jack_sparrow

VOR AUCTION - OPPORTUNITIES LOST & STILL THERE?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Panoramix said:

I am not sure why it makes such a difference, the issues you highlighted regarding named races would still exist. Max Havelaar used to sponsor a boat.

...and Jacques Vabre isn't the only one, Guyader sells ready made food and has a race in its name, "le Figaro" is a newspaper and has one of the oldest race etc....

Pano sorry but you have worn me out with now parking RO identity discussion and start talking individual raceboat sponsorship, unknown foods/races and class names like Figaro also being a newspaper banner. Cheers.

Share this post


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

Also why is everyone obsessed with the public perception of the VOR? Its not for you anymore. This is all corporate interest. All the title sponsor tents and spectator boats are for corporate hospitality, not you.

The point of this thread, as I understand, is that the current corporate/sponsorship/underwriting model is broken and not sustainable.  Barely seven boats made it to the start line.  It's a discussion around what might work.

1 hour ago, TPG said:

The owner of SHK technically actually has interest in yacht racing, hense the Scallywag (supermaxi) campaign. MAPFRE, etc is pure corporate marketing. I never implied it was being privately funded or the campaign was in the VOR for private interests, just the fact that a corporate level owner was actually (somewhat) involved in the sport. The VOR has no interest in appealing to privateer campaigns. 

Maybe the VOR should explore an interest in privateer campaigns.  Besides being already heavily invested in the Scallywag campaign, besides Witty's persuasion, what were the selling points that drew Lee Seng Huang to the VOR under the current model?  What insights might he have to encourage other owner/investors?  Under what improved conditions would an owner/investor be attracted to the ocean race?  What worked for him?  What didn't?  Under what ideal circumstances might others jump aboard?  

5 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

The point is that the VOR really is vastly below the level of the AC or Olympics in stature.

It is.  This the point.  Stature.  Prestige.  It's been squandered.  Equity in brand diminished.

5 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

One thing that VOR can't fix is part of what makes the AC and Olympics so different.  History.

The VOR has a rich history as Jack reminds us well.  But the current VOR severed it's roots.  The current race is a shadow of the former.  Heritage was mentioned upthread.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Pano sorry but you have worn me out with now parking RO identity discussion and start talking individual raceboat sponsorship, unknown foods/races and class names like Figaro also being a newspaper banner. Cheers.

I understand that with all this energy you spent feeding the trolls, there isn't much left to discuss the future of the VOR ;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, staysail said:

However you look at it this race, done in the style it is worthy of now, and not the present lame immitation, is going to cost a lot, much more than what is currently being spent, and the accountant mentality is not well suited to "having fun", managing any kind of real adventure. If a predicatble profit on a balance sheet has to be a major factor in the planning of this event sadly I think its doomed.

Stay could not agree more BUT if only you added a few more explanatory paragraphs being:

"Unfortunately the accountant mentality has reigned supreme for 30 years having only the same restrictive "bucket of money" in "real terms" available to put this race on under the same RO/Model the race started with. By "real terms" I mean not just the Present Value of money but adjustments both up and down for things like increased media/public exposure through technology changes over time etc.

Obviously the accountants have not had it all their own way as otherwise we wouldn't have seen in this period the recognition of sailboat technology changes like water ballast (W60) through to canters (V70). However in moving through to today where a OD V65 does 500 miles/day with ease compared to Stienlarger 2 a maxi winning all legs and doing 350 miles/day at best, that had to come at a cost coming out of the same bucket of 1988 money.

The nett result can only be one thing when competing for a overall race budget that hasn't changed in 30 years. Fleet numbers reduce and when they get periously close to extinction the next step is OD Rent a Boat. The step after that is the undertaker.

The irony is the enthusiast has embraced if not demanded going from 350 mile to 500 mile days and so in fact are partly responsible for the current status.  However to their defence they have not been afforded the ability to contribute towards that cost impost via mainstream products they might use every day or even an occasional big purchase.

They don't buy oil and gas engineering expertise (Brunel), subscribe to philanthropic ventures or windfarms (TTOP / V11), paint their house with an exotic coating system (Akzo' yet they own Dulux and no one knows that??) have any interest in Chinese heavy vehicles (Dongfeng) or outside Spain, a Spanish insurance company (Mapfre)".

So yes you are right in a sense. There is no vision, no understanding a second or third bucket of money has to be attracted and until that materialises the bean counters are running the show with nothing but a ledger at their disposal to get it back on course before it must inevitably hit the rocks.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about a hypothetical?  If skipped an edition and had a clean slate to rechristen the race.  If this was yours, what would you do?

Imagine for a moment that Lee Seng Huang is the tip of the iceberg and that there are in fact 30 - 50 "potential" parties from all over the world interested in an opportunity with an equal number of sponsors (currently shut out) in an event played out on the world stage.   What would you spin?  What would make this the most exciting offshore team race in the world that would have every major player vying for a spot?

It's a hypothetical.  Don't get crotchety!

  • Forget the Jim Clarkes.  There are exponentially more with $200 - 750MM.  Owner/investor spearheading a cosponsored campaign.
  • Unbranded race?  Which sponsors?  Red Bull? Puma (back)?  Maserati?  A telecom?  
  • Cost of a campaign including boat and team?  $10 - 20MM?  Owner buys the boat to campaign every major offshore race.  He likes his winning new record breaker.
  • The course?  Very important balance between ...
  • Nationalities?  Host cities? 
  • The boat.  OD?  Box?
  • Improved media coverage?
  • The Boatyard?

If Mr. X (target owner/investor) bit on the idea and called a meeting in the boardroom, what would be your pitch?  

Share this post


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

If Mr. X (target owner/investor) bit on the idea and called a meeting in the boardroom, what would be your pitch?  

$20M and you have the twins for the evening?

Sorry SX bit worn out. Tomorrow  I promise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Sorry SX bit worn out. Tomorrow  I promise.

Looking forward to it.

Share this post


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

  If this was yours, what would you do?

 

I know that the question wasn't for me....

It wouldn't be mine because I would have no use in it, but I wish that somebody who would have some real use of it would "inherit" it as they then would do everything to preserve and enhance it.

So assuming that this hypothetical entity gets it what could they do? I think that they need at least 20 entries. Dumbing down the race to a class 40 event would be silly and not respecting the heritage of big cutting edge boats going round the world. The IMOCA option has some merits but it just means that they are becoming a Vendée Globe supporting race, not good... A new version of V70s (OD or not) wouldn't attract enough people, it is just too expensive and bad VFM to build a boat that will race RTW once against 6 competitors...

I think that one solution would be a 3 class race : class 40, IMOCA and G-class multihulls. The bulk of the entries would come from the class 40, then you get enough IMOCAs to have an interesting race (10+ may be?) and say 2, 3 or 4 G-class. To take care of the wildly different speeds you get the class 40 to do the original route Europe, South Africa, Australia (or New Zealand), Brazil, Europe, you get the IMOCAs to follow the same route and zig zag a bit (say visit China, the east coast of the USA plus a few dog legs) and the G-class to zig zag a lot more (middle east, West coast of the USA on top). You organise the extra legs so that all class get to and leave the big stops roughly at the same time (within a week or two)

It just means that the race does not get all its eggs in the same basket, if one class decline (like the ORMAs did in the noughties, and btw they didn't take down the route du Rhum with them thanks to the IMOCAs and later the class 40), there are 2 other classes to sustain the race. It offers opportunities to participate with a small budget so that a few Corinthians can do it, and the class 40 is currently the only truly international offshore class. The fastest offshore boats will be part of it attracting headlines, hopefully a few billionaires will build one and winning in IMOCA will be extremely hard as it will attract the best professional skippers.

Last but not least, the sponsors will get value for money, with so many boats on the water it will make noise, the big stopovers where everybody stop will see a lot of activity (staggered arrivals and staggered starts) and the fast fleets will do pit stops in other places promoting the race around.

It stop being a single class race but that was the case in the early races. At the end you get one trophy per class + overall trophy with a point system.

Share this post


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

I know that the question wasn't for me....

The question is for anyone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

Dumbing down the race to a class 40 event would be silly and not respecting the heritage of big cutting edge boats going round the world.

A corinthian opportunity sounds interesting and it's a wild idea to split the race over three classes with varying stopovers.  What logistics, expense and size RO would be required if, for example, a SO low wipes out 3 Class 40's and a rescue needs to be coordinated while at the same time the multi's are crossing a finish line and the IMOCA's are running Live drone feeds?  Could three classes be managed in a RTW race?  If so, at what expense?

14 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

The IMOCA option has some merits but it just means that they are becoming a Vendée Globe supporting race, not good..

Agree.  Small crews and autopilot steps further away from the original idea of a crewed race. 

15 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

A new version of V70s wouldn't attract enough people, it is just too expensive and bad VFM to build a boat that will race RTW once against 6 competitors...

It might attract enough of the right people who would use the same boat to campaign S2H, Transpac, Med races, etc etc.  Less expensive than a Maxi.  Mini Maxi range.

Is the downfall of the VOR in part due to it being a single class?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haven't followed the thread in detail, but I believe someone was asking for the deltas in the last VO70 race... well, see attachment. Less than two minutes between 1st and 2nd in one of the legs, and pretty close racing as well. (between the boats that were not limping around, true...). 

Rumour mill expects a big race announcement this week in Newport. Geely has also stated its aim to float Volvo Cars in the near term. This could bring lots of new cash to revamp the  event. 

https://www.ft.com/content/097ea5c2-54db-11e8-b3ee-41e0209208ec

Personally, I agree with some here supporting the idea of getting rid of Volvo as owner...this race is right now just a corporate brand activation gig for them, and it shows. 

Screen Shot 2018-05-13 at 19.57.15.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, southerncross said:

A corinthian opportunity sounds interesting and it's a wild idea to split the race over three classes with varying stopovers.  What logistics, expense and size RO would be required if, for example, a SO low wipes out 3 Class 40's and a rescue needs to be coordinated while at the same time the multi's are crossing a finish line and the IMOCA's are running Live drone feeds?  Could three classes be managed in a RTW race?  If so, at what expense?

Agree.  Small crews and autopilot steps further away from the original idea of a crewed race. 

It might attract enough of the right people who would use the same boat to campaign S2H, Transpac, Med races, etc etc.  Less expensive than a Maxi.  Mini Maxi range.

Is the downfall of the VOR in part due to it being a single class?

 

The 3 class race is definitely a wild idea but I think that they need a wild idea to save the race now! Sure it will be more expensive than the current gig but the cost will be spread over more boats. In having three class getting to the same stopover there are economies of scale to be had. If there is an emergency, well they will have to deal with it even if the rest of the race suffer a bit for it but hopefully that won't happen daily! With number comes safety if something goes wrong the chance of a nearby competitor able to help are greater.

You can ban autopilots even with a crew of 4 or 6.

A class doing the classics could be an idea but I am not sure it is easy to do as these races have well established classes not suitable for the VOR and imposing a new class isn't easy.

They've tried every thing to save the V70 style boats, at some point you need avoid being too stubborn.

Being single class is not necessarily the cause of their downfall but it is definitely riskier IMO. Look the mini transat is being saved at the moment by the series, the route du rhum was saved by the IMOCAs, several classes seems to be a good life insurace.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

What about a hypothetical?  If skipped an edition and had a clean slate to rechristen the race.  If this was yours, what would you do?

Imagine for a moment that Lee Seng Huang is the tip of the iceberg and that there are in fact 30 - 50 "potential" parties from all over the world interested in an opportunity with an equal number of sponsors (currently shut out) in an event played out on the world stage.   What would you spin?  What would make this the most exciting offshore team race in the world that would have every major player vying for a spot?

It's a hypothetical.  Don't get crotchety!

  • Forget the Jim Clarkes.  There are exponentially more with $200 - 750MM.  Owner/investor spearheading a cosponsored campaign.
  • Unbranded race?  Which sponsors?  Red Bull? Puma (back)?  Maserati?  A telecom?  
  • Cost of a campaign including boat and team?  $10 - 20MM?  Owner buys the boat to campaign every major offshore race.  He likes his winning new record breaker.
  • The course?  Very important balance between ...
  • Nationalities?  Host cities? 
  • The boat.  OD?  Box?
  • Improved media coverage?
  • The Boatyard?

If Mr. X (target owner/investor) bit on the idea and called a meeting in the boardroom, what would be your pitch?  


1. Diversify funding opportunities. IOW - a team can be something with a lifestyle message like Red Bull, a loose conglomerate with stickers all over ranging from grocery stories and condoms, or rich dude who wants his own name on the boat. Basically no restrictions on organization and marketing approach.

2. Trim the fat. No more Alicante HQ & Lisbon fish factory boat yard. Dedicate resources to content creation,  I'll expand below.

3. Identify circuit events that are considered prerequisites, it'll have to include the classic regattas. Why? Need to use these events to narrow the design path (not strict OD - but something box rule flexibly put in place with the mind that the result fleet compares well to each other, but also can perform well in the classics). This gives actual teams/investors/corporate programs something to do in the build up and after - keeps the boats out of the dock, off the hard and actually can collect actual prestigious events (piggybacking off legitimacy and heritage organized by others).

4. Actual round the world course? Only mandatory locations are the Horn crossings. I'm partial to having a Gibraltar event because it creates good content, Cape Town for its historic importance to the Clipper Route,  Perth, Auckland, Azores, because to me they're special sailing places. 

5. Consistent with my view that you approach the boat design parameters with specific classic regattas & around the world in mind (instead of being focused on VOR only), need to balance close result (no one wants complete dominance by one team), cost containment without rigid cost cap (shared hull mold w/ open design deck layout/mast/sail). Foiling vs. daggerboard configs to allow diff teams with diff approaches to decide how to compromise. One problem with strict OD is it discourages would be sponsors in the marine industry from participating. Intellectual property developed for the boats will be held together in trust by the class association. IOW, no team owns it. The lead time & building resources = only competitive advantage a team might get, which allows new entrants to catch up. Well balanced boats also have better secondary market after their current owners are done with them.

6. On board media: I think ultimately this was the best part of past 2 cycles. It is quickly showing that having a dedicated person taking footage, curating it, piloting a drone & telling a story does wonders w/ minimal human capital. Alex thomson did some of the best simple daily videos with his iPhone. Simple. Low budget but effective. Everyone can appreciate how Alex is a marketing/team building monster - how many outside of France have succeeded in maintaining a cohesive team w/ new boats for this long? We're also getting at this interesting intersection where increased satellite coverage and bandwidth is reducing the cost of maintaining media connections. 

7. English, French, Spanish. 

None of these are holy - just thoughts I'd say helps contribute to a healthy class.

Edit:

8. I don't think I emphasized this enough. Boat size should be determined by requirements - if a JPK 1080 can get the job done with a crew of 5, I don't see why not. The key is making sure it can get it done and create nice competition at the classics while also get around the world. I think autopilot is essential, because interia is a really dumb reason to keep someone stuck at the helm (it adds 3 ppl to a crew rotation who can be trimming sails and what not). If you're a genius like Stu, fine take the helm - but if a team wants to put 3 ppl trimming a code sail, a staystail and the main - why not? This fleet that goes around the world should also really be scheduled with more respect for seasons & also timing of the classics. If they can do the Middle Sea, Fastnet, Sydney Hobart - it'll be fun to see the "locals" up against these traveling band of boats.
 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I know that the question wasn't for me....

It wouldn't be mine because I would have no use in it, but I wish that somebody who would have some real use of it would "inherit" it as they then would do everything to preserve and enhance it.

So assuming that this hypothetical entity gets it what could they do? I think that they need at least 20 entries. Dumbing down the race to a class 40 event would be silly and not respecting the heritage of big cutting edge boats going round the world. The IMOCA option has some merits but it just means that they are becoming a Vendée Globe supporting race, not good... A new version of V70s (OD or not) wouldn't attract enough people, it is just too expensive and bad VFM to build a boat that will race RTW once against 6 competitors...

I think that one solution would be a 3 class race : class 40, IMOCA and G-class multihulls. The bulk of the entries would come from the class 40, then you get enough IMOCAs to have an interesting race (10+ may be?) and say 2, 3 or 4 G-class. To take care of the wildly different speeds you get the class 40 to do the original route Europe, South Africa, Australia (or New Zealand), Brazil, Europe, you get the IMOCAs to follow the same route and zig zag a bit (say visit China, the east coast of the USA plus a few dog legs) and the G-class to zig zag a lot more (middle east, West coast of the USA on top). You organise the extra legs so that all class get to and leave the big stops roughly at the same time (within a week or two)

It just means that the race does not get all its eggs in the same basket, if one class decline (like the ORMAs did in the noughties, and btw they didn't take down the route du Rhum with them thanks to the IMOCAs and later the class 40), there are 2 other classes to sustain the race. It offers opportunities to participate with a small budget so that a few Corinthians can do it, and the class 40 is currently the only truly international offshore class. The fastest offshore boats will be part of it attracting headlines, hopefully a few billionaires will build one and winning in IMOCA will be extremely hard as it will attract the best professional skippers.

Last but not least, the sponsors will get value for money, with so many boats on the water it will make noise, the big stopovers where everybody stop will see a lot of activity (staggered arrivals and staggered starts) and the fast fleets will do pit stops in other places promoting the race around.

It stop being a single class race but that was the case in the early races. At the end you get one trophy per class + overall trophy with a point system.

How would you even start to handle the logistics, safety and media coverage for such a mixed fleet? 

The appeal of the class 40 fleet sailing around the world has already proved itself, it’s too slow for the non sailor to stay interested. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, southerncross said:

The point of this thread, as I understand, is that the current corporate/sponsorship/underwriting model is broken and not sustainable.  Barely seven boats made it to the start line.  It's a discussion around what might work.

Actually SX, it's worse that that. The current corporate/sponsorship/underwriting model really only attracted six teams. One private team took advantage of the fact that there were two boats gathering dust to choose from.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

8. I don't think I emphasized this enough. Boat size should be determined by requirements - if a JPK 1080 can get the job done with a crew of 5, I don't see why not. The key is making sure it can get it done and create nice competition at the classics while also get around the world. I think autopilot is essential, because interia is a really dumb reason to keep someone stuck at the helm (it adds 3 ppl to a crew rotation who can be trimming sails and what not). If you're a genius like Stu, fine take the helm - but if a team wants to put 3 ppl trimming a code sail, a staystail and the main - why not? This fleet that goes around the world should also really be scheduled with more respect for seasons & also timing of the classics. If they can do the Middle Sea, Fastnet, Sydney Hobart - it'll be fun to see the "locals" up against these traveling band of boats.

I like your post Miffy esp. 3 and 5.  But we differ on the boat and autopilots as you can imagine.  I think the boat needs to blow minds (not dollars/cost savings as suggested), one that the pro's can't wait to get their hands on to drive.  Driving is an essential skill and automation is a slippery slope we're already headed down IMHO.

I'm still up in the air about OD vs. Box.  If Box could be done within an attractive budget, then yes.  The deltas posted for the VO70 times above is encouraging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think of autopilot not as a slippery slope. But a balancing act. If a crew member can handsteer a tiller, great. 

If more boatspeed can be gained with them helping gybe a boat and move stuff. Great. Also it is a safety item. 

If someone is sick. The crew watch doesn't fall apart instantly. 

This isn't single handed sailing. Small crewed boats still disengage the autopilot when it makes sense. But it is really dumb when the conditions don't require it and really you can just tie a bungee to your tiller and focus on sailing the boat faster via other means. 

There's twenty ways to skin the cat. Artificially preventing an autopilot, why not get rid of radars? Read the clouds. Or AIS? Use a bearing compass and stay on watch. 

If we want fast and safe but manageable expenses, it must get small. And if you get small, you have to allow crews to rest. Autopilot. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that so many hate OD open it up some more again.

1. Find those that are willing to sponsor a boat for the next edition.
2. Lock them into a room.
3. The boat/class/rule/concept/thingamabob that gets the most people to put actual(!) money into escrow (toward build and campaign) gets selected. Time is short, sponsors might as well start to pay today.
4. Not enough takers? (A minimum of what? 6?) Start to introduce cheaper and simpler options until there are takers. Heck, all the way down to the Class40 if that is what it takes.
5. Still not enough? V65 one more time, and done if no consensus for a new boat can be found during the next round.

 

No matter how you do it opening the design adds more potential for real fragile boats. I'd love Tighten up the rules in other areas.
Boat does not make it to a finish, on its own? You are out.
Boat does not make it to a leg start, on time? You are out.
Someone got maimed or killed? Crew or third party, either way you are out. 

That should cut down the negative news a whole lot. "Life at the extreme" is not such a great slogan but the first word is important.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

What about a hypothetical?  If skipped an edition and had a clean slate to rechristen the race.  If this was yours, what would you do?

Imagine for a moment that Lee Seng Huang is the tip of the iceberg and that there are in fact 30 - 50 "potential" parties from all over the world interested in an opportunity with an equal number of sponsors (currently shut out) in an event played out on the world stage.   What would you spin?  What would make this the most exciting offshore team race in the world that would have every major player vying for a spot?

It's a hypothetical.  Don't get crotchety!

  • Forget the Jim Clarkes.  There are exponentially more with $200 - 750MM.  Owner/investor spearheading a cosponsored campaign.
  • Unbranded race?  Which sponsors?  Red Bull? Puma (back)?  Maserati?  A telecom?  
  • Cost of a campaign including boat and team?  $10 - 20MM?  Owner buys the boat to campaign every major offshore race.  He likes his winning new record breaker.
  • The course?  Very important balance between ...
  • Nationalities?  Host cities? 
  • The boat.  OD?  Box?
  • Improved media coverage?
  • The Boatyard?

If Mr. X (target owner/investor) bit on the idea and called a meeting in the boardroom, what would be your pitch?  

Good set of questions, I like the "poor" mega rich wealth range... I'm guessing that some of the Aussie maxi owners fit in that wealth range...

I have no problem with it remaining a Volvo race. I also don't see their sponsorship as an impediment to some car companies sponsoring a team. To some extent removing Volvo from the name would confuse the history now that it is well established. It would be a bit like renaming the Americas Cup, after all it was originally '£100 Cup'

It needs to attract household names as sponsors as they are the companies that have the biggest marketing budgets.

Entry should be a case of the team owner commissioning a designer and the build (or buying used) whilst arranging the sponsors  

The boat should be the type of boat that the team owner will want to race in local ocean races. I believe it needs to be a boat that should be capable of snapping at the current maxi's heals. So a box rule of at least 70ft but I think 80ft might be better for non VOR racing. It should be a boat that the other millionaires will be waiting to come on the market to either run as a 2nd tier entry or to retire from VOR and chase maxis. Whatever design rule is selected, there should be a long term commitment to stick with it and only make evolutionary changes because of safety or because of some new design concept that is prevented by the current rule and would make the VOR non-cutting edge.

 

Needs lots of southern ocean, a BIG no to the middle east and whilst I think the china legs are a distraction from the real race, it will help attract some rich to be team owners to give them a leisure activity for them to pay others to do for them. So I'm happy with the course. However, as someone from Melbourne I really hate to say this, but given the timing of the race, I think that it would be a good to finish that leg in Sydney, but a couple of weeks earlier so they can add the S2H to the VOR and then start the China leg from Hobart on New Years Day.

The course should remain fairly static with perhaps only minor adjustments, like changing Chinese cities, US east coast and Europe.

I'm happy with the online coverage. Maybe VOR needs to produce 30 minute/hour summary program weekly that can sell to (or pay) TV networks if they can generate the interest.  Clearly from an Australian perspective, VOR has not generated enough interest in their produce to get the media's attention. If it's like that in a stop over city, what about the rest of the world.

The boat yard is needed and should be in a location where the public can come and view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chasm said:

Given that so many hate OD open it up some more again.

1. Find those that are willing to sponsor a boat for the next edition.
2. Lock them into a room.
3. The boat/class/rule/concept/thingamabob that gets the most people to put actual(!) money into escrow (toward build and campaign) gets selected. Time is short, sponsors might as well start to pay today.
4. Not enough takers? (A minimum of what? 6?) Start to introduce cheaper and simpler options until there are takers. Heck, all the way down to the Class40 if that is what it takes.
5. Still not enough? V65 one more time, and done if no consensus for a new boat can be found during the next round.

 

No matter how you do it opening the design adds more potential for real fragile boats. I'd love Tighten up the rules in other areas.
Boat does not make it to a finish, on its own? You are out.
Boat does not make it to a leg start, on time? You are out.
Someone got maimed or killed? Crew or third party, either way you are out. 

That should cut down the negative news a whole lot. "Life at the extreme" is not such a great slogan but the first word is important.

Really important re survivability and not taking excessive risks. I hate the fleet leaving Auckland in March. They should be past the Horn by February. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

No matter how you do it opening the design adds more potential for real fragile boats. I'd love Tighten up the rules in other areas.
Boat does not make it to a finish, on its own? You are out.
Boat does not make it to a leg start, on time? You are out.
Someone got maimed or killed? Crew or third party, either way you are out. 

Good point.  Does scoring need to change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chasm said:

No matter how you do it opening the design adds more potential for real fragile boats. I'd love Tighten up the rules in other areas.
Boat does not make it to a finish, on its own? You are out.
Boat does not make it to a leg start, on time? You are out.
Someone got maimed or killed? Crew or third party, either way you are out. 

Any sponsor with experience with ocean racing will know that shit happens. So knowing that a lost rig will mean the campaign ends will surely have them looking elsewhere to spend their money.

5 minutes ago, Chasm said:

Someone got maimed or killed? Crew or third party, either way you are out. 

So you are saying that Vestas & Scallywag took unacceptable risks? Are you one of Random's bum boys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, southerncross said:

Good point.  Does scoring need to change?

Combined elapsed time? Would really deter excessive risk. 

Elapsed time also increases different sailing options esp with performance diff at diff points of sails with same hull but diff setups. 

You wouldn't play match racing tactics to follow someone closely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, southerncross said:

Good Stupid point.  Does scoring need to change?

correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Miffy said:

I think of autopilot not as a slippery slope. But a balancing act. If a crew member can handsteer a tiller, great. 

If more boatspeed can be gained with them helping gybe a boat and move stuff. Great. Also it is a safety item. 

If someone is sick. The crew watch doesn't fall apart instantly. 

This isn't single handed sailing. Small crewed boats still disengage the autopilot when it makes sense. But it is really dumb when the conditions don't require it and really you can just tie a bungee to your tiller and focus on sailing the boat faster via other means. 

There's twenty ways to skin the cat. Artificially preventing an autopilot, why not get rid of radars? Read the clouds. Or AIS? Use a bearing compass and stay on watch. 

If we want fast and safe but manageable expenses, it must get small. And if you get small, you have to allow crews to rest. Autopilot. 

Don't get me wrong.  I bow at his feet.  But Golden Boy's record breaking lap tucked inside a bubble, sipping on green tea and pinch/zooming a screen, while momentous and remarkable, isn't what the Whitbread/Volvo is about.

Technology offers a lot of advantages and creature comforts.  No doubt all kinds of devices could be used to give the crew a rest and increase speed on the boat.  But it misses the point and detracts from the original story and heritage.  I believe the current model has moved too far from the original and one of the main reasons it's faltering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is suggesting closed cockpit trimarans... also the autopilot isn't what makes the golden boy great. If you took the autohelm away he will systematically study the problem and solve it too. Windvane with a bungee on a tiller while he sails away knowing how to trim the sails better than you and manage his crossovers. 

Nostalgia of the old? But the original race was extreme and slow. Cooks were brought onboard. Refrigeration. Heated cabins. Steel boats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Miffy said:

No one is suggesting closed cockpit trimarans... also the autopilot isn't what makes the golden boy great. If you took the autohelm away he will systematically study the problem and solve it too. Windvane with a bungee on a tiller while he sails away knowing how to trim the sails better than you and manage his crossovers. 

There have been all kinds of suggestions about closed cockpits on the Volvo monohull.  Where have you been?  

Didn't I preface it by saying "I bow to his feet'? 

The point is, there are an unlimited number of technological and automated features/advantages that can be added to a boat to make it easier to sail.  The Volvo is at it's best the most mentally and physically demanding sport on the planet that only a select few ever become qualified enough to do.  Helming is a required skill and can make or break a teams chances at a win.  What's next?  Power winches because their arms are getting too tired from all the grinding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, southerncross said:

Power winches because their arms are getting too tired from all the grinding?

Works for WOX1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, southerncross said:

There have been all kinds of suggestions about closed cockpits on the Volvo monohull.  Where have you been?  

Didn't I preface it by saying "I bow to his feet'? 

The point is, there are an unlimited number of technological and automated features/advantages that can be added to a boat to make it easier to sail.  The Volvo is at it's best the most mentally and physically demanding sport on the planet that only a select few ever become qualified enough to do.  Helming is a required skill and can make or break a teams chances at a win.  What's next?  Power winches because their arms are getting too tired from all the grinding?

Slippery slope is a poor argument. What's next? Dynema? Roller furling? Carbon composite? 

I find it odd that you're big into specific things but then pick a bone with one item and nothing anyone says it being a compromise is acceptable. 

Fewer crews. Ppl get hurt. 3 ppl rotation just to helm. There are ppl who never get to helm. Autopilot isn't mandatory. It is a compromise and safety. Also makes boats faster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Miffy said:

Slippery slope is a poor argument. What's next? Dynema? Roller furling? Carbon composite? 

Doesn't matter if they're made of graphene and weigh 1000lbs so long as they're sailed by humans.

Can we agree to disagree yet?

Share this post


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

I have no problem with it remaining a Volvo race. 

That may well be your opinion. However the Teams have a different view. Brunos comments from Team Brunel are universally shared.

There will be hardly one team returning for the next edition if Volvo are running it as they do now. In other words the sponsors who are paying the bills for Volvo to have its plaything have had enough. When a RO doesn't listen its sponsor parties it's fucked.They are outta Dodge.

What many people here are suggesting as race fixes is akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, southerncross said:

Doesn't matter if they're made of graphene and weigh 1000lbs so long as they're sailed by humans.

Can we agree to disagree yet?

But you're okay with polars and instruments that tell a subpar helms person everything they need to do to get better? It just seems internally inconsistent and disregards what the sailors actually do when under autohelm. 

Share this post


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

What many people here are saying is akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The big announcement is coming soon.  It's been fun to speculate in the mean time. 

Share this post


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

How would you even start to handle the logistics, safety and media coverage for such a mixed fleet? 

The appeal of the class 40 fleet sailing around the world has already proved itself, it’s too slow for the non sailor to stay interested. 

The route du rhum does the safety and media coverage of a mixed fleet. The logistics would be harder with the stopovers but I explained in my post how they could do it. It just means that there are 3 stopovers which are opened longer (but less to organise) and some pit stops for the fast classes.

The class 40 don't need to generate as much interest as the big boats as the budgets are lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Miffy said:

But you're okay with polars and instruments that tell a subpar helms person everything they need to do to get better? 

Not only that, data from loads and performance is downloaded to the shore crew every second.  Am I ok with it?  I just think you have to draw the line somewhere.  Otherwise it becomes a grandiose video game. 

Share this post


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

Good set of questions, I like the "poor" mega rich wealth range... I'm guessing that some of the Aussie maxi owners fit in that wealth range...

I have no problem with it remaining a Volvo race. I also don't see their sponsorship as an impediment to some car companies sponsoring a team. To some extent removing Volvo from the name would confuse the history now that it is well established. It would be a bit like renaming the Americas Cup, after all it was originally '£100 Cup'

It needs to attract household names as sponsors as they are the companies that have the biggest marketing budgets.

Entry should be a case of the team owner commissioning a designer and the build (or buying used) whilst arranging the sponsors  

The boat should be the type of boat that the team owner will want to race in local ocean races. I believe it needs to be a boat that should be capable of snapping at the current maxi's heals. So a box rule of at least 70ft but I think 80ft might be better for non VOR racing. It should be a boat that the other millionaires will be waiting to come on the market to either run as a 2nd tier entry or to retire from VOR and chase maxis. Whatever design rule is selected, there should be a long term commitment to stick with it and only make evolutionary changes because of safety or because of some new design concept that is prevented by the current rule and would make the VOR non-cutting edge.

 

Needs lots of southern ocean, a BIG no to the middle east and whilst I think the china legs are a distraction from the real race, it will help attract some rich to be team owners to give them a leisure activity for them to pay others to do for them. So I'm happy with the course. However, as someone from Melbourne I really hate to say this, but given the timing of the race, I think that it would be a good to finish that leg in Sydney, but a couple of weeks earlier so they can add the S2H to the VOR and then start the China leg from Hobart on New Years Day.

The course should remain fairly static with perhaps only minor adjustments, like changing Chinese cities, US east coast and Europe.

I'm happy with the online coverage. Maybe VOR needs to produce 30 minute/hour summary program weekly that can sell to (or pay) TV networks if they can generate the interest.  Clearly from an Australian perspective, VOR has not generated enough interest in their produce to get the media's attention. If it's like that in a stop over city, what about the rest of the world.

The boat yard is needed and should be in a location where the public can come and view.

What make you think that the sponsors would come?

A OD 80 footer will be much more expensive than the current boats and I can't see how they will generate enough interest to pay for it. They've tried hard and failed for more than 10 years. The OBR was a very good idea but not good enough...

Share this post


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

Given that so many hate OD open it up some more again

I would disagree with "so many hate OD" scanning through this thread and others.

However there is a pretty wide acceptance that the brief issued for the 65 and therefore the outcome is undercooked if not tasteless with too much emphasis on it not falling apart and not enough budget devoted to achieve that but get a far slicker and more user friendly boat.

OD can still produce a great outcome if it is catered for properly and there is the money.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I would disagree with "so many hate OD" scanning through this thread and others.

However there is a pretty wide acceptance that the brief issued for the 65 and therefore the outcome was undercooked with too much emphasis on it not falling apart and not enough budget devoted to achieve that  but get a far slicker and more user friendly boat.

OD can still produce a great outcome if it is catered for properly.

And the VO65 were a reaction to the embarrassing debut of the 70s. Knut knew after the recession, if the new class of boats were not OD and would be left at the docks, teams would drop out of too many legs and it'll become a sham. With the amount of upwind beating this time around, he wasn't wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Miffy said:

With the amount of upwind beating this time around, he wasn't wrong. 

Ageed as you need a bunch of ingrediates to even make a cheap cake, the amount of uphill suger (generated by 4 equator crossings) put into the mix made it one not all like eating.

Share this post


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

They should be past the Horn by February.

Yes and then they don't have to build floating housebricks to survive this and other parts of the course.

Share this post


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

 ...So I'm happy with the course. However, as someone from Melbourne I really hate to say this, but given the timing of the race, I think that it would be a good to finish that leg in Sydney, but a couple of weeks earlier so they can add the S2H to the VOR and then start the China leg from Hobart on New Years Day.

The Melbourne stopover was deplorable, but not of your / Melbourne's doing.

The RO approached Sydney and Melbourne wanting a rediculous amount of money to be a Host City. Sydney said get fucked and Melbourne (I think through its Events Corp) were likewise inclined but aquieced and put in a small amount of money/contra consistent with someone wanting to fly their brand in town using their citys resources. Funny about that.

That is why the Melbourne Pitstop was a late announcement.

If they want to persevere with China they need to be out of Australia before Xmas to get to the Horn sooner as I said in Leg 7 so a slicker boat can evolve. China stopovers bring benefits but they come at a cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Miffy said:


1. Diversify funding opportunities. IOW - a team can be something with a lifestyle message like Red Bull, a loose conglomerate with stickers all over ranging from grocery stories and condoms, or rich dude who wants his own name on the boat. Basically no restrictions on organization and marketing approach.

^^ This and absolutely essential. Without this nothing else is possible. It has been the handbrake of all handbrakes on this event that the market the race attracts cannot identify the majority if not any of the principal sponsors.

Thank God for the current sponsors but how are they supposed to get a tangible return (over goodwill) and in turn the viewer can indirectly pay for the race, magic? Or are all the followers of this race buying a wind farm this weekend?

The absence of any retail element to this  race is so ludercrous that AkzoNobel who own Dulux Paints, Sikkens, Polyfilla etc can't even be bothered making some stickers. If by choice to avoid building v industrial brand confusion fine, but then it is if this race is sponsored along class lines being corporates who offer up heavy industrial products/services from trucks to engineering and bugger anyone else.

The outcome is no different than expecting people outside of France to identify VG retail sponsors and run out and buy a chicken or get a loan from a French bank from the other side of the bloody globe. NB. I understand VG are wanting to globalise more as it has hit max exposure/ saturation in France and there is only one way after that.

The RO is not bonkers, they are in essence ripping off the races principal sponsors to pay for their own marketing which is guess what??

....a multinational retail brand and the only big one in the race.

The pricks and those in management knowing this who  drink at their trough all deserve shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warning: this is a very long post.

Here are some of my ideas on the whole discussion.

Second warning: I do not have many solutions.

There is one aspect of finding corporate sponsorship that has changed over the years which has a strong impact and is not discussed that often. It is not only that costs have gone up significantly since the “good old days”. A big obstacle is that (corporate) finance textbooks have been teaching for at least 30 years now that CEO’s have interests that do not align with the owners of capital (often share holders) behind the firm. There has been an ever increasing push to eliminate spending on vanity projects by management (sailing anyone?) and to return maximum value to the share holders. In that environment, it is much harder for a CEO and a board to sign off on sponsoring a sailing event, because, activist shareholders can very easily construe this as a “fun perk” for the management rather than a good investment. I think this is an important driver for the difficulties in finding sponsors and support for the idea that whatever direction you take the race there has to be a very strong ROI case.  

I am with the idea that depending on rich owners rather than corporate sponsorship is unlikely to work. The time commitment is huge, the sailing is simply to brutal and uncomfortable for most to want to get on the boat and for an “ego project” the costs would be prohibitively high as compared to the status that winning (as an owner on dry land) confers. Completely changing the format of the race in the hope that the analysis above is wrong would be a massive gamble. Also, if that opportunity was there, why has no-one gotten a race like that of the ground?

I am sceptical about the “Bring what you have” concept of a mixed fleet with a handicap system. In my view this is simply too complicated for a wide audience. Yes, it may attract a bunch of rich owners, but, as discussed above, I am sceptical there are than many that would pour the resources and time into it. I know it worked in the past, but then again, “nostalgia is not what it used to be”.

I don’t think that the “OD platform with some room for innovation” approach is the correct one. I think the fatal flaw with the concept is that teams with money will invest vast sums in marginal gains.  These gains will be big enough to confer a small but significant advantage to the teams, but too small to benefit anyone else in the sport. In my opinion, if you go OD you have to do it under a very strict format. If you go box-rule, you have to keep the box wide enough (and shift it a little between editions) to allow ground breaking ideas. The obvious problem here is that you run the risk of an ABN-AMRO scenario. Only in the last of the 3 VO70 editions there was no sense real that there was one boat that was so much faster than the others that, barring disaster, they had the race under control a long way before the end. And in that edition there were 3 boats in the top 4 that were close to one design anyway, and we had ended up in the marginal gains spending war.

How to take the event further will be difficult. How do you build and audience for a sports event that drags on for 9 months, with long breaks in between and is held every 3 years?

Some more loose bits:

-I am in the camp that thinks a new OD design that feels more exiting is a good step forward for the race.

-Whoever takes charge (is Bruno Dubois interested?) will have to sort out first and foremost what the story is that they want to sell.

-Adding some more events with the same boats (if not always the same sponsors) should probably be given another shot and be strongly driven by the race owners.

-In an environment where continuation of teams for more than 2 editions is rare, I think Volvo have done a great job providing that continuity. However, I they have become rather omnipresent across the event.

-I think the media output this race is far superior to the previous edition. One question now is how to find a wider audience in media that companies and their shareholders recognize as high value.

To the two people still reading, I will stop here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more 'special' the racing, the more concentrated the audience. 

Having different classes would create more opportunities for sponsors. Having more boats with more local sponsorship would give the audience a team.

In Australia,  there's obviously plenty of aussies racing but there's no feeling that we've got a team. Having a second tier class would give those less financial and less experienced an opportunity to be involved and widen the audience.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the VoR os fucked right?   So why are we rabbiting on about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parent company / race owner need to cut the management team down to size. Too many fingers in the pie. 

Get some top teams involved - I didn't say sponsors. I said teams. Get 6 or 7 teams onboard & let them design a 62'r with a designer like FARR, Botin, JUAN a versatile boat that those team owners will fork out their own money for. Boats to be built 6-12 months before the edition they'll be used for. I bet a few savvy owners like RAN, Rambler, SHK could get boats built far cheaper than the VOR committee process. Boats to be used for minimum 2 editions.

Now that you have a crack team & a crack boat get a big multi national household company to plaster it with their signwriting. Let the teams run the boats & crews, sponsors suck at running boats. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

To the two people still reading, I will stop here.

Like many here I am still reading. I am one who will be very sad to see the demise of this event which over the years has been the biggest inspiration to so many in this sport.

But to all those struggling with ideas to make it cheaper so as to be more affordable I would say that to continue as the world's most challenging race it is inevitable that it will cost more, not less. And that unless it remains unquestionably the most extreme ocean racing challenge, sailed by the world's most famous sailors, for me and many like me it becomes (is now becoming!) a valueless has-been. Its a long race, its a commitment for a fan to bother to follow it, it has to be special.

The potential game changer is the drone and OBR reporting which could be the light at the end of the tunnel. This is new technology which is only going to get better and fast, and it produces entertainment and allows engagement. The race organisers have yet to learn how to exploit it. Never before has it been possible to show members of the public what it really takes to sail a fast offshore boat through the oceans in all their moods, and its possible the public could become engaged as never before.

If the public are to get interested it is the sailors who must be the main attraction. People are fascinated by people; not the advertising on the side of the boat! The sailors are the most important ingredient in the spectacle and must be portrayed as such.

It can only work if the event is genuine and "the hardest".

That means more expensive, not cheaper.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

That may well be your opinion. However the Teams have a different view. Brunos comments from Team Brunel are universally shared.

There will be hardly one team returning for the next edition if Volvo are running it as they do now. In other words the sponsors who are paying the bills for Volvo to have its plaything have had enough. When a RO doesn't listen its sponsor parties it's fucked.They are outta Dodge.

What many people here are suggesting as race fixes is akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

My comment is about it remaining under the brand name "Volvo" and not about the miss-managing of the event. If it can become well managed  then I think it should retain the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

If they want to persevere with China they need to be out of Australia before Xmas to get to the Horn sooner as I said in Leg 7 so a slicker boat can evolve. China stopovers bring benefits but they come at a cost.

An unfortunately valid good point. I'd dump China, because it makes little sense from a race route point of view, but the $$$$ might make it worthwhile. I kind of doubt we would have Scally if there was no Honkers.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Panoramix said:

What make you think that the sponsors would come?

A OD 80 footer will be much more expensive than the current boats and I can't see how they will generate enough interest to pay for it. They've tried hard and failed for more than 10 years. The OBR was a very good idea but not good enough...

Firstly I'm most certainly not proposing OD, fuck no, might as stick with the 65 as the VOR fades into irrelevance if they want to continue with OD.

I'm also not proposing that they make the new rule, 80 ft BOX and hope someone will enter a team and build boats.

They must make the product attractive to sponsors and wannabe team owners. They should be courting rich team owners who current run maxi programs or commission new build TP52's etc. If they get interested in the idea, they might chose to self finance the boat build and then get sponsors to offload the team running costs.

Share this post


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

I am with the idea that depending on rich owners rather than corporate sponsorship is unlikely to work. The time commitment is huge, the sailing is simply to brutal and uncomfortable for most to want to get on the boat and for an “ego project” the costs would be prohibitively high as compared to the status that winning (as an owner on dry land) confers. 

The status of VOR is on the decline and fine tuning the current model is like shuffling deck chairs on the titanic. There needs to be changes that will reverse the trend and talking to current and potential new team owners should be part of the process.  

4 hours ago, Zander said:

Completely changing the format of the race in the hope that the analysis above is wrong would be a massive gamble. Also, if that opportunity was there, why has no-one gotten a race like that of the ground?

There is no need for the format change to be a gamble.

If VOR management had half a brain, they would have been sounding out potential team owners well before this current event started. The stopover's should have been used as part of the charm offensive with interested parties, finalising the details about how the next race will be organised.

Announcing the new format should be just a formality with several teams already committed.

 

Share this post


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

My comment is about it remaining under the brand name "Volvo" and not about the miss-managing of the event. If it can become well managed  then I think it should retain the name.

This like pulling teeth.

I know you want the name Volvo to remain. It is largely to some extent not the fault of management for the last couple of decades. To suggest as you do is grossly unfair. I would go far as to say the departure of the last two CEO's is because they came to conclusion they were pushing shit uphill.

No management team can operate under a framework where the RO insists Teams/Sponsors underwrite a Volvo retail marketing machine. Other than a few dollars your own city even refused to do so.

As evidenced by no retail/service providers sponsors fronting up they also refuse to do so. There is probably an argument as evidenced by their lack of enthusiasm, rich privateers also refuse to give Volvo a free leg up.

So what's left is what's left which is non-retail sponsors like windfarms, industrial related entities and not for profit ecological groups, the later which underwrite 2 teams in this edition.

Talk about not seeing the woods for the trees.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Announcing the new format should be just a formality with several teams already committed.

This gets funnier by the minute. Name one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Name one.

Re-read what I wrote...

7 minutes ago, hoppy said:

If VOR management had half a brain, they would have been sounding out potential team owners well before this current event started. The stopover's should have been used as part of the charm offensive with interested parties, finalising the details about how the next race will be organised.

Announcing the new format should be just a formality with several teams already committed.

 

 

Share this post


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

Warning: this is a very long post.

Here are some of my ideas on the whole discussion.

Second warning: I do not have many solutions.

Some more loose bits:

-I am in the camp that thinks a new OD design that feels more exiting is a good step forward for the race.

-Whoever takes charge (is Bruno Dubois interested?) will have to sort out first and foremost what the story is that they want to sell.

-Adding some more events with the same boats (if not always the same sponsors) should probably be given another shot and be strongly driven by the race owners.

-In an environment where continuation of teams for more than 2 editions is rare, I think Volvo have done a great job providing that continuity. However, I they have become rather omnipresent across the event.

-I think the media output this race is far superior to the previous edition. One question now is how to find a wider audience in media that companies and their shareholders recognize as high value.

To the two people still reading, I will stop here.

Great post!

A couple of considerations.  

1) As you point out the conflict of interest between capital and corporate management is a killer.  Management get measured and rewarded on what drives the share price up, and in many jurisdictions over very short time frames.  Sponsoring a sailing race is a no brainer - "Don't Go There".

2) An opportunity I'm not hearing canvassed (and haven't bothered reading the whole thread...) is introducing some form of Nationality-based rules.  We are living in a world where populist nationalism and jingoism are seriously on the rise, the public "gets" competition between nations these days.  The nationality card is probably a lot more powerful at present than it hase been in other times.  It could even generate political interest and make the race more of a showcase for tourism - which is something both governments and the commercial sector are increasingly interested in.  Now a nationality flavoured version of the round the world race might need to be fairly one design given that not many countries could design a fast box rule boat, but that's not a new thing.  Nationality based rules could also do a lot to boost the profile of the sport in a range of emerging markets, Example: DongFeng is doing a lot to boost the sport in China, we're told.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoppy, if you used "would be" rather than "should" then that deals with Jack's issue.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Re-read what I wrote...

 

And read what I have been saying for days (in fact truth be known why I started  this  thread with some hints only so not to curtail open discussion) that the problem is not management. The problem is a Volvo branded event, a concept you have no difficulty with.

We agree to disagree so leave it at that. The future will determine who is right.

Share this post


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

This like pulling teeth.

I know you want the name Volvo to remain. It is largely to some extent not the fault of management for the last couple of decades. To suggest as you do is grossly unfair.

No management team can operate under a framework where the RO insists Teams/Sponsors underwrite a Volvo retail marketing machine. Other than a few dollars your own city even refused to do so.

As evidenced by no retail/service providers sponsors fronting up they also refuse to do so. There is probably an argument as evidenced by their lack of enthusiasm, rich privateers also refuse to give Volvo a free leg up.

So what's left is what's left which is non-retail sponsors like windfarms, industrial related entities and not for profit ecological groups, the later which underwrite 2 teams in this edition.

Talk about not seeing the woods for the trees.

What is wrong with you? It's starting to be like discussing with Rambum..

Please reread my original comment without your head up your own ass.....

11 hours ago, hoppy said:

I have no problem with it remaining a Volvo race. I also don't see their sponsorship as an impediment to some car companies sponsoring a team. To some extent removing Volvo from the name would confuse the history now that it is well established. It would be a bit like renaming the Americas Cup, after all it was originally '£100 Cup'

I never said anything about Volvo other than saying that the brand "VOLVO" would not prevent even some car companies from sponsoring a team. I did not said anything about the terms and conditions that Volvo AB imposes on sponsors, teams, race management or stopover cities.

Share this post


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

Hoppy, if you used "would be" rather than "should" then that deals with Jack's issue.

 

 

my mistake... in the context of my whole post, the meaning should have been understood..

Share this post


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

I never said anything about Volvo other than saying that the brand "VOLVO" would not prevent even some car companies from sponsoring a team.

Nonsence you have said nothing of the sort and made management the scapegoat. Go read your own posts.

But anyway indulge me. Name one light, heavy vehicle, industrial or marine propulsion manufacturer on planet earth who would sponsor a team in a Volvo branded event?

BTW Ride on Lawn Mowers don't count.

Share this post


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

Firstly I'm most certainly not proposing OD, fuck no, might as stick with the 65 as the VOR fades into irrelevance if they want to continue with OD.

I'm also not proposing that they make the new rule, 80 ft BOX and hope someone will enter a team and build boats.

They must make the product attractive to sponsors and wannabe team owners. They should be courting rich team owners who current run maxi programs or commission new build TP52's etc. If they get interested in the idea, they might chose to self finance the boat build and then get sponsors to offload the team running costs.

Sorry I didn't mean OD.

I am not convinced that rich team owners are ready to foot the bill. Even in the hey days of the Whitbread they were the exception not the rule.

The Med events are all about rich people showing off and networking, Kerguelen island isn't the place to be for these guys.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

Sorry I didn't mean OD.

I am not convinced that rich team owners are ready to foot the bill. Even in the hey days of the Whitbread they were the exception not the rule.

The Med events are all about rich people showing off and networking, Kerguelen island isn't the place to be for these guys.

^^ This. I think it was Miff who upthread somewhere indicated why Rich Privateers have largely never been interested in a RTW mono race. It was very good. I would only add to that, they like many sponsors also clearly have no interest in helping Volvo fund their car/retail marketing plaything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came here from a race thread.  Is this for OD people too?  Even the Asians got the sack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Nonsence you have said nothing of the sort and made management the scapegoat. Go read your own posts.

Show me the posts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got an idea!  Why doesn't someone have a race with Chinese sailors in it?

And while they are specifying gender mixes. go the whole hog and specify a few black people too.  Or is this a race just for rich white cunts?

Share this post


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

The status of VOR is on the decline and fine tuning the current model is like shuffling deck chairs on the titanic.

I'm now getting a really creepy Deja Vu feeling.

11 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

What many people here are suggesting as race fixes is akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

Share this post


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

I never said anything about Volvo other than saying that the brand "VOLVO" would not prevent even some car companies from sponsoring a team.

 

1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

Nonsence you have said nothing of the sort and made management the scapegoat. Go read your own posts.

But anyway indulge me. Name one light, heavy vehicle, industrial or marine propulsion manufacturer on planet earth who would sponsor a team in a Volvo branded event?

BTW Ride on Lawn Mowers don't count.

 

51 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Show me the posts?

Go find your own posts, which most are plagiarised from here anyway, so no wonder you forget Deckchair boy..but you first as you like replying to my posts with shitty gifs/pics and that my head and arse are joined.

Jerry+Macguire+Money.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, JeronimoII said:

Rumour mill expects a big race announcement this week in Newport.

 

12 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

In other words the sponsors who are paying the bills for Volvo to have its plaything have had enough. When a RO doesn't listen to its sponsor parties it's fucked.

Not too sure about big, but the Night of the Long Knives is underway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Go find your own posts, which most are plagiarised from here anyway, so no wonder you forget Deckchair boy..but you first as you like replying to my posts with shitty gifs/pics and that my head and arse are joined.

1) Yep I repeated the deckchair comment. But it's not like you are original with the comment, I'd read it elsewhere a few thousand times...

2) show me a post in this thread where I replied with an image/gif.....

3) You make the accusation, you bring the evidence.... 

I can see why Random loves harassing you, you really are a dick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Zander said:

A big obstacle is that (corporate) finance textbooks have been teaching for at least 30 years now that CEO’s have interests that do not align with the owners of capital (often share holders) behind the firm. There has been an ever increasing push to eliminate spending on vanity projects by management (sailing anyone?) and to return maximum value to the share holders.

Absolutely true with publicly held companies.  Not so with privately held where owner is a majority stake holder.  In any event, the idea is privately financed while splitting the cost through sponsorship.

4 hours ago, staysail said:

But to all those struggling with ideas to make it cheaper so as to be more affordable I would say that to continue as the world's most challenging race it is inevitable that it will cost more, not less.

There is exponentially more wealth than there was when the race first started.  The money is there.  It's the failure and lack of creativity, business savvy and pure salesmanship of current management to attract it.  Money ebbs and flows.  Honestly, the hardest part of the financing of the race will be, as it has always been, to sustain interest race after race.

Share this post


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

I can see why Random loves harassing you, you really are a dick

Hoppy your inability to answer a straight question, defend or even subststiate what your saying is no surprise.

I said this earlier, so please make some effort to rise to the occasion, not withstanding you and Randumb are on the same wavelength.

4 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

We agree to disagree so leave it at that. The future will determine who is right.

Your reply to that generous suggestion as follows I will put into the ignore basket along with you. 

4 hours ago, hoppy said:

Please reread my original comment without your head up your own ass.....

I do hope one day you enjoy the feeling of an original thought. It will be your first so make sure your sitting down.

Goodbye.

Share this post


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

I am not convinced that rich team owners are ready to foot the bill. Even in the hey days of the Whitbread they were the exception not the rule.

The Med events are all about rich people showing off and networking, Kerguelen island isn't the place to be for these guys.

Hong Kong, Sydney (once before), New York (once before) etc.  These are not the homes and playgrounds of the rich? 

Bring the race to your home like Hong Kong and win it while the owner hovers overhead in his Sikorsky?  Sound familiar?  What personal and economic return on investment do you think this generated for the owner let alone the city of Hong Kong?  Success is an understatement. 

If David Witt can can find an interested patreon to develop a Scallywag program and enter the Volvo, why does it seem so impossible to replicate?

Say what you will about David Witt but he got it done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, southerncross said:

It's the failure and lack of creativity, business savvy and pure salesmanship of current management to attract it. 

SX.. hint ..the Butler didn't do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, southerncross said:

If David Witt can can find an interested patreon to develop a Scallywag program and enter the Volvo, why does it seem so impossible to replicate?

Actually it didn't happen like that SX..imagine your driving past a high end used car lot and see something you really like and it comes with a really good chauffeur...big things come from little things.

Share this post


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

Actually it didn't happen like that SX..imagine your driving past a used car lot and see something you really like and it comes with a really good chauffeur.

They got it in on what was available.  Point is, Witt got in.  It can be done. 

fa68cf86-dc68-11e6-8fcb-68eb4ed74971_128 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites