Jump to content


worth less?


  • Please log in to reply
126 replies to this topic

#1 Editor

Editor

    Anarchist

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,612 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 04:28 PM

An Open Letter to America’s Cup Event Authority Chairman Richard Worth

The purpose of this letter is to bring to your attention the concern that many of us share in the direction that you are taking the marketing aspects of the America’s Cup, and to offer suggestions for improvement.

I speak not as an individual; however I do have experience with ACEA as an individual through my association with Paul Henderson and Kevin Reed of Red Maple Racing, a life long association with the sport, and an experienced background in entertainment marketing, including sailing. Rather, I speak as someone who gets constantly asked by friends within the sailing community about what is up with the Cup. They want to place blame on Golden Gate YC for not reaching out to the sailing community and not telling the story of what’s up with the Cup. The blame is not GGYC’s, the blame is yours.

As much as you and the rest of the staff at ACEA might want to spin things, in addition to your failure to reach the sailing community, of those few people you have reached, you have alienated far too many, for no good reason. “Out with the Flintstones and in with the Facebook” was just the start. Many of us grew up with the Flintstones, and have a Facebook page. Announcing ACWS dates, but no venues, and then never fulfilling those dates, as recently as this January. Why have announced dates with no venues too often not materialized? Is it because you had completely unrealistic venue fee pricing expectations based your completely unrealistic and unsustainable event production budget? A checkered flag at the finish line? Seriously? In a day and age when “authentic” is a big buzz word, what is authentic about taking something that is a signature within motorsports and using it in sailing?

Obviously, the front page story in the San Francisco Chronicle Saturday morning said all that needed to be said about the overhype that ACEA has had about projected attendance figures for Cup events. Those of us in the game a year ago knew that ACEA was spouting utter nonsense with those attendance projections. No wonder the City is now giving ACEA very justifiable pushback.

But those are small problems in the scheme of things. Currently, Grant Dalton is screaming that the Cup is not any less expensive than in the past, and is in fact 20% more expensive. Grant is also citing the fact there are only three billionaires and his team currently entered in the 2013 America’s Cup. As a part of one of the teams who a year ago took a very hard look at entering the ACWS and the America’s Cup, I have a decent idea what the costs are, and while we can debate Grant’s statements, the bigger issue than costs is the abject lack of definable media expose for potential sponsors. A year ago ACEA had no real set schedule for ACWS events, and no real media schedule. During the last year, nothing much has changed, including your assumption that broadcasters are going to line up in a bidding war for TV rights. That is not going to happen, especially in the US. If you had signed major TV broadcast partners, you’d be talking about them. Instead, we got press releases about the chef in Cascais. If you had signed major broadcast partners, it is highly likely we’d have more than the current three challengers entered.

Many people think more teams aren’t announcing their entry into the ACWS or Cup because they can’t find sponsorship money. I don’t know about other teams, but I do know about Red Maple. A year ago the issue was not finding interested and willing sponsors, the issue was being able to assure those sponsors that ACEA, meaning YOU, would come through with ACWS venues and a major media schedule. Red Maple elected to not go forward because there was no evidence you were going to perform as would have been necessary to satisfy those sponsors. Those teams who did not go forward are probably relieved they did not. Those teams that are still in the game and are hanging on by their fingernails are still waiting with bated breath for the announcement of your ACWS venues and dates, and for the TV package to be announced.

Simply put, the teams who rely on sponsorship to make it to the starting line in 2013 will not be there unless you announce ACWS venues and dates and your TV distribution package within a couple of weeks. The sooner the better. It almost does not matter what the package is, it just matters that there is something concrete to point to. For the prospective teams to obtain sponsorship there MUST be a media schedule that is actually in place. The most bizarre part about all this is that you cited ESPN2 in the ACEA Media Footprint document which was circulated last year, yet you had not made a deal with ESPN. The single thing that you could do immediately to start to reverse the trend of negative publicity that is currently besieging the America’s Cup is to make a deal with ESPN, and announce it. YouTube is amusing and all, but ESPN brings to the table the credibility that you lack, and which the America’s Cup needs, right now. The group of people who are most likely to come to San Francisco in the greatest numbers for the Louis Vuitton Cup and America’s Cup are people from the US, particularly those who are lifelong fans of the America’s Cup. Why you have essentially ignored the US market is beyond our comprehension.

Sure, there will be an America’s Cup in 2013 in San Francisco. But instead of a grand spectacle, it will be a whimper if no more than three challengers show up. Three challengers is a race, but it is not a regatta, and it is certainly not much of a show.

Right now, because of ACEA’s abject failings Golden Gate YC and the America’s Cup have a very serious credibility problem, largely because you as the Chairman of ACEA, the marketing arm for the Cup, completely over hyped and constantly under delivered on virtually every single thing you set out to do. So, the question is now: Are you just like ‘Captain Coward’ Francesco Schettino of the sunken Italian luxury cruise ship Costa Concordia, seeking refuge in a life raft that is just another ACEA spin city press release? Or, are you man enough to step up to the helm in the storm that you have driven the America’s Cup into as a result of your poor tactics, do the right thing for the Cup and the sport, and finally make some media and venue deals that sponsors can rely on so that they can agree to support teams who want to enter the 2013 America’s Cup? - Peter Huston.

#2 pitchpoledave

pitchpoledave

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 05:01 PM

I can't comment on the advertizing / sponsorship part but want to comment on another part of the project that seems to have gone nowhere. This is the youth component. Does anyone know what that is? I have not see one hide nor hare about it. Is Larry/Oracle Racing interested in promoting the entry levels of sailing especially multihull sailing? Or is this just about elite sailing/ego tripping?

I am currently giving away several dozen NEW cats to jump start 6 or 7 catamaran sailing schools here in Ontario but it would be nice if the AC folks would lend a hand to also support junior sailing and especially multihulls. I have a complete program to set up cat sailing schools if anyone out there wants to lend a hand or sponsor it then let me know.
Dave
www.nacra.ca

#3 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 06:17 PM

Pretty damned sound OP. I love that it is not hypercritical of everything AC. That it is not that the costs are too high, but the implication (and very sound, IMO), that it is the interaction between costs and the fundamentals related to venues / promotion that is the problem. So damned much effort, and a great effort I would say, related to the boats, the racing, and the production has been made, but it can all be squandered if people don't even know about it, and sponsors can't find confidence in what will be happening and the effort to get people to see the product they are investing in.

Determine the damned venues, and put an investment/effort into promotion that corresponds to the investment/effort into boats, racing, and production.

#4 Mariner

Mariner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,481 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 06 February 2012 - 06:25 PM

Maybe this is a better thread for this question....

Why is it teams can get the sponsorship for basically a no- audience Round The World venture, but no a huge City months long LV/ AC and an AC 72?? I would think an AC in SF would be a much easier sell? What am I not understanding?

#5 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 06:37 PM

Maybe this is a better thread for this question....

Why is it teams can get the sponsorship for basically a no- audience Round The World venture, but no a huge City months long LV/ AC and an AC 72?? I would think an AC in SF would be a much easier sell? What am I not understanding?



I will let the Frenchies explain, but the typical answer is that the French love the adventure aspect. I tend to think, right now, that the Jules Verne, and that type of racing, is a known commodity, and the AC situation is not relative to the exposure and the competitive potential of the French teams.

#6 ro!

ro!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,194 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 06:49 PM

Pretty damned sound OP. I love that it is not hypercritical of everything AC. That it is not that the costs are too high, but the implication (and very sound, IMO), that it is the interaction between costs and the fundamentals related to venues / promotion that is the problem. So damned much effort, and a great effort I would say, related to the boats, the racing, and the production has been made, but it can all be squandered if people don't even know about it, and sponsors can't find confidence in what will be happening and the effort to get people to see the product they are investing in.

Determine the damned venues, and put an investment/effort into promotion that corresponds to the investment/effort into boats, racing, and production.



I think the venue fees were sold to larry as a way to show that it was not a one way money street and that some revenue would be generated...when the venues decided that the world series would not show a return on 5M, the alphabet dug in it's heels and tried to make it work, with the results we have seen... dates with no venue and venues with no dates and sketchy will it happen places like Naples...

Cascais didn't have it's normal winds , so it and SD were a bust, Plymouth put on the crash and burn show, it seems everyone here wants the ac to be, but of course they weren't prepared to pay anything for it, and it could only be viewed on tv in NZ...of course there were zillions checking it out on youtube and facebook if we are to believe what you say....

Maybe larry has said I've given you everything you asked for, so go away and make it happen, perhaps because like you, his advisors have been telling him everything about his and rc's vision is mega....

#7 saulnier

saulnier

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 22 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 06:58 PM

Only the arrival of the Jules verne has made more than à 15 mn of TV coverage on each main média at prime time (12:00. 20:00 etc).+ press+ radio I think that the sponsoring effort of groupama or banque pop are largely reimbursed by press and média. They also reported 30000 people at Brest and Lorient Un fact much more than à 7millions € budget. ROi is positive.

On my opinion, Popular events are bankable ( tour de France, figaro, route du rhum) for sponsoring. Dick contest like AC are not. Maybe chairman takes risks if they fail in such High class happyfew event while they dont have audience to balance failure in front of thé board

#8 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 07:02 PM


Pretty damned sound OP. I love that it is not hypercritical of everything AC. That it is not that the costs are too high, but the implication (and very sound, IMO), that it is the interaction between costs and the fundamentals related to venues / promotion that is the problem. So damned much effort, and a great effort I would say, related to the boats, the racing, and the production has been made, but it can all be squandered if people don't even know about it, and sponsors can't find confidence in what will be happening and the effort to get people to see the product they are investing in.

Determine the damned venues, and put an investment/effort into promotion that corresponds to the investment/effort into boats, racing, and production.



I think the venue fees were sold to larry as a way to show that it was not a one way money street and that some revenue would be generated...when the venues decided that the world series would not show a return on 5M, the alphabet dug in it's heels and tried to make it work, with the results we have seen... dates with no venue and venues with no dates and sketchy will it happen places like Naples...


The idea that the program will eventually be able to charge venue fees may, in fact, be reasonable. But to think it should immediately, out of the box, be able to charge up such fees, particularly in this economic climate, was not well thought-out, I would say. Get the game rolling, then let the venues compete for you. The fees will naturally come, if they come at all. But it would seem that passing on the venue fees at the early point, should have been considered as part of the investment.

Cascais didn't have it's normal winds , so it and SD were a bust, Plymouth put on the crash and burn show, it seems everyone here wants the ac to be, but of course they weren't prepared to pay anything for it, and it could only be viewed on tv in NZ...of course there were zillions checking it out on youtube and facebook if we are to believe what you say....


Cascais (lack of wind) and San Diego (brutal cold/rainy weather) were both unfortunate. Still, seems in both cases there was woefully inadequate promotion. For those who knew the racing was going on, it seems people generally checked it out and were rewarded with good razing and coverage.

Maybe larry has said I've given you everything you asked for, so go away and make it happen, perhaps because like you, his advisors have been telling him everything about his and rc's vision is mega....


Funny, you are ignoring the point of the OP, and what others have said, the vision is just fine. Red Maple wanted to go, and actually had some sponsors interested. Peyrons have basically said the same, I think. Others, too. The scheduling and promotion are what many are saying is not fine.

#9 nzlboy

nzlboy

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  • Location:Brisbane, QueeNZland
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 06 February 2012 - 07:10 PM

The AC is very Ho Hum and is irrelevant. Sure some big ideas, advances in technology - but where's the sailing - its a verbal wank fest so far with a little bit of sailing somewhere in the ether.

How about the AC folks just get on with it and stop playing with themselves and the yachting community, not to mention San Francisco.
Too many big egos now! I am sure Larry and Russell will make a huge amount of dosh from it.....but what happened to sailing and racing.

#10 SellingSailing

SellingSailing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 06 February 2012 - 07:20 PM

Agree with your sentiments but think its too late to salvage at this stage. These guys never figured out how far out in front of things you have to be to have it all make sense commercially - probably shouldn't have started the ACWS until 2012, allowing all of 2010 and early 2011 to line-up venues (and TV) then have the teams sell against that schedule during the 2011 budget cycle for a 2012/13 program.

I've said it before - and have good reason to believe its true - I really think the problem lies at the "top" as much as anywhere. Unfortunately, you have to lay this at the feet of a few great sailors (but not sports marketers) who hatched this plan in the first place. The people brought on to manage the project didn't know, or didn't have the courage to tell them it wouldn't work and, candidly, I don't think dissenting advice was welcome anyway. So,we live with what we have and rue a huge missed opportunity for the sport of sailing. Would have been great to see REAL change come to the Cup that would have broadened participation around the world and reignited interest in a declining property....

#11 Albatros

Albatros

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 07:46 PM

Maybe this is a better thread for this question....

Why is it teams can get the sponsorship for basically a no- audience Round The World venture, but no a huge City months long LV/ AC and an AC 72?? I would think an AC in SF would be a much easier sell? What am I not understanding?

what is no audience for you might be big audience for others
what is big City for you might be a big remote shithole for others

scuse me for saying that your bellybutton is not -anymore- the axis of the galaxy
:rolleyes:


somebody ought to tell Houston gently that it's time to get a life, Worth is a tool, nothing more and nothing less, going after Worth is more of a sign of weakness than anything else ( even if it's clear the agenda goes further than that), but yep, this thread will have legs, POPCORN ANYONE ?

#12 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,665 posts
  • Location:yep
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 06 February 2012 - 07:56 PM


Maybe this is a better thread for this question....

Why is it teams can get the sponsorship for basically a no- audience Round The World venture, but no a huge City months long LV/ AC and an AC 72?? I would think an AC in SF would be a much easier sell? What am I not understanding?

what is no audience for you might be big audience for others
what is big City for you might be a big remote shithole for others

scuse me for saying that your bellybutton is not -anymore- the axis of the galaxy
:rolleyes:


somebody ought to tell Houston gently that it's time to get a life, Worth is a tool, nothing more and nothing less, going after Worth is more of a sign of weakness than anything else ( even if it's clear the agenda goes further than that), but yep, this thread will have legs, POPCORN ANYONE ?

Didn't Huston and RMR sign an NDA?

#13 Indio

Indio

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 06 February 2012 - 07:58 PM

Imo, with a little bit of persuasion (read that to mean Uncle Laryy's $$$) the ACWSL45 should have morphed into the ESS to leverage into the existing ESS popularity. It would have ensured immediate uptake by the existing ESS teams, and continuity as the wings and live technology were rolled out gradually. The ESS in AC45s would have injected life into the ESS, while providing a stable proven product which Worth(less) could market and hock all over the place. Moreover, it would have ensured the ESS AC45s series served as a feeder into the LV and AC proper, and could have garnered support from the likes of Dalton to at least continuing with the format.

Good effort btw Pete.




#14 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 08:07 PM

Imo, with a little bit of persuasion (read that to mean Uncle Laryy's $$) the ACWSL45 should have morphed into the ESS to leverage into the existing ESS popularity. It would have ensured immediate uptake by the existing ESS teams, and continuity as the wings and live technology were rolled out gradually. The ESS in AC45s would have injected life into the ESS, while providing a stable proven product which Worth(less) could market and hock all over the place. Moreover, it would have ensured the ESS AC45s series served as a feeder into the LV and AC proper, and could have garnered support from the likes of Dalton to at least continuing with the format.

Good effort btw Pete.



One of your better, all-time, posts. Makes a lot of sense. Doesn't mean the AC/ACWS can't still succeed, but IF, and that really is a big IF, what you suggested could have been an option, it certainly could have been an interesting thing to have considered.

#15 Catatonic

Catatonic

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • Interests:Hobie cats, Sailing in general, Ice boats, tits.

Posted 06 February 2012 - 08:24 PM

Imo, with a little bit of persuasion (read that to mean Uncle Laryy's $$$) the ACWSL45 should have morphed into the ESS to leverage into the existing ESS popularity. It would have ensured immediate uptake by the existing ESS teams, and continuity as the wings and live technology were rolled out gradually. The ESS in AC45s would have injected life into the ESS, while providing a stable proven product which Worth(less) could market and hock all over the place. Moreover, it would have ensured the ESS AC45s series served as a feeder into the LV and AC proper, and could have garnered support from the likes of Dalton to at least continuing with the format.

Good effort btw Pete.


Hahaha, if you think for one minute that Uncle Larry is going to put money in EB's ESS, your wrong...

#16 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,729 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 06 February 2012 - 08:56 PM

It seems to me that people are confused about how the ACWS is effecting the AC itself. We were all lead to believe that the ACWS would be a great platform to base a campaign for the AC and give sponsors increased returns, while giving the sailors experience. The problem is that the ACWS is a complete clusterfuck, except for the actual on-the-water activities (props to IM). No proper TV deals, no proper schedule, failed promises abot the calander, poor marketing and much more. If you were an existing sponsor, or one looking at this to make an investment ina full campaign, you would have no faith in ACEA to deliver. I think Peter H is also understating other factors. Overall cost is a big one. The reason why sponsors are less trusting of ACEA is because the figures are so big. If it were significantly cheaper than past AC's, it might be easier to get a sponsor to take a bigger risk. And that is before factoring in the behavior of the defender, which many on here are prepared to dismiss as "normal" defender behavior and as such, acceptable. But the loss of the COR, the poodle nature of both COR's, the draconian "gagging order", the obvious attempts to hinder the challengers as much as possible are all factors that added to the failings of ACEA, make sponsorship an unattractive proposition for those coming into the event for the first time.

All told, I love the concept and the boats. The execution, in general, has been dire.

#17 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 09:52 PM

"The execution, in general, has been dire."(simon n)

Executions are usually rather dire. A good choice of words!

A shot in the head is far more effective than a shot in the foot. I am of the opinion that (a shot in the head) is what has happened to ac34.

I hope i am wrong, by the way.

#18 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:23 PM

An Open Letter to America's Cup Event Authority Chairman Richard Worth

........ ...... .... Are you man enough to step up to the helm in the storm that you have driven the America's Cup into as a result of your poor tactics, do the right thing for the Cup and the sport, and finally make some media and venue deals that sponsors can rely on so that they can agree to support teams who want to enter the 2013 America's Cup? - Peter Huston.


First off I disagree there is any storm, as does the thoughtful and well informed KL in

TIME TO PANIC? uh, no
--
We have LOTS of boats (arguably too many already) in the ACWS. We have 4 very strong teams already building the first AC72's, and with a decent possibility of more commitments by later this year.

But let's assume for a moment that there is this sudden (why?) 'storm' that you imagine and that RW takes your urgent advice to (suddenly, and somehow) convince an ESPN channel to commit to broadcasting X number of hours, of each of the 7 (at minimum, already announced) more ACWS regattas. And to also commit X numbers of hours for the LVC and then for the AC - the dates for which we all already know anyway regardless the precise channel names and reach numbers. Well then what? RMR is already a failed effort, by your own admission not a candidate to enter, and no other North American teams besides OR are in it either.

Chinese companies may well be also interested in Chinese broadcasts, Korea in Korean broadcasts, France in French broadcasts, Italy in Italian broadcasts, and New Zealand already has not just the AC Uncovered weeklies, and the ACWS Highlights packages, but have already been broadcasting the ACWS races live on TV (and for all the various channels across the globe already signed up for various offerings, just click here) - all of which says nothing about the universal YouTube capabilities and devices reach that you for some reason completely discount too.

While yes it may well help, I'm not convinced that announcing an ESPN/North American package (or any other channel) is the one determining factor for the hopefuls that causes them to all go Aha! We are in! It is already being served to a huge population surrounding SF on Comcast Sports, but it being also suddenly broadcast in N America beyond Northern California is not any sudden guarantee of any particular audience figures anyway; teams surely need to convince sponsors the risk is well worth taking given how much is already in place, and given what they can point to as the 'product' potential even after just these very first 3 events. Some sponsors (Corum being a big ACWS example) have taken the leap already, good for them.

The people behind Red Maple Racing had no faith and I can easily imagine see them regretting having missed stepping on board before this boat left the dock. By the pointed tone of the piece, maybe you already have regrets too?

RW unlike any of us actually has massive experience, in massive sports marketing. He needs to seek your advice, to "announce ESPN two weeks from now"?

Let's not 'panic' over no 'ESPN' yet - it's early, have faith. RW and ACEA will make the best they can of the possibilities since it is obviously in their interests to, too. I don;t expect live TV to my neighborhood before many more months from now anyway, and am perfectly content to either fly down or else watch live via YouTube and even repeats via YT-on-demand. That Corum logo is there either way, every time.

#19 acintel

acintel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 264 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:38 PM

I find Huston post extremely sensible and accurate. Well done and thank you.

For months now, I have called for Worth to go, for people who understand the sport to come in.


But Worth is not the only responsible. Don't forget this circus has been orchestrated by Russell "my ego will explode" Coutts. He wanted to show he's a brilliant CEO. He only proved is among the best sailors in the world. Many would be happy with that. Not him. But he miserably failed in his new venture. Ellison should ask him his 50million bonus of AC33 back to -partially- cover up the loss of the 34AC.

#20 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:40 PM

SR, I should not need to remind you that KL has rode a ship to the floor of the sea before...

#21 Te Kooti

Te Kooti

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,436 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:44 PM

Huston has put a fair bit of work into this letter.

And raises many issues.

Should we expect some kind of answer to this "open letter?"



#22 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:19 PM

SR, I should not need to remind you that KL has rode a ship to the floor of the sea before...

Like as in ... the AC31 OneWorld Challenge? Or the movie Wind? Ha, well I have met the guy and prefer his writing to his presence but only because his writing is so damn good.

Huston (almost) had recent experience, with RMR, and had something to do with the movie Morning Light. But KL has had his finger on the pulse of all things ACSF since before LE even won the Cup - and he still writes most of the best material around it. Attends city and SFBOS meetings, and knows the local sailing scene extremely well.

Another contrast:

PH: "I speak as someone who gets constantly asked by friends within the sailing community about what is up with the Cup. They want to place blame on Golden Gate YC for not reaching out to the sailing community and not telling the story of what's up with the Cup."

KL: "Among the citizenry of San Francisco, meanwhile, there is a tremendous upwelling of curiosity and excitement surrounding AC34. I experience it every time I go out to give a talk, whether to a sailing crowd or a Rotary."

KL is actively doing something positive, actively in touch, in the city where it's all going to happen. Here he is on a subject similar to PH's rant, but from ACWS San Diego - which KL actually attended. It's good material, well-informed and heartfelt.
--
There is a traditionalist vein, worthy of respect, that cringes at the thought of the America's Cup as a "brand." I get that. I sort-of share it. But I'm looking forward, not back.

So:

1) Iain Murray is correct that, "The AC World Series is growing legs of its own."

2) Richard Worth is correct that, "Three months ago the America's Cup World Series didn't even exist, but we have 30 broadcast partners already. We have little left to prove; what we can do is improve. We can go back to Europe with a fully-formed sports property."

Think Naples in April, Venice in May.

And I wonder if, no—I bet you—I doubledog bet you there were as many people from Northern California here to watch the races as there were from Southern California. The road show moves on to Naples, Venice, and Newport, Rhode Island in 2012. But I'm ready right now for August and AC45s on the San Francisco cityfront. I can already imagine the spectacle. Terry Hutchinson and company took me along on Artemis for the Wednesday speed trials, and when these boats accelerate off the wind the sensation redefines thunder.

Redefines, because it isn't loud.

But it's thunder.

#23 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:29 PM

All I hear is the sound of one hand clapping.

#24 Damaged Goods

Damaged Goods

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,614 posts
  • Location:1600 Penn Ave
  • Interests:Community organizing.

Posted 07 February 2012 - 12:41 AM

Larry Ellison. That alone is reason to pass on this entire pathetic spectacle of ego-driven BS. Think I'll go attend the Catalina-22 Worlds in OKC. At least the regatta will have more than 10 entries and the after-party will be down-home, so to speak.

#25 Godzilla

Godzilla

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:Many

Posted 07 February 2012 - 12:57 AM

I will be on the water and in the City to watch the races.
Don't care about TV coverage at all.
No TV in the house anyway.

#26 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 01:18 AM

For some reason the above responses remind me of a Saturday when I was out SHing a 470 in a little too much wind on Lake Washington while at UW. Over at Husky stadium there was a big football game on (didn't hurt where I parked my bicycle at the UWYC so who cared, not me) and a friend called me that night to ask if it was me they had showed on national TV, on trapeze and on the edge of losing it. Had I known, would have set the spin too :)

I can see SF game broadcasts zeroing in on any passing 45s and 72s too, they will be even better camera attention grabbers. Hope so, since I do have a TV finally - and it has to be good for something.

#27 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:25 AM

it's early,


No it's bloody not. We are in the mid-stage of the AC34 cycle. Anybody with a serious chance of winning is already well into building boat #1. In terms of ACWS providing a show-case for teams to attract sponsors, Cascais, Plymouth and SD was it. That was the window of opportunity. Naples will already be too late to make a difference even for the single boat wannabes.

#28 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:30 AM

RW unlike any of us actually has massive experience, in massive sports marketing.


In soccer, which is the major established sport in most of the world and has been since the late 19th century. In most countries soccer has been a major part of TV schedules ever since there was TV. RW maximised value from TV deals in an established sport. That's an entirely different proposition and skill-set to boot-strapping the new-look AC into existence.

#29 ~HHN92~

~HHN92~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,132 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:35 AM

Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!

#30 Dawg Gonit

Dawg Gonit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,811 posts
  • Location:Channel Islands (oxnard), Calif

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:55 AM

I can't comment on the advertizing / sponsorship part but want to comment on another part of the project that seems to have gone nowhere. This is the youth component. Does anyone know what that is? I have not see one hide nor hare about it. Is Larry/Oracle Racing interested in promoting the entry levels of sailing especially multihull sailing? Or is this just about elite sailing/ego tripping?


Of course it is about Elite Sailing and Ego Tripping...................It's the AC.

Larry and Russel failed about 2 years ago when I issued a challenge to sail against me in my two 2.4mR boats in a Match Racing Fund Raiser for the BAADS Program. Their non response was a resounding echo of their Narcissistic AC "I wanna be a Sailing GOD" Attitude.

For gods sake, it was a fund raising idea. Are you 2 so out of touch??????????????????????

Thank you for your failure to sailing in general.

Larry..............are you listening????? The challenge is still there if you got the balls..... :lol: :lol: :lol:

#31 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:10 AM

.. Naples will already be too late to make a difference even for the single boat wannabes.

Disagree. You just need a fast boat on the line 18 months from now.

Dawg - the AC35 is not about supporting handicap racing, as good a cause as that is.

HHN - going multihulls was jumping off a cliff with a rope around their necks? Lmao, that and wings is what makes it high tech, forward looking, Silicon Valley and SF flavored perfect.

#32 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:39 AM


.. Naples will already be too late to make a difference even for the single boat wannabes.

Disagree. You just need a fast boat on the line 18 months from now.


Did you even bother to read what I said? Or what IM has recently said?

If you want to be a one-boat team you have until June to enter and you need to be building a boat at that point which, according to IM, takes 8 months. Do you really believe that an event in April is a help in show-casing to a sponsor when June is the absolute last drop-dead date to begin building. For which you need money. You need booked capacity in what is quite possibly the only yard in your country capable of building such a boat. You need some kind of design team, even if you take the off-the-shelf design. The yard needs to have a build team in place for a huge project. Apparently, you need to pre-buy the carbon which is in short supply. Get real. ACWS 2011 was for show-casing. 2012 would be to generate sponsor value if only there were a few sponsors.

#33 eric e

eric e

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,451 posts
  • Location:the far east

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:57 AM

All I hear is the sound of one hand clapping.


the fingers are curled

the motion is different

not sure it's clapping...

#34 Sailer X

Sailer X

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 371 posts
  • Location:uk

Posted 07 February 2012 - 06:49 AM

Bloody 2.4mR drivers. Stupid old duffers on my pond who are too stupid to sail anything but W/L, set their marks on laylines to the club marks, don't know the rules and don't watch where they are going. They'd be trolls if they knew how to use a computer.

#35 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,616 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 07 February 2012 - 08:12 AM

SR, I should not need to remind you that KL has rode a ship to the floor of the sea before...


jhc, those aren't KL's words. Spinray has taken a KL heading and added his own words, intimating that it's KL. He's done it before.

Spinray is correct about one thing. There are four strong teams.

The rest is typical Spinray garbage.

What Ian Murray said, before being censured/censored by his paymasters, that the reality is that there will only be 3 challengers next year is correct.

It's a shame really. It's will the first time in 30+ years that there will be no French team in the LV CSS. Strange that they always managed an entry in monohulls, 12 mtrs and IACC class, but fail when it comes to multihulls, supposedly the forte of the French.

You can never have too many boats in a regatta. You adjust the course to accommodate. Currently the ACWS is a two horse race between ETNZ and OR/S. The rest are just making up the numbers. More strong teams may make it interesting but somehow I doubt it.

There really is no interest, outside of the few sailing forums, in the ACWS or AC34. It is not a topic of conversation in any of the Yacht Clubs I frequent nor amongst my non-sailing friends. The 6 month hiatus in the ACWS is a stupid mistake by ACEA. Any interest they may have garnered is gone, all for the sake of a few dollars. The America's Cup Uncovered videos must be costing a packet yet are struggling to get 6000 views. Not money well spent.

#36 Moonduster

Moonduster

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 08:55 AM

Eric,


the fingers are curled

the motion is different

not sure it's clapping...



That's the post of the decade ... good work!





#37 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 03:57 PM


You just need a fast boat on the line 18 months from now.


Did you even bother to read what I said? Or what IM has recently said?

Here's what he said, direct quote from in the KL article

As America's Cup Race Management CEO Iain Murray puts it, "We have four more teams that credibly could build an AC72. China Team, for example, has build space on hold at McConaghy in Zhuhai." I personally am hopeful for the Spanish team, GreenCom. They're not in-build, but Murray asserts, "There's more than smoke and mirrors."

Somewhere else, he is quoted as suggesting ET already has enough for a build; it is the rest of the campaign they don't yet have enough for. Bruno P himself has said he's looking at June or later.

Will anyone else press that Go button? We just can't know, until probably June.

jhc, those aren't KL's words. Spinray has taken a KL heading and added his own words, intimating that it's KL. He's done it before.

As usual, I tried to be conscientious enough to make obvious what was from the article versus my own ideas on it - and as usual included links. You are the one doing the misleading.

To the posts above suggesting that the ACWS becomes more a burden than a hindrance to the Big Four (and anyone else possible): Yes, I tend to agree it may benefit the event more than individual teams in that some sailors will have much higher priorities once AC72's are launched; but otoh some benefits of the ACWS buildup going to the overall event's profile will obviously benefit those teams too - and especially their commercial sponsors in terms of added action and exposure. Maybe the real axe teams have to grind is with their own sponsors?

We haven't actually heard anyone asking for fewer ACWS events, it's been more a criticism of not having more of them. DB called for one in Auckland just yesterday, GD has said as much before, and since the 2011 schedule is already booked out then they must be talking 2012. So evidently the ACWS works well for them and their sponsors too.

#38 ro!

ro!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,194 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:20 PM



You just need a fast boat on the line 18 months from now.


Did you even bother to read what I said? Or what IM has recently said?

Here's what he said, direct quote from in the KL article

As America's Cup Race Management CEO Iain Murray puts it, "We have four more teams that credibly could build an AC72. China Team, for example, has build space on hold at McConaghy in Zhuhai." I personally am hopeful for the Spanish team, GreenCom. They're not in-build, but Murray asserts, "There's more than smoke and mirrors."

Somewhere else, he is quoted as suggesting ET already has enough for a build; it is the rest of the campaign they don't yet have enough for. Bruno P himself has said he's looking at June or later.

Will anyone else press that Go button? We just can't know, until probably June.

jhc, those aren't KL's words. Spinray has taken a KL heading and added his own words, intimating that it's KL. He's done it before.

As usual, I tried to be conscientious enough to make obvious what was from the article versus my own ideas on it - and as usual included links. You are the one doing the misleading.

To the posts above suggesting that the ACWS becomes more a burden than a hindrance to the Big Four (and anyone else possible): Yes, I tend to agree it may benefit the event more than individual teams in that some sailors will have much higher priorities once AC72's are launched; but otoh some benefits of the ACWS buildup going to the overall event's profile will obviously benefit those teams too - and especially their commercial sponsors in terms of added action and exposure. Maybe the real axe teams have to grind is with their own sponsors?

We haven't actually heard anyone asking for fewer ACWS events, it's been more a criticism of not having more of them. DB called for one in Auckland just yesterday, GD has said as much before, and since the 2011 schedule is already booked out then they must be talking 2012. So evidently the ACWS works well for them and their sponsors too.


Yet again you can't resist spinning it up..even you know he doesn't want a date in NZ because he thinks the wsl is a good idea and is working well for them..

Maybe the reason that etnz would like a date in Auckland is because of the series of sketchy dates and venues that have been served up by the alphabet which has led to virtually no exposure for their sponsers...
Dalts knows that a date in NZ would have at least some promotion and a good number of sailors would get up off their arses and go watch it, and bring some return on their million+ dollar investment ...

#39 Rennmaus

Rennmaus

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,757 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:26 PM

It would be interesting to know which sponsor signed up because of the ACWS and not the actual "product" the LVC/AC. Only Corum? Would the few signed-up sponsors have declined, if ther wasn't an ACWS? Will we ever know?

#40 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:27 PM

Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been? No one would still give a damn. Non-sailors would be bored to tears if they were forced to watch, and sailors would know that the boats suck, and be bored to tears. Sure it would have cost less, but would have generated far less interest, as well. The organizers have done some things poorly, which should be expected, adn it could certainly be the case there could have been more competitors, but I don't know that, long term, things would be much better under other plans. Maybe we just wont have as many teams as we would like this time around, but if we get spectacular racing and coverage, AC35 could be amazing. Let's just hang on and see what happens over the next few months. There will be a lot less questions come July.

#41 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:33 PM

It would be interesting to know which sponsor signed up because of the ACWS and not the actual "product" the LVC/AC. Only Corum? Would the few signed-up sponsors have declined, if ther wasn't an ACWS? Will we ever know?



Tony Studio?








:lol:

#42 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:39 PM

It would be interesting to know which sponsor signed up because of the ACWS and not the actual "product" the LVC/AC. Only Corum? Would the few signed-up sponsors have declined, if there wasn't an ACWS? Will we ever know?

Without knowing the sales pitch made, and any agreement specificity's signed, we probably will not ever know how much a factor the ACWS was in decisions by various sponsors. It may also have varied and been less big to Puma, very big to Corum, medium big to Nestle.

Much of the thrust of PH's 'open letter' (widely applauded here) aside from the "sign ESPN, right now!" argument was that securing more ACWS venues with firm dates was absolutely critical to teams still on the bubble. It must surely be a factor, to some degree.

#43 Rennmaus

Rennmaus

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,757 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:43 PM


It would be interesting to know which sponsor signed up because of the ACWS and not the actual "product" the LVC/AC. Only Corum? Would the few signed-up sponsors have declined, if there wasn't an ACWS? Will we ever know?

Without knowing the sales pitch made, and any agreement specificity's signed, we probably will not ever know how much a factor the ACWS was in decisions by various sponsors. It may also have varied and been less big to Puma, very big to Corum, medium big to Nestle.

Much of the thrust of PH's 'open letter' (widely applauded here) aside from the "sign ESPN, right now!" argument was that securing more ACWS venues with firm dates was absolutely critical to teams still on the bubble. It must surely be a factor, to some degree.

So, the way it is set up now, it is no factor, because sponors declined because of the sub-standard execution (if we follow Peter). Hmmmmm, o.k., thanks.

#44 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:47 PM


We haven't actually heard anyone asking for fewer ACWS events, it's been more a criticism of not having more of them. DB called for one in Auckland just yesterday, GD has said as much before, and since the 2011 schedule is already booked out then they must be talking 2012. So evidently the ACWS works well for them and their sponsors too.


Yet again you can't resist spinning it up..even you know he doesn't want a date in NZ because he thinks the wsl is a good idea and is working well for them..

Why can't you resist arguing with both DB and GD clearly saying that they want a down-under ACWS event?

Maybe the reason that etnz would like a date in Auckland is because of the series of sketchy dates and venues that have been served up by the alphabet which has led to virtually no exposure for their sponsers...
Dalts knows that a date in NZ would have at least some promotion and a good number of sailors would get up off their arses and go watch it, and bring some return on their million+ dollar investment ...

Yes, some of their sponsors - perhaps especially the NZ government itself who funneled > $NZD30M into it - would likely be very pleased.

You still can't point me to anywhere where anyone who matters has suggested they did not want to participate in the ACWS. Only that most of the focus for those building AC72's is on that program. Wow, big surprise there!

#45 trenace

trenace

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,282 posts
  • Location:Ocala, FL

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:11 PM


Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been? No one would still give a damn. Non-sailors would be bored to tears if they were forced to watch, and sailors would know that the boats suck, and be bored to tears. Sure it would have cost less, but would have generated far less interest, as well. The organizers have done some things poorly, which should be expected, adn it could certainly be the case there could have been more competitors, but I don't know that, long term, things would be much better under other plans. Maybe we just wont have as many teams as we would like this time around, but if we get spectacular racing and coverage, AC35 could be amazing. Let's just hang on and see what happens over the next few months. There will be a lot less questions come July.

While disagreeing with the V5s, it's very arguable -- and of course many argued it at the time -- that 2013 was too early for the LV and AC. The ACWS could have been started in 2012 instead of 2011.

This might have done a lot better for organization and sponsorship. It is true though that September 2014 would have been 4 1/2 years, and GGYC would have been criticized by some here for anything more than a day or two past 4 years on the dot.

#46 Test

Test

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:14 PM

I will be on the water and in the City to watch the races.
Don't care about TV coverage at all.
No TV in the house anyway.

Funny, I won't be out on the water to watch racing after my experiences with Fleet Week and the 4th. I've canvased most of the overlooks, Angel Island, TI, Headlands, and IMHO they're too far away to absorb details. I like the onboard coverage, graphics, and some of the commentary on the TV coverage. I'll watch most of the racing at home, where the viewing is a much richer experience. Although I'm sure friends will drag me out on the water for at least one race.

On the OP:
I really don't find it surprising there are only three or four real contenders for this round of the LV/AC. When the AC folks were selling the the AC to SF (and others), they had some pie in the sky claims, but it was just selling. The ACWS has been a success in farming teams for the AC34 and giving us spectators a view into what we cam expect in 2013.

#47 Indio

Indio

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:24 PM



We haven't actually heard anyone asking for fewer ACWS events, it's been more a criticism of not having more of them. DB called for one in Auckland just yesterday, GD has said as much before, and since the 2011 schedule is already booked out then they must be talking 2012. So evidently the ACWS works well for them and their sponsors too.


Yet again you can't resist spinning it up..even you know he doesn't want a date in NZ because he thinks the wsl is a good idea and is working well for them..

Why can't you resist arguing with both DB and GD clearly saying that they want a down-under ACWS event?

Maybe the reason that etnz would like a date in Auckland is because of the series of sketchy dates and venues that have been served up by the alphabet which has led to virtually no exposure for their sponsers...
Dalts knows that a date in NZ would have at least some promotion and a good number of sailors would get up off their arses and go watch it, and bring some return on their million+ dollar investment ...

Yes, some of their sponsors - perhaps especially the NZ government itself who funneled > $NZD30M into it - would likely be very pleased.

You still can't point me to anywhere where anyone who matters has suggested they did not want to participate in the ACWS. Only that most of the focus for those building AC72's is on that program. Wow, big surprise there!


What do you fail to understand about this?!! Participation in the ACWSL45 circus was COMPULSORY if teams wanted to participate in the LV-CSS. ETNZ didn't want to and stated it often enough, Get your face out of Ehman's butthole and get some fresh perspective.

#48 Indio

Indio

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:32 PM


Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been? No one would still give a damn. Non-sailors would be bored to tears if they were forced to watch, and sailors would know that the boats suck, and be bored to tears. Sure it would have cost less, but would have generated far less interest, as well. The organizers have done some things poorly, which should be expected, adn it could certainly be the case there could have been more competitors, but I don't know that, long term, things would be much better under other plans. Maybe we just wont have as many teams as we would like this time around, but if we get spectacular racing and coverage, AC35 could be amazing. Let's just hang on and see what happens over the next few months. There will be a lot less questions come July.

You're spouting a lot of presumptuous clap-trap: anything to support them or are you just wanking with your eyes wired open....again!?!Posted Image

#49 ro!

ro!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,194 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:46 PM



We haven't actually heard anyone asking for fewer ACWS events, it's been more a criticism of not having more of them. DB called for one in Auckland just yesterday, GD has said as much before, and since the 2011 schedule is already booked out then they must be talking 2012. So evidently the ACWS works well for them and their sponsors too.


Yet again you can't resist spinning it up..even you know he doesn't want a date in NZ because he thinks the wsl is a good idea and is working well for them..

Why can't you resist arguing with both DB and GD clearly saying that they want a down-under ACWS event?

Maybe the reason that etnz would like a date in Auckland is because of the series of sketchy dates and venues that have been served up by the alphabet which has led to virtually no exposure for their sponsers...
Dalts knows that a date in NZ would have at least some promotion and a good number of sailors would get up off their arses and go watch it, and bring some return on their million+ dollar investment ...

Yes, some of their sponsors - perhaps especially the NZ government itself who funneled > $NZD30M into it - would likely be very pleased.

You still can't point me to anywhere where anyone who matters has suggested they did not want to participate in the ACWS. Only that most of the focus for those building AC72's is on that program. Wow, big surprise there!



#50 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 06:02 PM

What do you fail to understand about this?!! Participation in the ACWSL45 circus was COMPULSORY if teams wanted to participate in the LV-CSS. ETNZ didn't want to and stated it often enough, Get your face out of Ehman's butthole and get some fresh perspective.

Yes it's compulsory. Some people would have preferred some other mix between boats, ACWS or not, dates, formats, DoG matches, whatever their trip. But what teams have signed onto, has been obvious since forever already.

Again, you and a couple others keep saying it but where was this "stated it often enough" ?

And TE has little to do with the topic, it is surely more LE and RC's overall vision being executed - and being participated in by 10 ACWS teams, including the standings-leading ETNZ who are actively practicing, actively putting effort into trying hold that lead, by their own, recent statements that can be pointed to.

That you don't like the ACWS does not necessarily mean that the teams feel that way. That I do like it does not either but overall the teams seem to strongly agree with my view of it, not yours unless you can point to it.

#51 ro!

ro!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,194 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 06:30 PM




We haven't actually heard anyone asking for fewer ACWS events, it's been more a criticism of not having more of them. DB called for one in Auckland just yesterday, GD has said as much before, and since the 2011 schedule is already booked out then they must be talking 2012. So evidently the ACWS works well for them and their sponsors too.


Yet again you can't resist spinning it up..even you know he doesn't want a date in NZ because he thinks the wsl is a good idea and is working well for them..

Why can't you resist arguing with both DB and GD clearly saying that they want a down-under ACWS event?

Maybe the reason that etnz would like a date in Auckland is because of the series of sketchy dates and venues that have been served up by the alphabet which has led to virtually no exposure for their sponsers...
Dalts knows that a date in NZ would have at least some promotion and a good number of sailors would get up off their arses and go watch it, and bring some return on their million+ dollar investment ...

Yes, some of their sponsors - perhaps especially the NZ government itself who funneled > $NZD30M into it - would likely be very pleased.

You still can't point me to anywhere where anyone who matters has suggested they did not want to participate in the ACWS. Only that most of the focus for those building AC72's is on that program. Wow, big surprise there!


As usual you do not even bother to read what I say before jumping in with more spin..

I did not argue that dalts said there should be a wsl regatta in Auckland...he already came out and said that, but I didn't see where he or the NZ government said it was worth $5M to bring it there...

You are the only one on the planet that believes dalts wanted a world super league series in 45's, and that he is happy to be forced to race in it as part of the entry into the real AC, in Million dollar boats that he has to buy from the defenders of the AC ... at sketchy venues with no exposure for his sponsers....

#52 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 06:44 PM

Seems we have gotten off subject.

SR I appreciate your comments regarding the challenger teams efforts to fulfill their contract requirements, as you point out the teams "want" to sail in the acws. They want to sail in the accss.

The point of this thread is whether ac alphabet has fulfilled their obligation, and specifically are they going to provide the media exposure they have outlined. Are they getting the spectator numbers, and media exposure they implied to the challengers.

I say no. Also, I say without getting personal, there are many apparent shortcomings exposed. If the shortcomings are due to arrogance, unrealistic expectations, poor execution, or incompetence, is not really important. What is important to this thread is that there is no expectation that the well thought out 'open letter' that this thread was started in reference to, will be answered by anyone.

There is a real disconnect.

And no amount of 'spin' will correct that.

#53 ~HHN92~

~HHN92~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,132 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 06:57 PM


Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been?


Money, and time.

Anyway, it was only a nickels worth................................ :huh:

#54 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 06:57 PM

^ I am in complete agreement with everyone who wishes they would put more effort into promotion. And it stands to reason they will do exactly that, now that they have a working 'product' that produces good televised racing. Bigger TV audiences would be cool, for everyone.

Have also agreed that, to some extent to different teams and sponsors, PH is dead right about how announcing an ESPN-like TV deal would help - and the deal be hopefully also associated with firm dates and venues for the apparent gaps in late 2012 and early 2013.

It sort of comes down to the chicken and egg question, probably. RW may be tasked with maximizing the deals, which may require signing them later rather than earlier, which potentially puts his task somewhat in conflict with teams wanting it done sooner. I think we all get and agree that problem.

In San Diego Murray suggested that the coming cost-cutting was to help enable venue to deals to be done more easily. Maybe that will also help speed things along TV-wise, meaning the revenue required won't be as big as what RW was originally tasked with finding in the TV department.

#55 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 February 2012 - 07:05 PM

Richard Worth will be with Iain Murray during our Skype interview on Friday. Post your questions in the other thread.

#56 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,665 posts
  • Location:yep
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 07 February 2012 - 07:18 PM


What do you fail to understand about this?!! Participation in the ACWSL45 circus was COMPULSORY if teams wanted to participate in the LV-CSS. ETNZ didn't want to and stated it often enough, Get your face out of Ehman's butthole and get some fresh perspective.

Yes it's compulsory. Some people would have preferred some other mix between boats, ACWS or not, dates, formats, DoG matches, whatever their trip. But what teams have signed onto, has been obvious since forever already.

Again, you and a couple others keep saying it but where was this "stated it often enough" ?

And TE has little to do with the topic, it is surely more LE and RC's overall vision being executed - and being participated in by 10 ACWS teams, including the standings-leading ETNZ who are actively practicing, actively putting effort into trying hold that lead, by their own, recent statements that can be pointed to.

That you don't like the ACWS does not necessarily mean that the teams feel that way. That I do like it does not either but overall the teams seem to strongly agree with my view of it, not yours unless you can point to it.

The only things connecting WS with AC is the hijacking of the AC name and the forcing of challengers to take part in it. The fact that only 30% of WS teams will ever reach the LVCSS shows just how irrelevant the WS is to the AC. 60% of WS competitors are in the WS for the ride NOT for the AC.

#57 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 08:25 PM



Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been? No one would still give a damn. Non-sailors would be bored to tears if they were forced to watch, and sailors would know that the boats suck, and be bored to tears. Sure it would have cost less, but would have generated far less interest, as well. The organizers have done some things poorly, which should be expected, adn it could certainly be the case there could have been more competitors, but I don't know that, long term, things would be much better under other plans. Maybe we just wont have as many teams as we would like this time around, but if we get spectacular racing and coverage, AC35 could be amazing. Let's just hang on and see what happens over the next few months. There will be a lot less questions come July.

While disagreeing with the V5s, it's very arguable -- and of course many argued it at the time -- that 2013 was too early for the LV and AC. The ACWS could have been started in 2012 instead of 2011.

This might have done a lot better for organization and sponsorship. It is true though that September 2014 would have been 4 1/2 years, and GGYC would have been criticized by some here for anything more than a day or two past 4 years on the dot.


Very possible that moving the LV & AC back to 2014 would have helped teams.

#58 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 08:31 PM



Here's my nickel's worth (pun intended):

They have made too big of a reach in too short of a time, with too many expectations and promises.

Even if they wanted to move towards the multi-hulls, which is understandable coming out of 33, it appeared that the decision was made when the question was asked on going with one or the other.

Instead of moving towards/merging with the ESS, they could have had their cake and some ice cream with it. For a quick turn around to regain the footing, and to move towards something in the future, a monohull series in V5's would have done the trick. Low cost, get the ball rolling again event that many of the established, and some that were interested, could have jumped into without a lot of cost. With the world economy tanking since the end of 32, a low risk/cost event would have been the ticket for those on the fence and those that did not have the deep pockets to go whole hog into a totally new platform.

Then, to please the multihullers they could have given, at probably a very low cost, a boost to the Little AC and helped that event to grow and gain some stature. Run sistered events in an ACWS like format, with the coverage given to each, stagger races or race days to boost both disciplines. All the bells and whistles could have been developed simultaneously without a mad rush to go totally whiz bang. Ramp it up not slam it through.

After 34, or maybe 35, then the progression could have gone towards the multihulls for future events, at the will of the competitors and teams. It would eliminate the mad rush to sign multihull experts, convert the monohull guys to cat sailing, which is all costing money above and beyond what the 'savings' were supposed to be. Buying SL33's and other boats, support craft, parts and pieces is burning-up all of any savings that were to be had.

Taking things a step at a time instead of leaping off the cliff with the rope around their neck may have helped make an event that could have covered a lot of bases, saved a lot of costs, maybe piggy-backed with some other planned events, and re-generated the positive attention that the AC really needed coming out of 33.

I do hope that maybe we are wrong, that in spite of the current appearances AC34 will turn out to be successful, they have just not taken the path I would have followed. I am making plans to be there, for my first live AC event, so it better succeed!



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been? No one would still give a damn. Non-sailors would be bored to tears if they were forced to watch, and sailors would know that the boats suck, and be bored to tears. Sure it would have cost less, but would have generated far less interest, as well. The organizers have done some things poorly, which should be expected, adn it could certainly be the case there could have been more competitors, but I don't know that, long term, things would be much better under other plans. Maybe we just wont have as many teams as we would like this time around, but if we get spectacular racing and coverage, AC35 could be amazing. Let's just hang on and see what happens over the next few months. There will be a lot less questions come July.

You're spouting a lot of presumptuous clap-trap: anything to support them or are you just wanking with your eyes wired open....again!?!Posted Image


How about audience numbers, lack of TV contracts, lack of interest in print media, basically the complete forgetting of the AC from everyone outside of sailing. And even within sailing, I would say the VOR, Jules Verne, Coville/Joyon, Open-60s and ORMA type racing have gained interest while the AC has lost interest. AC33 gained some interest back into the AC, but for many years, it had been largely forgotten.

#59 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 08:37 PM



Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been?


Money, and time.

Anyway, it was only a nickels worth................................ :huh:


Like I said, less cost, less interest and potential income. As far as time is concerned, why bother moving up a shitty product? As someone else said, it MAY have been beneficial to put off the LV and AC one year, as the AC72, and training in them, is the real BIG expense. The ACWS is a relatively cheap component of the AC, the way I see it, and the teams very well may have benefited from having another year to race, learn, and gain exposure in the AC45s before getting to the must-build date for the AC72s. But going back to the OP, it may not have been necessary had the organizers nailed down more venues, earlier, and I would add the BEST venues, regardless of venue fees being paid.

#60 Oneyoti

Oneyoti

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,292 posts

Posted 08 February 2012 - 05:35 PM

I haven't even read the replies but this is one of the best posts I've read on these forums since BMWOR crossed the finish line in the last AC's race. Well done!!!!

#61 Oneyoti

Oneyoti

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,292 posts

Posted 08 February 2012 - 05:40 PM

The AC is very Ho Hum and is irrelevant. Sure some big ideas, advances in technology - but where's the sailing - its a verbal wank fest so far with a little bit of sailing somewhere in the ether.

How about the AC folks just get on with it and stop playing with themselves and the yachting community, not to mention San Francisco.
Too many big egos now! I am sure Larry and Russell will make a huge amount of dosh from it.....but what happened to sailing and racing.


Good grief, I'm only down to this reply (which I think is great) and I'm suddenly becoming aware that there are few more dissenters and a few more realistists without the $$$ pulled over their eyes.

About time these forums lived up to their name!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Watch the army of sycophants come and bury this reply.....................................................

#62 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 09 February 2012 - 08:01 AM

Really, what good would sticking with the V5s been? No one would still give a damn. Non-sailors would be bored to tears if they were forced to watch, and sailors would know that the boats suck, and be bored to tears.


I would not have been in favour of a return to V5s (which is not the same as saying I think the AC72 was the correct choice). But IACC boats boring? Have you ever actually seen one, close up and personal, powered up in a decent breeze and driven by a race crew? One of my treasured sailing memories is helming a 24-footer, hearing a colossal noise behind me and turning around to see an IACC gybing 100 yards away. I wasn't bored......

#63 Te Kooti

Te Kooti

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,436 posts

Posted 09 February 2012 - 08:01 AM

Very possible that moving the LV & AC back to 2014 would have helped teams.



Some of them (eg. the Greek Challenge) were depending on this.

When it was not possible they dropped-out.

However, I can see why RC/LE wanted to bring it on ASAP


#64 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 09 February 2012 - 08:06 AM

Watch the army of sycophants come and bury this reply..


Hardly an army. Barely a squad these days. There's been quite a turn-around.

#65 Rennmaus

Rennmaus

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,757 posts

Posted 09 February 2012 - 09:31 PM

<<America's Cup: Major free to air US television deal imminent - Coutts


In a media conference this morning, Russell Coutts revealed that a major broadcast deal was imminent for the USA.

When pressed further Coutts said the deal was with one of the major US broadcasters, and was a free to air package.

'Around November last year we gave the teams details of a comprehensive television package, and the events package around the America’s Cup – so the Challengers have some certainty as to what to expect. There is something like 30 broadcasters already signed.

'There is a major television broadcast contract in the final stages of negotiation in the US. It has been quite a complicated discussion. I haven’t been directly involved, but I have been getting reports on progress,' he added.

'This America’s Cup coverage is going to be exceptional in terms of exposure. However these deals to take time to finalize in terms of the details.'

'We all recognize the urgency, and I have been pushing for quite a while to announce something publicly – but the ongoing discussions haven’t really helped that. An announcement will be made soon.

'Frankly I think this will be one of the best, if not the best television broadcasts that the America’s Cup has ever had – certainly in the time that I have been involved.

'I personally think that the changes that we have made to the television production will change the way the world views our sport, and we have made massive changes', he added. 'It has taken time and a lot of effort from people like Stan Honey and his organization , but it has been worth it, and we will see some more changes for Naples (America’s Cup World Series has its next round in Naples, Italy in April).

'Now that the broadcasters have seen the footage, no-one is disputing the quality of the coverage – even from the ACWS events we held last year'

'The free to air broadcaster makes this a significant deal for the US market.'
(continued)>>

#66 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 09 February 2012 - 10:46 PM

^ Could be terrific news, that TV deal.

'Free to Air' excludes it being ESPN, right? Iirc they are only carried in the US by FIOS, Cable and Dish. ABC?

#67 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 09 February 2012 - 11:05 PM

may be from the same media conference
--


Coutts not worried by lack of Cup challengers


SUZANNE MCFADDEN Last updated 11:38 10/02/2012

Sir Russell Coutts is confident that more than three challengers will line up in next year's America's Cup, but says even a condensed fleet would produce top quality racing.

The head of Cup defender Oracle Racing says he "highly doubts" that the three challengers now building AC72s - Emirates Team New Zealand, Italians Luna Rossa and the Swedish Artemis challenge - will be the only competitors in the Louis Vuitton Cup, sailing off San Francisco in July next year to find an opponent for Oracle Racing in the America's Cup match.

June 1 is the deadline for the other six teams now racing AC45s - smaller versions of the Cup boats - to pay their entry fees as viable challengers for the 34th America's Cup.

While Coutts won't predict how many of those challengers will eventuate, he admitted some will drop out of contention without the necessary funding to build the monster wing-sail catamarans.

"I do think there will be more than four boats. But I don't think in my involvement in the America's Cup have I seen four teams as good; they are as competitive as any I have been involved with," Coutts told Boating New Zealand magazine.

"In a competitive sense, I don't think it matters that much. In an awareness sense, if you have teams like Korea, China and France in the game, it's much better, because you can engage those audiences more."

Oracle Racing and the event management had gone to great lengths, Coutts said, to cut back campaign costs.

With almost 60 per cent of a team's budget spent on personnel, cutting the boat crew from 17 to 11, and shortening the sailing time by stopping teams from launching a new boat until July this year, had helped make savings.

Coutts said he was happy with the International Jury's answers to questions posed by Oracle Racing on the collaboration between Emirates Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa, now working together in Auckland.

The protocol rules explain that the team's boats cannot link their telemetry while sailing with each other to share trialling information, the teams cannot help each other with building each other's boats, and they have to have separate contracts with the New Zealand boat building companies they employ.

But as Team NZ Grant Dalton head says both boats can, and will, continue to sail together in the lead-up to the Louis Vuitton Cup.


--




#68 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,980 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:24 AM

^ Could be terrific news, that TV deal.

'Free to Air' excludes it being ESPN, right? Iirc they are only carried in the US by FIOS, Cable and Dish. ABC?


It's going to be on the E channel . Kim and Chloe Kardasihian go sailing :)

#69 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:58 AM

I'm going to make a guess that the TV deal is with NBC Sports Network (or something similar), which is the rebranded Comcast SportsNet (one of Comcast's planned moves after buying NBC), which was a group of regional sports stations on cable, some of which ran the early ACWS coverage.

I feel like Coutts means 'free to watch' rather than 'free to the airwaves', but if I'm wrong, I'll be a happy camper.

Even if it is NBC Sports Network/Comcast Sports Net, I've been told that Comcast/Xfinity is going to be sinking a lot of money into the network, and that could help the Cup succeed better than it otherwise might. A young, hungry network with a mandate to make a name for itself might be a real asset to a sport that has so rarely been covered (or watched) well. Less preconceived notions, more willingness to work with ACTV producers to present the best possible package. Biggest problem being that it only reaches a fraction of the population (Comcast is the biggest, but still only reaches something like 25% IIRC), and that it's usually something like channel 327 or whatever on your cable, up with the Home Shopping Network and Military Channel rather than ESPN or NBC.

But if Coutts announces that one of the big 5 sports networks (NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, ESPN) is the new broadcaster, I will have some seriously renewed faith in Larry Ellison, because he will probably have had to guarantee a hell of a fee to them.

#70 ~HHN92~

~HHN92~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,132 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 12:48 PM

I'm going to make a guess that the TV deal is with NBC Sports Network (or something similar), which is the rebranded Comcast SportsNet (one of Comcast's planned moves after buying NBC), which was a group of regional sports stations on cable, some of which ran the early ACWS coverage.

I feel like Coutts means 'free to watch' rather than 'free to the airwaves', but if I'm wrong, I'll be a happy camper.

Even if it is NBC Sports Network/Comcast Sports Net, I've been told that Comcast/Xfinity is going to be sinking a lot of money into the network, and that could help the Cup succeed better than it otherwise might. A young, hungry network with a mandate to make a name for itself might be a real asset to a sport that has so rarely been covered (or watched) well. Less preconceived notions, more willingness to work with ACTV producers to present the best possible package. Biggest problem being that it only reaches a fraction of the population (Comcast is the biggest, but still only reaches something like 25% IIRC), and that it's usually something like channel 327 or whatever on your cable, up with the Home Shopping Network and Military Channel rather than ESPN or NBC.

But if Coutts announces that one of the big 5 sports networks (NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, ESPN) is the new broadcaster, I will have some seriously renewed faith in Larry Ellison, because he will probably have had to guarantee a hell of a fee to them.


What you describe about NBC/Comcast sounds a lot like ESPN in the early to mid 80's.

#71 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,616 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 10 February 2012 - 12:56 PM

NBC Sports Network is just a re-branded Versus isn't it?

#72 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 02:09 PM

I'm going to make a guess that the TV deal is with NBC Sports Network (or something similar), which is the rebranded Comcast SportsNet (one of Comcast's planned moves after buying NBC), which was a group of regional sports stations on cable, some of which ran the early ACWS coverage.

I feel like Coutts means 'free to watch' rather than 'free to the airwaves', but if I'm wrong, I'll be a happy camper.

Even if it is NBC Sports Network/Comcast Sports Net, I've been told that Comcast/Xfinity is going to be sinking a lot of money into the network, and that could help the Cup succeed better than it otherwise might. A young, hungry network with a mandate to make a name for itself might be a real asset to a sport that has so rarely been covered (or watched) well. Less preconceived notions, more willingness to work with ACTV producers to present the best possible package. Biggest problem being that it only reaches a fraction of the population (Comcast is the biggest, but still only reaches something like 25% IIRC), and that it's usually something like channel 327 or whatever on your cable, up with the Home Shopping Network and Military Channel rather than ESPN or NBC.

But if Coutts announces that one of the big 5 sports networks (NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, ESPN) is the new broadcaster, I will have some seriously renewed faith in Larry Ellison, because he will probably have had to guarantee a hell of a fee to them.


I'd generally agree with most of this. However, let's parse the list down a bit for "free over the air". What I hope will happen, is some sort of hybrid, because that is probably what would be the best outcome we in the US could hope for, some sort of cable/major deal, with cable covering the LVC and a major covering a race or two of the AC.

I'll be shocked if Fox is involved, though on a global basis that would be best solution because of News Corps massive footprint. But, knowing a guy who is pretty high up in the food chain at Fox Sports, I've got no sense the AC is even on their radar screen.

NBC/new cable brand or ABC/ESPN make the most sense. You'd have to think there is some sort of competition between the two.

The point was made to me last night in a PM from a very knowledgable Cup insider that not having a TV deal at this stage of the Cup cycle was pretty standard. Except what is not standard is that the organizers have made tons of promises on which they have not delivered. Announcing dates and no venues, and then not fulling those dates is a huge strike to the credibility of ACEA. So, until they show an elevated standard of performance, how can they be trusted in what they say?

The whole equation was about helping small, new teams get to the starting line. That simply hasn't happened, and now Coutts is saying that it won't matter if there are only four teams because they will all be competitive. Might not matter from a sailing perspective, but from a show time perspective three teams in the LVC is going to be lame, especially given that two of them come from countries with a total population combined about half of that of California. Where's the global viewer interest in that?

The biggest problem I've got with Worth/ACEA is their complete lack of accountability for saying something and then it never happening. It isn't like it has happened once or twice on small things, it happens pretty repeatedly on big stuff. Basically, the only thing we will be able to believe about a TV deal is when we hear it announced by the broadcaster, and ACEA would be wise to let the broadcaster make those announcements.

#73 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,414 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 10 February 2012 - 02:16 PM

NBC Sports Network is just a re-branded Versus isn't it?


No, its a lot more than that, or at least thats the goal. NBC Sports Network is the latest to challenge ESPN's empire, and it just might take a bite out of ESPN's ass. Fox Sports Net was the first to try, but it went up against ESPN in its hayday and they failed. NBCSN is challenging ESPN at a point where ESPN, from a editorial and talent stand point, is starting to wear on sports fans. From the overdone Chris Berman and what seems like 50+ ex-NFL players and coaches on the payroll, to the Tebow drool fest on the ESPN airwaves, for the first time in a while sports fans are hungry for a legit alternative to ESPN and NBCSN has a real chance to capitalize on that. From what I've seen so far they are making an honest effort. They need to expand their online viewing services more though. Hope that is the plan.

WetHog :ph34r:

#74 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 02:42 PM

What you describe about NBC/Comcast sounds a lot like ESPN in the early to mid 80's.


You are of course correct about that, but, the difference is the whole cable network thing was just getting going back then. ESPN had been around for a bit, but the cable landscape was vastly smaller than it is today.

I can't even count how many channels I have on Verizon FIOS. I get lost in it all, so whatever NBC/new brand are going to do, is going to have to be massive to break through the clutter.

That is why ESPN would be the best for AC 34, at least in the US, because there is instant brand recognition.

#75 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,616 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 10 February 2012 - 02:53 PM


NBC Sports Network is just a re-branded Versus isn't it?


No, its a lot more than that, or at least thats the goal. NBC Sports Network is the latest to challenge ESPN's empire, and it just might take a bite out of ESPN's ass. Fox Sports Net was the first to try, but it went up against ESPN in its hayday and they failed. NBCSN is challenging ESPN at a point where ESPN, from a editorial and talent stand point, is starting to wear on sports fans. From the overdone Chris Berman and what seems like 50+ ex-NFL players and coaches on the payroll, to the Tebow drool fest on the ESPN airwaves, for the first time in a while sports fans are hungry for a legit alternative to ESPN and NBCSN has a real chance to capitalize on that. From what I've seen so far they are making an honest effort. They need to expand their online viewing services more though. Hope that is the plan.

WetHog :ph34r:


From what I could see of their schedule it is mostly a lifestyle channel. The only sports I could see was National Hockey League and coverage of the LA round of the Rugby 7's. The rest was mostly fishing and hunting.

#76 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,616 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 10 February 2012 - 03:04 PM



What you describe about NBC/Comcast sounds a lot like ESPN in the early to mid 80's.


You are of course correct about that, but, the difference is the whole cable network thing was just getting going back then. ESPN had been around for a bit, but the cable landscape was vastly smaller than it is today.

I can't even count how many channels I have on Verizon FIOS. I get lost in it all, so whatever NBC/new brand are going to do, is going to have to be massive to break through the clutter.

That is why ESPN would be the best for AC 34, at least in the US, because there is instant brand recognition.


When the organisers talked to ESPN 18 months ago ESPN were only interested in showing AC34 on ESPN 3. ESPN 1 & 2 were not even an option on a time buy basis. ESPN also wanted total internet exclusivity.

That was 18 month ago and things do change.

#77 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 10 February 2012 - 03:19 PM

given that two of them come from countries with a total population combined about half of that of California.


No problem. You simply educate the viewers that the "Swedes" are mostly Americans but you don't tell them that most of the "American team" are Aussies and Kiwis.

#78 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,154 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 10 February 2012 - 03:25 PM

I was at a presentation by Ian Burns early on when the initial plan was announced.
The gist of it was "Yes, the programs will have higher budgets, but these budgets will be sustainable because the America's Cup World Tour will be valuable and so sponsorships will be more available."

I have heard versions of this line of crap so many times you wouldn't believe it.

Unfortunately the marketing value of the America's Cup World Series was and still is unproven. There is no history of yachting being successfully packaged as sustainably profitable entertainment package. This is a risky proposition even with the America's Cup marque. So prudent marketers are reluctant to invest significant dollars with limited prospects of success. This is how marketing people lose their high paying jobs at big companies, so "No, thanks" is the likely conclusion of any sponsorship discussion.

What we know is that it was going to cost a whole lot. Early adopters are asked to share in the cost of creating the value of the circuit, but there is little incentive to be one of those early adopters. The only motivation is that you are passionate for the America's Cup, and because of the increased costs associated with this cycle, one needs to have two extra extra zeros at the end of one's personal financial statement.
The more prudent course is to sit out this cycle. It will cost less to buy in in 2 years and you will have surrendered nothing.
From an business standpoint, AC34 makes no sense.
On the other hand, just because so much is at risk, it's potentially really exciting, and I wish there was enough money out there to pay more than 3 design teams.
SHC

#79 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 03:47 PM

I was at a presentation by Ian Burns early on when the initial plan was announced.
The gist of it was "Yes, the programs will have higher budgets, but these budgets will be sustainable because the America's Cup World Tour will be valuable and so sponsorships will be more available."

I have heard versions of this line of crap so many times you wouldn't believe it.

Unfortunately the marketing value of the America's Cup World Series was and still is unproven. There is no history of yachting being successfully packaged as sustainably profitable entertainment package. This is a risky proposition even with the America's Cup marque. So prudent marketers are reluctant to invest significant dollars with limited prospects of success. This is how marketing people lose their high paying jobs at big companies, so "No, thanks" is the likely conclusion of any sponsorship discussion.

What we know is that it was going to cost a whole lot. Early adopters are asked to share in the cost of creating the value of the circuit, but there is little incentive to be one of those early adopters. The only motivation is that you are passionate for the America's Cup, and because of the increased costs associated with this cycle, one needs to have two extra extra zeros at the end of one's personal financial statement.
The more prudent course is to sit out this cycle. It will cost less to buy in in 2 years and you will have surrendered nothing.
From an business standpoint, AC34 makes no sense.
On the other hand, just because so much is at risk, it's potentially really exciting, and I wish there was enough money out there to pay more than 3 design teams.
SHC


And a whole lot of people wish that you were funded so as to be able to run another defense team.

#80 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,256 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 10 February 2012 - 03:49 PM

There is no history of yachting being successfully packaged as sustainably profitable entertainment package.


There's plenty of history of ocean racing being so packaged. Vendée Globe, Volvo Ocean Race etc. IMO the "adventure" element is important in providing general viewers something they can understand and relate to. ESS also appears to be sustainably profitable albeit at a much lower price point than even the ACWS.

Other than the crashes, ACWS still seems fairly esoteric for the general viewer no matter how many lines Stan Honey paints on the screen.

#81 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 03:49 PM



What you describe about NBC/Comcast sounds a lot like ESPN in the early to mid 80's.


You are of course correct about that, but, the difference is the whole cable network thing was just getting going back then. ESPN had been around for a bit, but the cable landscape was vastly smaller than it is today.

I can't even count how many channels I have on Verizon FIOS. I get lost in it all, so whatever NBC/new brand are going to do, is going to have to be massive to break through the clutter.

That is why ESPN would be the best for AC 34, at least in the US, because there is instant brand recognition.


When the organisers talked to ESPN 18 months ago ESPN were only interested in showing AC34 on ESPN 3. ESPN 1 & 2 were not even an option on a time buy basis. ESPN also wanted total internet exclusivity.

That was 18 month ago and things do change.


18 months ago the organizers had the wrong people talking to the wrong people about the wrong things.

That might have changed in recent months.

#82 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,616 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 10 February 2012 - 04:04 PM

^^^^

Meeting Date

30 June 2010, Bristol, Conn

Attendees

ESPN
• John Wildhack, EVP Programming Acquisitions & Strategy
• Leah LaPlaca, VP Programming & Acquisitions
• Stacie McCollum Programming & Acquisitions (reports to Leah)
• John Tasker, Senior Director of Digital Media
• Gary Jobson, contract ESPN presenter – arranged meeting

BMW ORACLE Racing
• Russell Coutts
• Tim Jeffery
• Mark Bullingham
• Denis Harvey
• Scott Robinson

#83 SellingSailing

SellingSailing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 79 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 10 February 2012 - 04:08 PM

But yes, it was VS...NBC will have content to share that will drive viewers for the new/re-branded channel so that might help longer-term. Will be interesting to note race schedule (haven't looked in a while) If they are weekdays...good luck with viewership. If they are weekends, good luck against college & pro football. Not sure where this will fit in the schedule...


NBC Sports Network is just a re-branded Versus isn't it?


No, its a lot more than that, or at least thats the goal. NBC Sports Network is the latest to challenge ESPN's empire, and it just might take a bite out of ESPN's ass. Fox Sports Net was the first to try, but it went up against ESPN in its hayday and they failed. NBCSN is challenging ESPN at a point where ESPN, from a editorial and talent stand point, is starting to wear on sports fans. From the overdone Chris Berman and what seems like 50+ ex-NFL players and coaches on the payroll, to the Tebow drool fest on the ESPN airwaves, for the first time in a while sports fans are hungry for a legit alternative to ESPN and NBCSN has a real chance to capitalize on that. From what I've seen so far they are making an honest effort. They need to expand their online viewing services more though. Hope that is the plan.

WetHog :ph34r:



#84 sunseeker

sunseeker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,354 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:11 PM

^^^^

Meeting Date

30 June 2010, Bristol, Conn

Attendees

ESPN
• John Wildhack, EVP Programming Acquisitions & Strategy
• Leah LaPlaca, VP Programming & Acquisitions
• Stacie McCollum Programming & Acquisitions (reports to Leah)
• John Tasker, Senior Director of Digital Media
• Gary Jobson, contract ESPN presenter – arranged meeting

BMW ORACLE Racing
• Russell Coutts
• Tim Jeffery
• Mark Bullingham
• Denis Harvey
• Scott Robinson


But didn't Coutts just say he wasn't directly involved any of the negotiation with ESPN? WTF?

#85 RMK

RMK

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:14 PM

No, he didn't.

#86 RMK

RMK

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:19 PM

'There is a major television broadcast contract in the final stages of negotiation in the US. It has been quite a complicated discussion. I haven’t been directly involved, but I have been getting reports on progress,' he added


He may have met w/ESPN back in 2010 but is not in the current "Broadcast" negotiations. Probably not w/ESPN.

WTF indeed ;)

#87 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:31 PM

I don't think RW had even been hired yet, in June '10. Maybe he's working this one.

Is the interview supposed to be today?

#88 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:43 PM

yeah, in a few hours. I am getting RW and IM during the last work hour of a long week...fun! I hope they have a drink - I do!

#89 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:45 PM

BTW I am finally set up to do interview completely live, but AC Comms didn't necessarily think that my first try should be with IM as my guinea pig!

#90 Albatros

Albatros

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:54 PM


There is no history of yachting being successfully packaged as sustainably profitable entertainment package.


There's plenty of history of ocean racing being so packaged. Vendée Globe, Volvo Ocean Race etc. IMO the "adventure" element is important in providing general viewers something they can understand and relate to.

the key here is in SC's line about "still unproven", all the examples we can come up with had to start somewhere and grow,just remember the first round the world races that evolved into the current VOR ... pure amateurism and in terms of exposure a mere sidewhow, and with current big "AC sort of F1" picture there were some thinking / hoping that the name America Cup on its own would be sufficient to jump a couple of hurdles in one go. They might have pulled it off in a different economical situation.

me thinks SC has been hitting nails bigtime

#91 Rennmaus

Rennmaus

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,757 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 06:59 PM

More on TV, congrats UK (hopefully you won't get locked out of YouTube):

AMERICA'S CUP WORLD SERIES COMPREHENSIVELY LIVE ON SKY SPORTS

#92 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 07:16 PM

More on TV, congrats UK (hopefully you won't get locked out of YouTube):

AMERICA'S CUP WORLD SERIES COMPREHENSIVELY LIVE ON SKY SPORTS


Good for the UK. Too bad Ainslie can't sail, would definitely help the ratings. Guess we have to wait for the US announcement.

#93 Mariner

Mariner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,481 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 27 February 2012 - 07:18 PM

More on TV, congrats UK (hopefully you won't get locked out of YouTube):

AMERICA'S CUP WORLD SERIES COMPREHENSIVELY LIVE ON SKY SPORTS



Good for them. :huh: wonder when we'll hear about the US??

#94 Rennmaus

Rennmaus

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,757 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 08:16 PM

More good news, not necessarily for the AC, but in general, as it shows that there are still companies around that sponsor first class sailing.

<<ALPARI ANNOUNCES TITLE SPONSORSHIP OF WORLD MATCH RACING TOUR

London, UK - 27 February 2012: Alpari, a global association of companies providing online foreign exchange ("Forex", "FX"), precious metals and CFD trading services, today announced a five-year title partnership with the World Match Racing Tour. The agreement sees the world's leading professional sailing series become the Alpari World Match Racing Tour from February 2012.


(more + dates)>>

#95 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 08:29 PM


More on TV, congrats UK (hopefully you won't get locked out of YouTube):

AMERICA'S CUP WORLD SERIES COMPREHENSIVELY LIVE ON SKY SPORTS



Good for them. :huh: wonder when we'll hear about the US??

From the link,

As the AC World Series prepares to make its fourth stop on the circuit in Naples, event organizers will also be announcing partnerships with free-to-air national broadcasters in the American and Italian markets in the coming days.

me: I think we've figured out here that the American broadcast deal in the works, that RW referred to in his interview with Clean, is getting done with NBC. Youtube is good but I hope NBC coverage includes Naples too. Unfortunately for us West coasters, it is pretty early in the morning during afternoons in Naples and Venice.. but then there is DVR.

#96 nav

nav

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,026 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 09:00 PM



More on TV, congrats UK (hopefully you won't get locked out of YouTube):

AMERICA'S CUP WORLD SERIES COMPREHENSIVELY LIVE ON SKY SPORTS



Good for them. :huh: wonder when we'll hear about the US??

From the link,

As the AC World Series prepares to make its fourth stop on the circuit in Naples, event organizers will also be announcing partnerships with free-to-air national broadcasters in the American and Italian markets in the coming days.

me: I think we've figured out here that the American broadcast deal in the works, that RW referred to in his interview with Clean, is getting done with NBC. Youtube is good but I hope NBC coverage includes Naples too. Unfortunately for us West coasters, it is pretty early in the morning during afternoons in Naples and Venice.. but then there is DVR.


Yeah like that'll work - you'll never stay off here long enough for you DVR to deliver any surprises.

#97 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 20 March 2012 - 09:29 PM

Just announced.



America’s Cup Chairman Richard Worth Takes on New Role, Will Head America’s Cup World Series Development

San Francisco, California, 20/03/2012


The chairman of America’s Cup marketing arm is switching roles to become its head of world series development, allowing him to focus efforts exclusively on finding new America's Cup World Series venues and generating increased broadcast revenues from the burgeoning growth of America’s Cup competitive sailing.

The America’s Cup Event Authority announced today that Richard Worth will become the head of America’s Cup World Series Development and spearhead what is becoming one of the most important efforts to grow the sport of sailing and the America’s Cup, bringing the race to new and old fans alike through television and the internet.

“I am excited about the opportunity to focus my efforts and help America’s Cup sailing to reach new audiences and advertisers,” Worth said. “The 34th America’s Cup and the Louis Vuitton Cup are established sporting properties but occur only every three or four years. Our challenge is to develop the World Series into a fantastic asset and this is the key to future growth of the sport internationally.”

In the interim, the CEO’s role will be filled by Stephen Barclay, a Board Member of the America’s Cup Event Authority.

With the television product now largely developed, the focus turns to developing the AC World Series as a sporting property, and as a result, Gary Lovejoy (Director of Media Production) will revert to a consultancy role before leaving the Event Authority in September. Stephen Barclay notes “the TV pictures are a real achievement of this edition of the America’s Cup. Finally, the sport of sailing looks like a sport when watched on TV and Gary has been the person who has led this development. We thank him for his enormous contribution”.

Denis Harvey will take on more responsibility in his role as Production Executive of America’s Cup Television as the Event Authority moves into the final three events of the inaugural America’s Cup World Series season. “This is an exciting time for capturing and distributing this racing to viewers and I am excited to participate in the effort,” said Harvey.

The next generation images that are capturing the world are enabled through high-definition cameras and microphones on each boat, bringing the live action directly to race fans watching online and on television. In addition, viewers are able to clearly see who's leading a race through a helicopter shot that incorporates augmented reality, the LiveLine graphics system created by the same team that developed the yellow first-down line in American football telecasts.

The AC World Series Naples will be broadcast in the U.S. by Comcast SportsNet and in Europe by Sky Sports, Viasat, Canal+ and a main stream Italian broadcaster, amongst others, starting April 11, 2012. The AC World Series will be sailed in the AC45 wing-sailed catamarans.

The NBC Sports Group also will broadcast live, over-the-air races from the Louis Vuitton Cup and the America’s Cup Final between July 4 to September 22, 2013. The America’s Cup events of 2013 will be sailed in the next generation America’ s Cup boat, the AC72, more than double the size of an AC45 with its 131-foot mast.



#98 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,774 posts

Posted 20 March 2012 - 10:29 PM

I'm guessing he's 'worth less' now without the CEO role but he is still playing a big role. I'm glad, do like his cerebral intellect and he does seem to be quite smitten by the AC 'product' being produced.

Never struck me as the detail-oriented bean-counter that Barclay likely is..

#99 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 20 March 2012 - 10:37 PM

What it looks like is that two top people - Worth and Lovejoy - got the big ease. Lovejoy just cost too much, and Worth is having to go and prove his...well..worth by going and raising money from venues. I imagine it was either that or take a walk...

Meanwhile, what lots have asked for has finally happened. Murray is running the whole show.

#100 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,800 posts

Posted 21 March 2012 - 12:03 AM

I'm guessing he's 'worth less' now without the CEO role but he is still playing a big role. I'm glad, do like his cerebral intellect and he does seem to be quite smitten by the AC 'product' being produced.

Never struck me as the detail-oriented bean-counter that Barclay likely is..


Pretty difficult to go from being Chairman of an organization to regional sales guy. If they weren't buying what you were selling when you were the #1 guy in the organization, why would a prospect see you as more credible in a reduced role?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users