Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jocecito2007

Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

Recommended Posts

Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Bigger question is for Alinghi as rumor has it they have Nevada sand in their sail bags at the very least ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Ok - by "built" I assume you mean "constructed" ? In what regard would you like to frame the discussion ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Ok - by "built" I assume you mean "constructed" ? In what regard would you like to frame the discussion ?

 

 

As in 'having' been built or 'having' been constructed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Ok - by "built" I assume you mean "constructed" ? In what regard would you like to frame the discussion ?

 

 

As in 'having' been built or 'having' been constructed?

 

. . . well as we now know, "having" always retains its past tense when used in the DoG - in fact The BOR90 "is being" built even as we speak (hull extensions (??), new rig (??) etc. etc.) so I guess we shall all wait with baited breath for the production of the CHR "as soon as possible".

 

This aside I remain intrigued by the question posed . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Ok - by "built" I assume you mean "constructed" ? In what regard would you like to frame the discussion ?

 

 

As in 'having' been built or 'having' been constructed?

 

. . . well as we now know, "having" always retains its past tense when used in the DoG - in fact The BOR90 "is being" built even as we speak (hull extensions (??), new rig (??) etc. etc.) so I guess we shall all wait with baited breath for the production of the CHR "as soon as possible".

 

This aside I remain intrigued by the question posed . . .

"having" without a tense determining verb is used as an adjective, regardles of being (!) in the DoG or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Ok - by "built" I assume you mean "constructed" ? In what regard would you like to frame the discussion ?

 

 

As in 'having' been built or 'having' been constructed?

 

. . . well as we now know, "having" always retains its past tense when used in the DoG - in fact The BOR90 "is being" built even as we speak (hull extensions (??), new rig (??) etc. etc.) so I guess we shall all wait with baited breath for the production of the CHR "as soon as possible".

 

This aside I remain intrigued by the question posed . . .

"having" without a tense determining verb is used as an adjective, regardles of being (!) in the DoG or not.

 

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Ok - by "built" I assume you mean "constructed" ? In what regard would you like to frame the discussion ?

 

 

As in 'having' been built or 'having' been constructed?

 

. . . well as we now know, "having" always retains its past tense when used in the DoG - in fact The BOR90 "is being" built even as we speak (hull extensions (??), new rig (??) etc. etc.) so I guess we shall all wait with baited breath for the production of the CHR "as soon as possible".

 

This aside I remain intrigued by the question posed . . .

"having" without a tense determining verb is used as an adjective, regardles of being (!) in the DoG or not.

 

 

+1

 

ok - but back on thread - what is the point of Josecito's question ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget, the "interpretive resolutions" to the Deed of Gift have been rescinded by SNG.

 

And there have been some interesting ones that would really help SNG right about now...

these resolutions have been rescinded, and no longer exist.

 

Now, could someone argue in court that it has been interpreted that way in the past? Probably.

 

Not a real winning strategy though when you're the one that rescinded the interpretive resolutions in question for your own advantage in the last Cup match, and the court is already wondering about your inclination and ability to uphold your fiduciary responsibilities as Trustee.

 

okay, for those willing to do their homework, and old outdated yet still interesting link.

http://www.a3.org/ac2000_Resolutions.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh $hit....

 

This could get really ugly, as I think I can see where they might be going...

 

I'm afraid to say it.

 

It won't be the CHR...it'll be the design of DZ itself.

 

Anyone else notice the similarity between it and other....oh $hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, there are a gazillion questions concerning BOR90. Expect some legal fireworks, VERY soon.

 

 

Oh shit !

 

More delays !

 

Bring on the Louis Vuitton Worldwide series.

 

However, if Ehman wants a witness to swear Anacortes is in the US of A I will do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, there are a gazillion questions concerning BOR90. Expect some legal fireworks, VERY soon.

 

I agree that many questions will be raised by lawyers & others.

I hope the questions will better serve to identify future clarifications to the deed than to delay or determine the legality of the DoG regatta entries. To pursue these questions with claims of enabling the DoG regatta will make one or the other a laughing stock.

To pursue them with the intention of bringing the deed into today's global boat construction realities will be an important contribution the 'reformers' can make.

To these ends I think it is an important question.

 

Might the question need to be broken down into the elements of design, materials sourcing, component manufacture for the hull, rig, sails etc?

This might make the deed look like a rat's nest similar to the construction of Wall Street funds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, there are a gazillion questions concerning BOR90. Expect some legal fireworks, VERY soon.

 

. . . careful with the CAPS LOCK STUFF Josecito . . . HE might be watching . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't forget, the "interpretive resolutions" to the Deed of Gift have been rescinded by SNG.

 

And there have been some interesting ones that would really help SNG right about now...

these resolutions have been rescinded, and no longer exist.

 

Now, could someone argue in court that it has been interpreted that way in the past? Probably.

 

Not a real winning strategy though when you're the one that rescinded the interpretive resolutions in question for your own advantage in the last Cup match, and the court is already wondering about your inclination and ability to uphold your fiduciary responsibilities as Trustee.

 

okay, for those willing to do their homework, and old outdated yet still interesting link.

http://www.a3.org/ac2000_Resolutions.html

 

How can they be rescinded if SNG hasn't requested so & recieved approval in the form of documentation from the NSYC? Also, SNG must publish any changes approved by the NYSC to the Deed. Where are they???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't forget, the "interpretive resolutions" to the Deed of Gift have been rescinded by SNG.

 

And there have been some interesting ones that would really help SNG right about now...

these resolutions have been rescinded, and no longer exist.

 

Now, could someone argue in court that it has been interpreted that way in the past? Probably.

 

Not a real winning strategy though when you're the one that rescinded the interpretive resolutions in question for your own advantage in the last Cup match, and the court is already wondering about your inclination and ability to uphold your fiduciary responsibilities as Trustee.

 

okay, for those willing to do their homework, and old outdated yet still interesting link.

http://www.a3.org/ac2000_Resolutions.html

 

How can they be rescinded if SNG hasn't requested so & recieved approval in the form of documentation from the NSYC? Also, SNG must publish any changes approved by the NYSC to the Deed. Where are they???

 

 

I have been wondering about that as well. I think that they may be able to rescind certain provisions, such as those done by the trustees, but it's difficult to see how they can rescind orders of the NY courts without going back to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could argue against both teams on the "domestic build" requirement. But best not to dilly-dally in such details. As seemed implied by the court: "go sail your race". Let the lawyers argue the stupid details afterward.

 

Anyway, it would behoove BOTH teams to avoid raising this issue. The one who does, will look really stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

While you are pondering that question, ponder this one: Is the NY Attorney General's office considering whether or not to pursue an abuse of Trust by SNG?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could argue against both teams on the "domestic build" requirement. But best not to dilly-dally in such details. As seemed implied by the court: "go sail your race". Let the lawyers argue the stupid details afterward.

 

Anyway, it would behoove BOTH teams to avoid raising this issue. The one who does, will look really stupid.

 

Not really . SNG/Alinghi have an obligation to ask it as Trustee. If the answer is affirmative in the case of deed compliance of the BOR90 DoG racer then they have a similarly compliant vessel in which to defend. In the case that the BOR90 is not compliant then there is no contest surely ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Alinghi really do start legal proceedings over the design of BOR90, then I'm going back to the theory that the reason we have no confirmed sightings of CheeZilla is that it doesn't exist. Maybe Ross was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

While you are pondering that question, ponder this one: Is the NY Attorney General's office considering whether or not to pursue an abuse of Trust by SNG?

 

OK, let's start with one simple question: Are you sure the yacht's boom is 100% US built?

 

I hope lawyers don't start pondering....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

While you are pondering that question, ponder this one: Is the NY Attorney General's office considering whether or not to pursue an abuse of Trust by SNG?

 

OK, let's start with one simple question: Are you sure the yacht's boom is 100% US built?

 

I hope lawyers don't start pondering....

 

I sincerely hope that Erne$to files a lawsuit over the construction of DoGzilla's boom.

 

Sounds like another great idea from Lucifer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

While you are pondering that question, ponder this one: Is the NY Attorney General's office considering whether or not to pursue an abuse of Trust by SNG?

 

. . . interesting question (maybe deserves its' own thread) . . . where is HE these days anyway ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't forget, the "interpretive resolutions" to the Deed of Gift have been rescinded by SNG.

 

And there have been some interesting ones that would really help SNG right about now...

these resolutions have been rescinded, and no longer exist.

 

Now, could someone argue in court that it has been interpreted that way in the past? Probably.

 

Not a real winning strategy though when you're the one that rescinded the interpretive resolutions in question for your own advantage in the last Cup match, and the court is already wondering about your inclination and ability to uphold your fiduciary responsibilities as Trustee.

 

okay, for those willing to do their homework, and old outdated yet still interesting link.

http://www.a3.org/ac2000_Resolutions.html

 

How can they be rescinded if SNG hasn't requested so & recieved approval in the form of documentation from the NSYC? Also, SNG must publish any changes approved by the NYSC to the Deed. Where are they???

 

 

I have been wondering about that as well. I think that they may be able to rescind certain provisions, such as those done by the trustees, but it's difficult to see how they can rescind orders of the NY courts without going back to court.

 

There are only 3 that have been thru the courts. 2 amendments & 1 interpretation -

 

THE WATERLINE LENGTH AND "OWN BOTTOM" AMENDMENT

 

THE ARM OF THE SEA INTERPRETATION

 

THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE AMENDMENT

 

The ones that haven't gone thru the courts mean sqwat in NYSC hence "constructed in the country to which the Challenging Club belongs" stands.

 

IMO a boat has to be desinged, manufactured, built & sailed in it's home country before it can be moved under it's own power or transported to the venue. The Deed or IR doesn't say the boat can be built or constructed outside of it's home country.

 

Alinghi is going to have problems if they need to bond & join their hulls at the venue as that is not assembling like putting sails on, stepping the mast & etc. Neither is them finishing their sails which as rumored were manufactured in Nevada.

 

Lots of questions on the Deed & IR if Alinghi & BOR want to face off again. It will all start if EB pushes his all or nothing that leads to a DoG & then CHR but hopefully he has learnt his lesson.

 

My 2 cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, let's start with one simple question: Are you sure the yacht's boom is 100% US built?

 

I suspect there is video documentation of the boom being built in the states. You probably have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Alinghi really do start legal proceedings over the design of BOR90, then I'm going back to the theory that the reason we have no confirmed sightings of CheeZilla is that it doesn't exist. Maybe Ross was right.

Thanks for going back and editing the link into it. That is a good read.

 

And come to think of it... Despite a lot of searching, we really haven't seen any evidence of a full-on CZ project yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

While you are pondering that question, ponder this one: Is the NY Attorney General's office considering whether or not to pursue an abuse of Trust by SNG?

 

OK, let's start with one simple question: Are you sure the yacht's boom is 100% US built?

 

I hope lawyers don't start pondering....

 

I am sure it is 100% built in the U.S. I can also say that with certainty about their mast(s) and bowsprit.

 

Next.

 

Carbon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, let's start with one simple question: Are you sure the yacht's boom is 100% US built?

 

I suspect there is video documentation of the boom being built in the states. You probably have it.

LOL!

 

Jocecito - Got any good NSA-bird shots from the past hour, of the area around Bombardier in Villeneuve please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

Yes.

 

Ehman is so far ahead of you it's not even funny.

 

Of all the possible angles of attack on the boat, that one is by far the weakest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. . . interesting question (maybe deserves its' own thread) . . . where is HE these days anyway ??

 

All sock puppets have a master. They can't make an appearance when the master is busy.

 

h

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IT IS AN IMPORTANT DAY IN THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICA'S CUP.

AND OUR UPPER-CASE BROTHER IS NOT HERE.

 

IS HE DECEASED?

 

OR ON A FLIGHT TO VILLENEUVE TO TALK TO THE SAUSAGE MAKER AND EUPHONIUM REPAIR BLOKE?

 

CAN'T SAY I MISS HIM !

 

WELL, JUST A LITTLE BIT !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, there are a gazillion questions concerning BOR90. Expect some legal fireworks, VERY soon.

 

All the more reason to build another boat, at this point, a design and build for #2 could easily be executed, conclusively in the USA. By all with United States Passports.

 

Building and entire boat that way adjacent to a lake in Switzerland, may not be as easy to do.

 

Makes me recall when the Sweden had Volvo build the initial set of winches for Sverige, using leg power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jocecito brings up an interesting topic. EB doesn't have to worry about building a CZ all in Switzerland if he can get GGYC's challenge thrown out (much like CNEV's was) due to their challenging yacht being not wholly constructed in the US. If GGYC's challenge is thrown out is there another challenger of record in line? If not then CNEV has now held an annual regatta and is a valid challenger under that portion of the DoG.

 

So if winning on the water was most important to EB then this would be a foolish tack for him to take. If winning at all costs (and/or screwing LE and RC) is what is most important to EB then this is just one of many more legal fights that EB can start.

 

I leave it up to you guys to decide for yourself which is most important to Ernesto (I will not appeal) Bertarelli.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Makes me recall when the Sweden had Volvo build the initial set of winches for Sverige, using leg power.

 

That would be tough, unless you had opposable thumbs on your feet. Did they employ monkeys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Makes me recall when the Sweden had Volvo build the initial set of winches for Sverige, using leg power.

 

That would be tough, unless you had opposable thumbs on your feet. Did they employ monkeys?

 

 

No, but Alinghi does. Starting with their lawyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jocecito brings up an interesting topic. EB doesn't have to worry about building a CZ all in Switzerland if he can get GGYC's challenge thrown out (much like CNEV's was) due to their challenging yacht being not wholly constructed in the US

This court isn't going to go for this. They would say (as they did in 1988) go sailing and if you still feel this way after the event, come back with your arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carbon is right on the 100% US built. The winches were built in the US as well. So there is the rig and bowsprit, hulls, winches, and I bet the harken deck hardware is US built as well. I believe the rule says that anything custom has to be from the teams country. Off the shelf items can be foreign kit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carbon is right on the 100% US built. The winches were built in the US as well. So there is the rig and bowsprit, hulls, winches, and I bet the harken deck hardware is US built as well. I believe the rule says that anything custom has to be from the teams country. Off the shelf items can be foreign kit.

AFAIK all harken winches are built in Italy.."...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Didnt DZ's carbon nomex come from the UK? Or is that going too nit-picky? :ph34r:

 

isnt this issue a stalemate? Lets say that under some definition, the boat build/construction or whatever is not deed legal - maybe the US seatbelts were built in Korea. If eB sues, then GGYC can have the same case against SNG as the only place that SNG could get headlights is from Iceland.

 

I think issues like this wont get much traction with the courts though -ntiwk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jocecito brings up an interesting topic. EB doesn't have to worry about building a CZ all in Switzerland if he can get GGYC's challenge thrown out (much like CNEV's was) due to their challenging yacht being not wholly constructed in the US

This court isn't going to go for this. They would say (as they did in 1988) go sailing and if you still feel this way after the event, come back with your arguments.

 

Absolutely... The wheels are rolling.

 

I could see a bigger fight with the dates thing.... 10 months from what resolution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Makes me recall when the Sweden had Volvo build the initial set of winches for Sverige, using leg power.

 

That would be tough, unless you had opposable thumbs on your feet. Did they employ monkeys?

Probably not monkeys. Makes sense to fit pedals and employ bike riders if you are in the hull of the boat. Wouldn't get to see much tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Makes me recall when the Sweden had Volvo build the initial set of winches for Sverige, using leg power.

 

That would be tough, unless you had opposable thumbs on your feet. Did they employ monkeys?

Probably not monkeys. Makes sense to fit pedals and employ bike riders if you are in the hull of the boat. Wouldn't get to see much tho.

 

Sorry, I was referring to "building winches with leg power". Meaning, the act of "using legs to build winches". Not operating winches with legs, which is probably what jorgie meant.

 

:lol: back to our regular thread...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was BOR90 ENTIRELY built in the US?

 

We have to ponder on this question

 

While you are pondering that question, ponder this one: Is the NY Attorney General's office considering whether or not to pursue an abuse of Trust by SNG?

 

OK, let's start with one simple question: Are you sure the yacht's boom is 100% US built?

 

I hope lawyers don't start pondering....

 

Which boom? The one that was on the boat 2 weeks ago? The spare(s) in the shed? The one(s) they are going to build next month? Bring it on! The only one that counts is the one that they show up with on race day. Surely EB's third seed lawyers have told him that is a non starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A little off track but can anyone nail this photograph?

 

post-17804-1238730393_thumb.jpg

 

It would say that it has to be 'Intrepid'. She's the only boat I can think of that had the grinders below deck due to the deck sweeping boom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jocecito brings up an interesting topic. EB doesn't have to worry about building a CZ all in Switzerland if he can get GGYC's challenge thrown out (much like CNEV's was) due to their challenging yacht being not wholly constructed in the US

This court isn't going to go for this. They would say (as they did in 1988) go sailing and if you still feel this way after the event, come back with your arguments.

 

that would be my opinion too

 

the courts have bent over backward trying to give ernie all the time he needs to agree on a race outside the courtroom

 

but i'd say his time is now up

 

mercury bay style, go race in 10months and come back to us if you lose and still want to feed the lawyers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

However, if Ehman wants a witness to swear

 

 

I'm good at swearing...............I have a sailor's potty mouth ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A little off track but can anyone nail this photograph?

 

post-17804-1238730393_thumb.jpg

 

 

Samuel Wakeman grinding the spinnaker winch aboard the Intrepid during the America's Cup trials.

 

amazing site with som great classic shots...

 

http://www.life.com/image/50674590

 

mikie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A little off track but can anyone nail this photograph?

 

post-17804-1238730393_thumb.jpg

 

It would say that it has to be 'Intrepid'. She's the only boat I can think of that had the grinders below deck due to the deck sweeping boom.

 

Didn't Micheal Fays' big boat have below deck grinders as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A little off track but can anyone nail this photograph?

 

post-17804-1238730393_thumb.jpg

 

 

Samuel Wakeman grinding the spinnaker winch aboard the Intrepid during the America's Cup trials.

 

amazing site with som great classic shots...

 

http://www.life.com/image/50674590

 

mikie

 

Bingo, a virtual poster toaster for finding that. Yes, nice site, and its new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, there are a gazillion questions concerning BOR90. Expect some legal fireworks, VERY soon.

 

All the more reason to build another boat, at this point, a design and build for #2 could easily be executed, conclusively in the USA. By all with United States Passports.

 

Building and entire boat that way adjacent to a lake in Switzerland, may not be as easy to do.

 

Makes me recall when the Sweden had Volvo build the initial set of winches for Sverige, using leg power.

 

Both Dogzilla and Cheesezilla were built by mainly kiwi boatbuilders, and good luck to either of them if they have to try and knock out another boat of similar quality and in a reasonable time by native boat builders. Not many people who know what it takes to construct a project like these would argue that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both Dogzilla and Cheesezilla were built by mainly kiwi boatbuilders, and good luck to either of them if they have to try and knock out another boat of similar quality and in a reasonable time by native boat builders. Not many people who know what it takes to construct a project like these would argue that.

You seem to know more about Cheesezilla than I do, can you tell us more about it ?

Just ask more about it from those kiwi builders you seem to know (at least I hope you do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was Cheesezilla entirely built in Switzerland?

 

This is a question we should ponder.

 

1st question is the North Sails w/ all the Nevada sand on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A little off track but can anyone nail this photograph?

 

post-17804-1238730393_thumb.jpg

 

It would say that it has to be 'Intrepid'. She's the only boat I can think of that had the grinders below deck due to the deck sweeping boom.

 

Didn't Micheal Fays' big boat have below deck grinders as well?

yep and they're still there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites