council/Govt to TNZ

-$150M paid back to Council/Govt for base construction

-$25M paid back to Council/Govt for Event hosting costs including building/running public viewing/Event villages in Viaduct & Takapuna.

-$15M base/Event area rental back to Council/Govt

-$10M to TVNZ for media gear/host broadcasting costs

 

Some interesting tidbits about the bases/village in http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11956644

Quote

Goff said talks were focused on the Wynyard Basin option between Halsey, Wynyard and Hobson wharves, but the parties were looking at putting double basis for syndicates with two yachts at the southern end of Wynyard Point to reduce the Halsey Wharf "intrusion" into the harbour.

He said the problem with this proposal is the effect on roads and hazardous substance storage tanks the further you move into Wynyard Point.

Pic from Stop Stealing our Harbour which rightly shows that the bases across the top of Hobson will block view but also shows how HHW gives vastly better public viewing of boat launch/base activity than Halsey would have.

WCZBWGJPRRCDVO2SZ54UD6N4AY.jpg

Now imagine if that was the backs of the bases

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also interesting from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11955907

Quote

But Parker continues to dig his heels in. The Herald understands the minister has suggested they explore a hybrid option, which would see only the eastern side of the wharf used.

sounding more & more like my idea of 'scaled back' HHW

sNTM6X3.jpg

Double bases on Wynyard East, single bases on Halsey is taking that even further.

There was an option in the depths of the Council docs using the whole length of Wynyard East & with a thin breakwater/superyacht berth Halsey extension, final version could be more like that?

 

Edit: that option may have existed only in my head :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, hoom said:

Farmer is 100% on the money.

I guess these Dalton articles are an attempt to partly follow his advice to clarify the situation but whatever the intention the message has not come through as clear as Farmer is suggesting.

 

Especially if Bermudas '$75M' fee was actually mostly spent on base infrastructure & underwriting poor event revenue.

 

Govt & Council are clearly planning on fronting over $200M on base infrastructure as well as a bunch of hosting stuff.

At the same time Prada is supposed to be fronting for running the Challenger Series & supposedly Team entry fees are going to running the event too.

So what the fuck else do they expect to spend this Hosting Fee on???

 

How about: Hosting Fee $200M paid by Council/Govt to TNZ

-$150M paid back to Council/Govt for base construction

-$25M paid back to Council/Govt for Event hosting costs including building/running public viewing/Event villages in Viaduct & Takapuna.

-$15M base/Event area rental back to Council/Govt

-$10M to TVNZ for media gear/host broadcasting costs

 

Now imagine if that was the backs of the bases

Can't really compare the AC35-specific developments in Bermuda to the requirements of Auckland where the local Council is trying to piggy-back their longer-term water-front plans on the back of AC36. The Defender should not have to fund the infrastructure to host an event which will benefit the country and Auckland economies.

ETNZ still have to fund the development, design and construction of their AC75 to compete against the might of the NYYC & LR big-money Challenges. They now have something tangible they can use to raise these funds - unlike AC35 when all they had were their credibility and unwavering faith of their hardcore private backers like Matteo. Pay them $36-50mil hosting fee and get on with it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

It's not going into my pocket.

That is the retort from Team New Zealand boss Grant Dalton, over the America's Cup event fee controversy which has included inferences the regatta will be held overseas if New Zealand doesn't cough up.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11956872

This is just a highly selective lift from the long Fairfax story and counters a story run on the same day by NZH which just goes over out-dated information and tries to make a negative story about it. It is pretty obvious from the original NZH story that they are miffed that ETNZ won't talk to them other than by email.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Indio said:

Can't really compare the AC35-specific developments in Bermuda to the requirements of Auckland where the local Council is trying to piggy-back their longer-term water-front plans on the back of AC36. The Defender should not have to fund the infrastructure to host an event which will benefit the country and Auckland economies.

ETNZ still have to fund the development, design and construction of their AC75 to compete against the might of the NYYC & LR big-money Challenges. They now have something tangible they can use to raise these funds - unlike AC35 when all they had were their credibility and unwavering faith of their hardcore private backers like Matteo. Pay them $36-50mil hosting fee and get on with it..

Considering:

  • TNZ are demanding a larger number of bases
  • TNZ chose a boat that requires bigger & deeper bases -> far more expensive to provide than was needed for AC50s
  • TNZ are demanding a 'legacy village' infrastructure including a free permanent base & a bunch of superyacht berths
  • Historical funding from Govt & huge public support that other teams lack
  • NZ & particularly Auckland has a large % of small tax, small govt, small minded people who love to bitch at Govt/Council spending

TNZ should be really fucking careful how far they push.

This is what Jim Farmer is saying too.

 

If funding to develop the JC75 is a problem they really really better fucking not be expecting to pay for it out of a big Hosting Fee, maybe consider reworking that concept to something a bit easier & which requires less expen$ive bases.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the most prudent way to control the amount of money the public will have to stump up with is to simply  bring forward the challenger notice of intent to compete time frame and adjust the required infrastructure to suit the exact known amount of contenders.

ETNZ have gone about the whole process backwards and still refuse to commit to Auckland lock stock and barrell so how in the hell did they expect the public to react to the starry eyed Halsley vision and the hosting fee demands.

I now understand why Tindal and Shoobridge rolled over at the council hearing.

The hosting fee according to Goff was a latter inclusion to negotiations.

Farmer is bringing a pragmatic and rational view to this ever growing fiasco.

Stop Stealing the Harbour are correct in highlighting the flaws in the design being mooted which effectively locks out and blocks the public harbour views from the viaduct.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Farmer should STFU. What's his game anyway?

Pissed he's no longer on the Board?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GD "To suggest that the team should pay ... firstly I have no idea how we could ... but that would be like asking the All Blacks to pay for the World Cup when it was in New Zealand. That just doesn't make any sense."

So they've come up with a hugely expensive new class, a protocol that allows building 2 boats and unlimited smaller surrogates but plead poverty as to holding the defence. What's wrong with this picture?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

GD "To suggest that the team should pay ... firstly I have no idea how we could ... but that would be like asking the All Blacks to pay for the World Cup when it was in New Zealand. That just doesn't make any sense."

So they've come up with a hugely expensive new class, a protocol that allows building 2 boats and unlimited smaller surrogates but plead poverty as to holding the defence. What's wrong with this picture?

 

Nothing! Move along and whinge somewhere else..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dogwatch said:

GD "To suggest that the team should pay ... firstly I have no idea how we could ... but that would be like asking the All Blacks to pay for the World Cup when it was in New Zealand. That just doesn't make any sense."

So they've come up with a hugely expensive new class, a protocol that allows building 2 boats and unlimited smaller surrogates but plead poverty as to holding the defence. What's wrong with this picture?

 

All good for P$B to over spend them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Am Cup - Team NZ's Dalton sets record straight

by Richard Gladwell

http://www.sail-world.com/news/200137/Am-Cup---Dalton-sets-record-straight-on-vexed-fee

Interesting bit in there:

On the sailing side of the America's Cup, two teams are believed proceeding towards building Surrogate America's Cup class yachts. There is no limit to the number of surrogates that can be built, however teams are limited to two AC75's the first of which can be launched after March 31, 2019.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  ^ Nah. First of all, he persists in the surrogate - NON surrogate mistake. Secondly, it's just QR and LR building TP52s

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Xlot said:

 ^ Nah. First of all, he persists in the surrogate - NON surrogate mistake. Secondly, it's just QR and LR building TP52s

 

Bingo, makes sense.

The ACE writings are mildly interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Audio http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11957269

Sailor Tony Rae says America's Cup 'just has to be in Auckland'

"I think that people have to just forget about how it's going to happen and just get on with it ... someone has to pay for it ... I think if Sir Peter Blake were still around the thought of having this Cup after winning it and not defending it in New Zealand, would be absurd to him."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

All good for P$B to over spend them.

Somebody could but even P$B may struggle to outspend DeVos.

Looks like realistically there are only 4 teams who will be in this thing, so govt may as well scale the venue plans way, way back. Just allocate 4 bases on the eastern side of Winyard Point. ? The other fantasied teams are still simply rattling their change tins and time has run too short for them with launched JC75s required of Challs to race ACWS events in Europe in ‘20 by the Protocol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Somebody could but even P$B may struggle to outspend DeVos.

Looks like realistically there are only 4 teams who will be in this thing, so govt may as well scale the venue plans way, way back. Just allocate 4 bases on the eastern side of Winyard Point. ? The other fantasied teams are still simply rattling their change tins and time has run too short for them with launched JC75s required of Challs to race ACWS events in Europe in ‘20 by the Protocol.

Yes, an american team may very well be the winner of this money race. It will also be a question of being able to go to the fringes of the rules, as the kiwis did in the last AC

It will be interesting to know if these boats will be the beginning of a new kind of boats and will trickle down as last AC multis, or if the boat will be so expensive that they will become white elephants, finish like Spruce Goose .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Somebody could but even P$B may struggle to outspend DeVos.

Looks like realistically there are only 4 teams who will be in this thing, so govt may as well scale the venue plans way, way back. Just allocate 4 bases on the eastern side of Winyard Point. ? The other fantasied teams are still simply rattling their change tins and time has run too short for them with launched JC75s required of Challs to race ACWS events in Europe in ‘20 by the Protocol.

Most teams will struggle with the 100% nationality clause, rather than the cost. The boat cost is not that bad as you are dealing with mostly standard and scaleable monohull technology in terms of winch systems etc aside from the foils which will probably be steel and not carbon, and would not have three months build time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost isn't very much about building the boat(s). It's about design and development for what isn't only a new class but to a substantial extent a new concept.

Roll back to the beginning of the IACC class. That led to what was almost certainly the biggest spending cycle of all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted by Spinbot in the americascup.com domain thread but more relevant to this thread http://www.jamesfarmerqc.co.nz/legal-commentary/americas-cup-part-3a

 

As I suggested above Farmer sees the recent publicity mini-blitz as a belated attempt by TNZ to follow his advice to nix the bad press.

I'm less sure than Farmer that it really came across as clearly as it should have, felt more like a defense of position demanding 'big Event Fee or else' rather than a 'thats definitely not gonna happen' that Farmer suggested.

 

But I thoroughly agree with him in concern that the boat carries big risks not just in whether it actually works but that it may dissuade teams through (percieved) complexity/cost -> result in too few teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Oops, posted by mistake in the wrong thread, you’re right.

The complex new boat is an issue but another is Farmer’s point that the govt already invested money in the team to get the Cup to NZ, many $10’s of millions. That gives Govt some stake, some say, in how things should go down. It’s the ‘price paid’ by ETNZ for accepting that dosh and it made NZ a partner; so the threat of going elsewhere if GD doesn’t get the funding he wants out of Govt instead of from other backers just can’t be reasonably wielded in this case.

None of Bermuda, SF or Valencia had made deep, prior investments into how the Cup had been won. In this case, maybe a Govt Agency like ATEED might appropriately run the Event if a ‘fee’ is to be allocated for that? Despite the voluminous commercial considerations that make up much of it, unlike the ACA and then the ACEA authorities this apparently new ‘ACE’ operation is not mentioned anywhere at all in this AC’s Protocol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATEED is an Auckland Council agency and yes I think they would expect to be heavily involved in running the Event.

 

GD seems to be expecting to run the Event as a fully independent fiefdom with Govt/Council merely providing the physical infrastructure -> need to give us heaps of money to do it.

Govt & Council will be expecting to leverage their existing agencies -> we're already spending heaps of money to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only involvement by ATEED would be in the carparking duties - they will not be anywhere near the event management and control. People seem to think they have a claim on ETNZ just because the government invested Tourism NZ money in the AC34 Challenge - an investment so successful they wanted to do it again in AC36 until they got cold feet. AC34 is over and done with, and NZ Inc. got their 36-mil's worth of world-wide exposure through ETNZ's efforts.

Had the government honoured their commitment to AC36, they'd be perfectly entitled to have a say in things. As it is, if they want to maximise the economic benefits to NZ, they and Auckland City will have to spend money to host AC36 in Auckland. ETNZ scraped and begged to fund themselves in AC35 after being abandoned by the government. As Defender, they will run the defence because they are best equipped to do so: Auckland City and central government can involve themselves with maximising the returns from the multitude of peripheral activities and deliverables associated with AC36.

And pay the Hosting Fee and get on with it!!! ETNZ are entitled to it - they've earned it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, hoom said:

ATEED is an Auckland Council agency and yes I think they would expect to be heavily involved in running the Event.

 

GD seems to be expecting to run the Event as a fully independent fiefdom with Govt/Council merely providing the physical infrastructure -> need to give us heaps of money to do it.

Govt & Council will be expecting to leverage their existing agencies -> we're already spending heaps of money to do it.

Agreed that it makes sense to allow them to run the Event, even profit off of it if they can, given the heavy past and coming investments.

ETNZ and their ghostly new ‘ACE’ - what have they (who?) invested into it? If profits do get made selling TV, parking, T shirts, SY berth fees, who exactly gets the return and why is it them?

How did the RWC go down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying Govt/Council should run the whole Event but they surely have reasonable expectation to be heavily involved at least in the shoreside parts.

Even on the water Police/Coastguard were heavily involved last time in herding spectators with boats purchased specially for it, they'll surely be doing the same again this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Indio said:

The only involvement by ATEED would be in the carparking duties - they will not be anywhere near the event management and control. People seem to think they have a claim on ETNZ just because the government invested Tourism NZ money in the AC34 Challenge - an investment so successful they wanted to do it again in AC36 until they got cold feet. AC34 is over and done with, and NZ Inc. got their 36-mil's worth of world-wide exposure through ETNZ's efforts.

Had the government honoured their commitment to AC36, they'd be perfectly entitled to have a say in things. As it is, if they want to maximise the economic benefits to NZ, they and Auckland City will have to spend money to host AC36 in Auckland. ETNZ scraped and begged to fund themselves in AC35 after being abandoned by the government. As Defender, they will run the defence because they are best equipped to do so: Auckland City and central government can involve themselves with maximising the returns from the multitude of peripheral activities and deliverables associated with AC36.

And pay the Hosting Fee and get on with it!!! ETNZ are entitled to it - they've earned it.

Well, car parking and boat parking. 

All in all, a nice summary of how the Cup should be staged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now