Jump to content


Dalton Ramps up Work on New Kiwi Challenge

Emirates ETNZ Grant Dalton NZ Govt.

  • Please log in to reply
175 replies to this topic

#1 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 13 October 2013 - 12:03 AM

Signs of life on Halsey Street.  ENTZ has had preliminary meeting with Govt and Grant Dalton is heading overseas to talk to the team's international sponsors.

 

Grant Dalton on Fundraising Drive for Team NZ

 

"There are signs of life in Team New Zealand with boss Grant Dalton heading to Europe and the United States next month on a fundraising drive for the next America's Cup campaign.

 

"Dalton and skipper Dean Barker discussed options with Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce on Friday.

"With the government indicating it is prepared to get behind another tilt at the Auld Mug based on the country's enthusiasm for the just completed campaign in San Francisco that went right to the wire, Dalton is now looking at private funding options for the future. . . . . "



#2 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,810 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 03:14 AM

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice,...

#3 Donjoman

Donjoman

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 360 posts
  • Location:Hong kong

Posted 13 October 2013 - 03:15 AM

Even in losing there must have been a bump in GDP....

Great to see him back into it!

#4 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,219 posts
  • Interests:Getting guys to put their white sticky stuff all over my face.

Posted 13 October 2013 - 04:11 AM

Even in losing there must have been a bump in GDP....

Great to see him back into it!

GDP = Grant Dalton' Pocket

#5 TKR

TKR

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 99 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 04:48 AM

Team NZ need Dalton and Barker OUT! #freshblood



#6 Speed demon

Speed demon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Location:Athens

Posted 13 October 2013 - 06:33 AM


So from that we now see that Barker is not stepping up to be CEO. That must mean Dalton is returning and Barker is the skipper again.

I suspect Dalton is just securing some money to appease that NZ Government.

There is no future in Dalton going back on what he as already said. He has to secure money and move on. But the money is to big to say no.

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

#7 Speed demon

Speed demon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Location:Athens

Posted 13 October 2013 - 06:42 AM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

#8 sclarke

sclarke

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 481 posts
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Americas Cup

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:14 AM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

Yankee Doodle??



#9 vij

vij

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Interests:Born Swedish. Lives in Switzerland

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:20 AM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

Yankee Doodle??

 

 

Sound like it.



#10 jonsailor

jonsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,464 posts
  • Location:Mooloolaba Australia
  • Interests:Sailing, design, hot babes

Posted 13 October 2013 - 08:53 AM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 

yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.

At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.

Not many other teams could put a national team together??



#11 jonsailor

jonsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,464 posts
  • Location:Mooloolaba Australia
  • Interests:Sailing, design, hot babes

Posted 13 October 2013 - 08:53 AM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 

yep...and the tossers come out to play again. yankee poodle MKII.

At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.

Not many other teams could put a national team together??



#12 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,239 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 13 October 2013 - 09:17 AM

Not many other teams could put a national team together??

 

We have:

 

AUS - but it's unclear where all the $$$ is going to come from.

ITA - so long as they can live with the boat choice.

GBR - we hope. Same comment on the boat choice.

SWE - apparently but no comments for several weeks.

USA - rumours from GD of a non-OR syndicate but nothing further heard

 

Not a squeak from the AC34 ACWS wannabes.

 

It's not entirely a ringing endorsement to date. Possibly some hanging fire until details emerge. The trouble is, by then the media interest will have long-since subsided.



#13 tractorbeam

tractorbeam

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:Asia

Posted 13 October 2013 - 01:07 PM

Coutts has a proven record when backed by a single billionaire. Fundraisng with cap in hand I would guess is not his forte.



#14 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,219 posts
  • Interests:Getting guys to put their white sticky stuff all over my face.

Posted 13 October 2013 - 02:39 PM

Coutts has a proven record when backed by a single billionaire. Fundraisng with cap in hand I would guess is not his forte.

the true measure of a great sailor is their ability to panhandle.

#15 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,725 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 13 October 2013 - 02:56 PM

Not many other teams could put a national team together??

 

We have:

 

AUS - but it's unclear where all the $$$ is going to come from.

ITA - so long as they can live with the boat choice.

GBR - we hope. Same comment on the boat choice.

SWE - apparently but no comments for several weeks.

USA - rumours from GD of a non-OR syndicate but nothing further heard

 

Not a squeak from the AC34 ACWS wannabes.

 

It's not entirely a ringing endorsement to date. Possibly some hanging fire until details emerge. The trouble is, by then the media interest will have long-since subsided.

You are not going to hear anything for a long time either. Nobody is going to say very much until there is some movement on format and timing.

 

As for your analysis....

 

SWE are definitely in with a few retainers been offered, IP been put in charge and IP has even been sailing with TT on the RC44.

 

Why would AUS be any different from every other team that hasn't got a B. However, if you thi9nk the Oatleys would challenge and then not take part, you are barking up the wrong tree. My guess is they already knew where the budget is coming from.

 

You need to add one serious French challenger. Frank Cammas certainly seems very keen and if anybody can get it together, he's the one I would bet on. He has his design team sorted and has already been doing development work. Not sure how this will play out with his Olympic campaign, but I wouldn't put it past him to find a way to do both!

 

At this stage, I am betting on 6 challengers next time around but reserve the right to change the number when the format and boats are known.



#16 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 13 October 2013 - 03:11 PM


Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??
not a chance. If it ain't broke, ...

#17 Enzedel 92

Enzedel 92

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,776 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 08:43 PM

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice,...

 

 

What about 3 times?



#18 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 13 October 2013 - 11:23 PM

 

Not many other teams could put a national team together??

 

We have:

 

AUS - but it's unclear where all the $$$ is going to come from.

ITA - so long as they can live with the boat choice.

GBR - we hope. Same comment on the boat choice.

SWE - apparently but no comments for several weeks.

USA - rumours from GD of a non-OR syndicate but nothing further heard

 

Not a squeak from the AC34 ACWS wannabes.

 

It's not entirely a ringing endorsement to date. Possibly some hanging fire until details emerge. The trouble is, by then the media interest will have long-since subsided.

You are not going to hear anything for a long time either. Nobody is going to say very much until there is some movement on format and timing.

 

As for your analysis....

 

SWE are definitely in with a few retainers been offered, IP been put in charge and IP has even been sailing with TT on the RC44.

 

Why would AUS be any different from every other team that hasn't got a B. However, if you thi9nk the Oatleys would challenge and then not take part, you are barking up the wrong tree. My guess is they already knew where the budget is coming from.

 

You need to add one serious French challenger. Frank Cammas certainly seems very keen and if anybody can get it together, he's the one I would bet on. He has his design team sorted and has already been doing development work. Not sure how this will play out with his Olympic campaign, but I wouldn't put it past him to find a way to do both!

 

At this stage, I am betting on 6 challengers next time around but reserve the right to change the number when the format and boats are known.

 

+1  That's a good take on it.

 

For my money, add a viable New Zealand challenge to that mix. 

 

Dalton and Barker are doing exactly what they should do at this stage -- protecting the NZ team's intellectual and personnel capital  while roping in backing from existing sponsors and supporters. They've got a compelling and well-documented marketing story to pitch to potential new sources of income. 

 

Which is not to say that Dalts or Deano will be holding down the same jobs three or four years from now.  I expect there will be a rigorous analysis of successes and failures, most of which rightfully will only be disseminated to stakeholders.  Dalts deserves a chairman's role for next time around, with preferably an outsider as CEO.  Moose Sanderson would be my first choice. Deano deserves another chance but skipper, helm and tactician slots should be open to competition.  



#19 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,621 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:24 AM

 

Not many other teams could put a national team together??

 

We have:

 

AUS - but it's unclear where all the $$$ is going to come from.

ITA - so long as they can live with the boat choice.

GBR - we hope. Same comment on the boat choice.

SWE - apparently but no comments for several weeks.

USA - rumours from GD of a non-OR syndicate but nothing further heard

 

Not a squeak from the AC34 ACWS wannabes.

 

It's not entirely a ringing endorsement to date. Possibly some hanging fire until details emerge. The trouble is, by then the media interest will have long-since subsided.

You are not going to hear anything for a long time either. Nobody is going to say very much until there is some movement on format and timing.

 

As for your analysis....

 

SWE are definitely in with a few retainers been offered, IP been put in charge and IP has even been sailing with TT on the RC44.

 

Why would AUS be any different from every other team that hasn't got a B. However, if you thi9nk the Oatleys would challenge and then not take part, you are barking up the wrong tree. My guess is they already knew where the budget is coming from.

 

You need to add one serious French challenger. Frank Cammas certainly seems very keen and if anybody can get it together, he's the one I would bet on. He has his design team sorted and has already been doing development work. Not sure how this will play out with his Olympic campaign, but I wouldn't put it past him to find a way to do both!

 

At this stage, I am betting on 6 challengers next time around but reserve the right to change the number when the format and boats are known.

 

Reasonable.  And I would go as far as to say a French challenger making it all the way to the LV is more likely than GBR, and quite possibly two Frog challenges.  I am not sure Cammas is any more likely than the Peyrons, as they have been able to launch even bigger endeavors than Frank has managed before, and they are already in the game, owning their own AC45.  Ideally, we would see both.  Korea may have been close to making it last time . . . I would not put it past them and/or China for AC35.

 

My ideal would be 4 Euro teams, 4 East Asia/Oceana/ME teams, and 2 US teams.  After that . . . If Russia can find the rubles, or Canada can find enough doughnut money, or anyone else can make a go . . . that would be nice, too, but not essential or necessarily even beneficial.



#20 burbanite

burbanite

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 316 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 02:02 AM

Russia has its share of billionaires, surely these nouveau riche types are running out of places to display their ostentatious-ness? The AC would be a perfect fit.



#21 tls

tls

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 04:38 AM

My ideal would be 4 Euro teams, 4 East Asia/Oceana/ME teams, and 2 US teams.  After that . . . If Russia can find the rubles, or Canada can find enough doughnut money, or anyone else can make a go . . . that would be nice, too, but not essential or necessarily even beneficial.

 

Frankly, I would be very happy with two challenging teams that are both really good and evenly matched.  Having 8 teams where 6 of them don't have the boat sorted out seems worse than only having two teams to start with.  



#22 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,725 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 14 October 2013 - 05:21 AM

Sorry to the NZers. I didn't include them in my list because this thread was about them. hope they are there next time and can get some money together quickly in order to be able to retain key people  before the vultures swoop. I wonder how many offers Glenn has had already.



#23 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,410 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:21 PM

Coutts has a proven record when backed by a single billionaire. Fundraisng with cap in hand I would guess is not his forte.


What Billionaire was backing RC in ,95 and ,00?

WetHog

#24 tractorbeam

tractorbeam

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:Asia

Posted 14 October 2013 - 02:35 PM

RC was the skipper in '95 & '00. Not the team principal.  Peter Blake was the team principal.



#25 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,410 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 14 October 2013 - 03:50 PM

RC was the skipper in '95 & '00. Not the team principal.  Peter Blake was the team principal.

 

Right so helming an AC boat to a 9-0 record in AC finals, nevermind something like 42-1 record in the '95 LVC, wouldn't have helped him on the fundraising trail?  I disgree.

 

WetHog  :ph34r:



#26 Schnick

Schnick

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,987 posts
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

Posted 14 October 2013 - 04:35 PM

Would have liked to see a Minoprio/Burling team for NZ this time. But you gotta have a CEO..

#27 Brutal

Brutal

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 456 posts
  • Location:Ashburn, VA

Posted 14 October 2013 - 05:15 PM

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice,...

 

 

What about 3 times?

That's when some serious ass gets beat...



#28 billy backstay

billy backstay

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,246 posts
  • Location:Etchells fleet 24..Long River meets the Sound....
  • Interests:boats, cars, girls....

Posted 14 October 2013 - 05:18 PM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 

yep...and the tossers come out to play again. yankee poodle MKII.

At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.

Not many other teams could put a national team together??

 

There's enough talent in many countries to field a decent team, US, GBR, ITA, France, etc.....



#29 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 14 October 2013 - 05:56 PM


Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again. yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??
 
There's enough talent in many countries to field a decent team, US, GBR, ITA, France, etc.....
but no political will to do so

#30 billy backstay

billy backstay

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,246 posts
  • Location:Etchells fleet 24..Long River meets the Sound....
  • Interests:boats, cars, girls....

Posted 14 October 2013 - 06:17 PM

 

 


Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.

He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.

He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.

If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again. yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??
 
There's enough talent in many countries to field a decent team, US, GBR, ITA, France, etc.....
but no political will to do so

 

 

Which is why you need a billionaire to bankroll....



#31 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 09:32 PM

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.

TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.

It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

#32 Desprit

Desprit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Location:Wellington, New Zealand

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:11 AM

 

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.

TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.

It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

You are correct that the vehicle is a company (see http://www.business....ompanies/582931 )  but that I understand is owned by a trust. The trustees seem to be Jim Farmer and Gary Paykel. When asked a few years ago at a club function Tom Schnackenberg IIFC said the beneficiary's were the youth of New Zealand. That is not a verbatim quote but my best recollection.



#33 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:22 AM

 

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.

TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.

It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

If you want to split hairs any more finely, you'll need an electron microscope.

 

Fer Chrissake, assuming the budget was $100 mill, the team was 36 percent underwritten by the gummint. 

 

In terms of sailors, percentage of designers, management, local support, etc. ETNZ was the most national team out there by a long shot.

 

Wonder how national the HIYC team will be. Looking forward to your take on that!



#34 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:30 AM


It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

After three years of nothing but harsh criticism towards every aspect of the event visible to anyone remotely following ET, grumpy could face a few tough questions from sponsors, especially on the amount of funding he had with AC34 given it will likely be in large winged cats again.



#35 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 October 2013 - 01:19 AM


It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

After three years of nothing but harsh criticism towards every aspect of the event visible to anyone remotely following ET, grumpy could face a few tough questions from sponsors, especially on the amount of funding he had with AC34 given it will likely be in large winged cats again.

 

Oh dear!  The needle has stuck in the groove again. 

 

After three years of unrelenting negativity it's time you took up something more creative,  like embroidery or worm culture.  It's clear you are contributing nothing of value to this conversation.



#36 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 15 October 2013 - 01:46 AM

 

 

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.

TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.

It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

If you want to split hairs any more finely, you'll need an electron microscope.

 

Fer Chrissake, assuming the budget was $100 mill, the team was 36 percent underwritten by the gummint. 

 

In terms of sailors, percentage of designers, management, local support, etc. ETNZ was the most national team out there by a long shot.

 

Wonder how national the HIYC team will be. Looking forward to your take on that!

 

I think the Aussie's approach will be very similar to the Kiwis. Most of the team will be Australian, but it'll be a privately funded team, so whilst we'll regard it as representing Australia to some extent, it certainly won't be the Australian national sailing team.

 

A lot of this is probably market forces as well. It's cheaper to hire locals and there's plenty of talent around.



#37 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 October 2013 - 02:09 AM

 

 

 

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.

TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.

It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

If you want to split hairs any more finely, you'll need an electron microscope.

 

Fer Chrissake, assuming the budget was $100 mill, the team was 36 percent underwritten by the gummint. 

 

In terms of sailors, percentage of designers, management, local support, etc. ETNZ was the most national team out there by a long shot.

 

Wonder how national the HIYC team will be. Looking forward to your take on that!

 

 

I think the Aussie's approach will be very similar to the Kiwis. Most of the team will be Australian, but it'll be a privately funded team, so whilst we'll regard it as representing Australia to some extent, it certainly won't be the Australian national sailing team.

 

A lot of this is probably market forces as well. It's cheaper to hire locals and there's plenty of talent around.

 

OK, let's move on --  just agree that neither NZ's last or next team, nor Australia's were/will be national teams in the sense that they represent a national association. But plenty national flavour, that's fer sure.



#38 h20man

h20man

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Location:ocean

Posted 15 October 2013 - 02:39 AM

Even in losing there must have been a bump in GDP....

Great to see him back into it!

I would bet that statistically GDP took a hit.... as people were watching the race and not working..... ;)

 

but what a show it was....



#39 NZL3481

NZL3481

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 691 posts

Posted 15 October 2013 - 07:47 AM


It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

After three years of nothing but harsh criticism towards every aspect of the event visible to anyone remotely following ET, grumpy could face a few tough questions from sponsors, especially on the amount of funding he had with AC34 given it will likely be in large winged cats again.

All of ETNZ's sponsors are very happy with their returns. One thing GD is a wizard at is ensuring that those that put in feel they have got a great value for their money. Private backers included. My understanding is the Swiss & Spanish sponsors are pretty much already over the line.

 

My money is still on GD getting the money in the door, retaining the talent, installing Shoebie as CEO, doing his Volvo and playing the spiritual leader of TNZ.

 

Barker will have some role but the rising star Burling may outshine him at all levels come the next AC.



#40 NZL3481

NZL3481

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 691 posts

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:11 AM

 

 

Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.

TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.

It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.

 

If you want to split hairs any more finely, you'll need an electron microscope.

 

Fer Chrissake, assuming the budget was $100 mill, the team was 36 percent underwritten by the gummint. 

 

In terms of sailors, percentage of designers, management, local support, etc. ETNZ was the most national team out there by a long shot.

 

Wonder how national the HIYC team will be. Looking forward to your take on that!

There are a few Australians that can thank the Oatleys for their contributions to the Australian Sailing Team and the gold medals around their neck. That won't be forgotten amongst those that have one of those medals, but no guarantee of a return to the homeland to play in the next AC.

 

IM's track record of successful AC teams he's been involved in isn't too flash. I hope he's not up to his neck in this one but suspect he may be.



#41 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,101 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 15 October 2013 - 10:43 AM

 
 I expect there will be a rigorous analysis of successes and failures, most of which rightfully will only be disseminated to stakeholders.    


Since you kiwi taxpayers money was involved then stakeholders should include every man, women, sheep and child in the country.
But regardless of who gets to read it, it should only contain 2 words.
'We choked'

#42 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,101 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 15 October 2013 - 10:44 AM


 


 


Barker has to move on and find his real value in the big world and get away from the coat tail of the Dalton's of this world and take real accountability for his actions.
He cannot continue to keep getting burnt and then immediately jump back into the fire without taking time to evaluate his real skill and value.
He is not as smart / talented enough compared to the Coutts, Ainslie, Comnners of this world to jump teams or run teams. He will never be if he stays in TNZ and under people like Dalton.
If Coutts was his CEO then that would be different...

 
yep...and the tossers come out to play again.  yankee poodle MKII.
At least Barker and Grant are NZr's...working and doing thier best for NZ.
Not many other teams could put a national team together??

It's not actually a national team. It's a private company with a nationalistic name. TNZ is different from national teams in other sports which are run by associations comprised of the New Zealand members.
TNZ is a private company that mostly hires New Zealand sailors, but hires many international designers. Whether this is due to market forces or not is an interesting question. TNZ has hired some international sailors like Ashby, Ainslie and Hutchinson in the past, so they do it when it suits them.
It must be difficult for TNZ to sell the AC to sponsors when they've trashed the current event in the media for the last three years. They'd have to explain to sponsors whether or not they like the event. The sponsors would want their products presented in a positive way.
 
If you want to split hairs any more finely, you'll need an electron microscope.
 
Fer Chrissake, assuming the budget was $100 mill, the team was 36 percent underwritten by the gummint. 
 
In terms of sailors, percentage of designers, management, local support, etc. ETNZ was the most national team out there by a long shot.
 
Wonder how national the HIYC team will be. Looking forward to your take on that!
There are a few Australians that can thank the Oatleys for their contributions to the Australian Sailing Team and the gold medals around their neck. That won't be forgotten amongst those that have one of those medals, but no guarantee of a return to the homeland to play in the next AC.
 
IM's track record of successful AC teams he's been involved in isn't too flash. I hope he's not up to his neck in this one but suspect he may be.
IM never lost from 8:1 up. Fuck some of you kiwis are clueless cunts.

#43 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 15 October 2013 - 07:38 PM

NZ also got to 8:1 up, no mean feat. And they did it with panache.

I did expect that Oracle would prevail, but for a long time it was difficult to understand how they would do so.

I think there is some truth to the fact that they lost a quantity of confidence - but whether that was due to simply watching Oracle's transom - or something on the NZ boat itself - I am curious to understand.

#44 TornadoSail2016

TornadoSail2016

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 989 posts
  • Location:New Hampshire

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:07 PM

Team NZ need Dalton and Barker OUT! #freshblood

Not how I see this.  I think Dalton is probably key to this happening.  He might need to bring others in and use himself as the figurehead instead of being out on the water racing, but he is still needed for TNZ to get funding and progress.



#45 TornadoSail2016

TornadoSail2016

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 989 posts
  • Location:New Hampshire

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:16 PM

You need to add one serious French challenger. Frank Cammas certainly seems very keen and if anybody can get it together, he's the one I would bet on. He has his design team sorted and has already been doing development work. Not sure how this will play out with his Olympic campaign, but I wouldn't put it past him to find a way to do both!

My understanding is that Frank is trying to put together a French team for the AC. With his performance at the LAC I think his design team already have started to focus their efforts.  While it might not come to be, I think the LAC will see an increase in participation as well funded teams turn to the class as a useful and cost efficient test bed for ideas and concepts for an AC sailed on winged catamarans.  This should be interesting to watch.  My hope is that it does not push out people like Steve Clark, Fred & Magnus, Team Invitcus and so on.



#46 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,968 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:48 PM

Not sure about that TS; it's still pretty expensive to do a C compared to something more production oriented that might be an easier test bed and a less fragile platform.  An SL-33 is around 400k....



#47 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 October 2013 - 11:14 PM

 
 I expect there will be a rigorous analysis of successes and failures, most of which rightfully will only be disseminated to stakeholders.    


Since you kiwi taxpayers money was involved then stakeholders should include every man, women, sheep and child in the country.
But regardless of who gets to read it, it should only contain 2 words.
'We choked'

 

Such misdirected sagacity!

 

Fer sure our boat didn't fold up and sink like a stone in several hundred feet of water, all in the space of a few minutes.



#48 cheshirecat

cheshirecat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 157 posts
  • Location:Twixt sky and sea
  • Interests:VFRPS

Posted 16 October 2013 - 06:40 AM

Well I've done a fair bit of fund raising over the years in the film industry and don't envy anyone raising coin for a team on the wrong side of "the biggest sporting comeback in history". I notice even GD's pitch centers on internet hits around a team which the local press associated with "choker" articles on their front pages. As of two weeks ago sponsorship by E was not under consideration and that's a biggy. I think TNZ missed a big opportunity not challenging for COR asap regardless of whether they were going to or not. In addition their coach/management should had given them a bollocking for the way they handled the last leg and finish when O was on their winning streak.
 
I'm not too familiar with corporate sponsorship but aside from the above there will be issues if DB is front man at press conferences, he showed no charisma or initiative and JS demolished him every time. GA showed sparks and would have been a better choice as front person as did RD. In addition his winning AC record is not great and is becoming an important factor. I should point out that a sponsor type entity saying they are happy is totally unrelated to cash being handed over.
 
Regarding billionaires then they are strange beasties and by and large their reasons for investing in anything are NOT in the realms of our imaginations. Either way their reasons for investing in TNZ are not helped by the above.
 
It would be great and important for the AC to have a TNZ entry but in their present format they are a tough sell.

#49 cheshirecat

cheshirecat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 157 posts
  • Location:Twixt sky and sea
  • Interests:VFRPS

Posted 16 October 2013 - 06:45 AM

Well I've done a fair bit of fund raising over the years in the film industry and don't envy anyone raising coin for a team on the wrong side of "the biggest sporting comeback in history". I notice even GD's pitch centers on internet hits around a team which the local press associated with "choker" articles on their front pages. As of two weeks ago sponsorship by E was not under consideration and that's a biggy. I think TNZ missed a big opportunity not challenging for COR asap regardless of whether they were going to or not. In addition their coach/management should had given them a bollocking for the way they handled the last leg and finish when O was on their winning streak.
 
I'm not too familiar with corporate sponsorship but aside from the above there will be issues if DB is front man at press conferences, he showed no charisma or initiative and JS demolished him every time. GA showed sparks and would have been a better choice as front person as did RD. In addition his winning AC record is not great and is becoming an important factor. I should point out that a sponsor type entity saying they are happy is totally unrelated to cash being handed over.
 
Regarding billionaires then they are strange beasties and by and large their reasons for investing in anything are NOT in the realms of our imaginations. Either way their reasons for investing in TNZ are not helped by the above.
 
It would be great and important for the AC to have a TNZ entry but in their present format they are a tough sell.



#50 sclarke

sclarke

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 481 posts
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Americas Cup

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:23 AM

Well I've done a fair bit of fund raising over the years in the film industry and don't envy anyone raising coin for a team on the wrong side of "the biggest sporting comeback in history". I notice even GD's pitch centers on internet hits around a team which the local press associated with "choker" articles on their front pages. As of two weeks ago sponsorship by E was not under consideration and that's a biggy. I think TNZ missed a big opportunity not challenging for COR asap regardless of whether they were going to or not. In addition their coach/management should had given them a bollocking for the way they handled the last leg and finish when O was on their winning streak.
 
I'm not too familiar with corporate sponsorship but aside from the above there will be issues if DB is front man at press conferences, he showed no charisma or initiative and JS demolished him every time. GA showed sparks and would have been a better choice as front person as did RD. In addition his winning AC record is not great and is becoming an important factor. I should point out that a sponsor type entity saying they are happy is totally unrelated to cash being handed over.
 
Regarding billionaires then they are strange beasties and by and large their reasons for investing in anything are NOT in the realms of our imaginations. Either way their reasons for investing in TNZ are not helped by the above.
 
It would be great and important for the AC to have a TNZ entry but in their present format they are a tough sell.

From what is being circulated in the news in NZ, it sounds like GD is looking at finding a private backer. The Government money is a plan to tide them through in the interim while they wait for details on the next cup. If GD can find a private backer (a billionaire) then sponsors would not be as major a factor as they have been in the past. Its been proven that New Zealand, on the whole, is dedicated to having a team, wether its ETNZ or some other form of a New Zealand challenge. Getting public support is not hard this time. Last time the fact that the government had publicly backed the team meant the public was pretty much forced to back the team wether we liked it or not, this time its by choice so IMO New Zealand doesn't really care where they get the funding, as long as they get it. I mean there's everyday people setting up automatic payments into the Team NZ account to help them get to th start line.

 

I really don't believe corporate sponsors will look at ETNZ as being a "choke" campaign. The majority of the feedback both through the media and from fans was very positive towards ETNZ. The only people who see ETNZ as chokers are OTUSA fans and medis who enjoy "putting the boot in".

 

The majority of NZ'ers see ETNZ as having done a great job representing their team, their fans and their country. Even the NZ media is praising them (for once) Oracle have spent most of their time defending themselves from accusations of using illegal systems while ETNZ had pushed the billlionaire backed team to the brink of defeat and forced them to pull off what has been called "a miracle" when really, the fact that ETNZ had gotten so close to where Oracle were was, was an unbelievable feat given the HUGE head start Oracle had over everyone else.

 

While the American media are pushing the "Greatest comeback in the history of sport" headline, the rest of the world knows how hard it was for any other team to even get close. Oracle had made it virtually impossible for anyone to win the Cup and when one team had got close they were forced to turn to Larry and his bottomless wallet.

 

Oracle Team USA would have you believe it was sheer hard work, belief and determination that turned their campaign around, but the public perception (thanks to the media) has meant people have had to ask themselves how it happened. While only OTUSA team members know the truth, perception in todays world can mean more than reality, which is why IMO ETNZ will have no problems finding either private or corporate backing



#51 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 09:54 AM

TNZ plays up the nationality card, so it seems to me that their image is very different at home versus abroad.

 

At home they have a lot of public support and their campaign is regarded as a near miss.

 

Abroad, they lost the last cup after having a big lead and they don't seem to have a positive view of the current AC format. They give the impression that they want to win the AC and then make wholesale changes to the format for the defense back in Auckland. This is a difficult sell to foreign companies who don't really care whether the cup is in New Zealand or not.

 

There's also a contradiction. If you don't like the competition then why do you want to do this? How do we know that the next cup will be better when we don't know how it will be run? If the current competition is so crappy then how will we get value for money this time? What happens if we don't win and the supposedly great competition back in New Zealand doesn't eventuate?

 

I think their best bet is a local sponsor, so they can stick with the "bring the cup home to New Zealand" theme they've been running for years.

 

I can't see why a foreign sponsor would buy into this. I'm presuming that Emirates has pulled out.



#52 coaster1

coaster1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 131 posts
  • Location:left coast

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:30 AM

Well I've done a fair bit of fund raising over the years in the film industry and don't envy anyone raising coin for a team on the wrong side of "the biggest sporting comeback in history". I notice even GD's pitch centers on internet hits around a team which the local press associated with "choker" articles on their front pages. As of two weeks ago sponsorship by E was not under consideration and that's a biggy. I think TNZ missed a big opportunity not challenging for COR asap regardless of whether they were going to or not. In addition their coach/management should had given them a bollocking for the way they handled the last leg and finish when O was on their winning streak.
 
I'm not too familiar with corporate sponsorship but aside from the above there will be issues if DB is front man at press conferences, he showed no charisma or initiative and JS demolished him every time. GA showed sparks and would have been a better choice as front person as did RD. In addition his winning AC record is not great and is becoming an important factor. I should point out that a sponsor type entity saying they are happy is totally unrelated to cash being handed over.
 
Regarding billionaires then they are strange beasties and by and large their reasons for investing in anything are NOT in the realms of our imaginations. Either way their reasons for investing in TNZ are not helped by the above.
 
It would be great and important for the AC to have a TNZ entry but in their present format they are a tough sell.

From what is being circulated in the news in NZ, it sounds like GD is looking at finding a private backer. The Government money is a plan to tide them through in the interim while they wait for details on the next cup. If GD can find a private backer (a billionaire) then sponsors would not be as major a factor as they have been in the past. Its been proven that New Zealand, on the whole, is dedicated to having a team, wether its ETNZ or some other form of a New Zealand challenge. Getting public support is not hard this time. Last time the fact that the government had publicly backed the team meant the public was pretty much forced to back the team wether we liked it or not, this time its by choice so IMO New Zealand doesn't really care where they get the funding, as long as they get it. I mean there's everyday people setting up automatic payments into the Team NZ account to help them get to th start line.

 

I really don't believe corporate sponsors will look at ETNZ as being a "choke" campaign. The majority of the feedback both through the media and from fans was very positive towards ETNZ. The only people who see ETNZ as chokers are OTUSA fans and medis who enjoy "putting the boot in".

 

The majority of NZ'ers see ETNZ as having done a great job representing their team, their fans and their country. Even the NZ media is praising them (for once) Oracle have spent most of their time defending themselves from accusations of using illegal systems while ETNZ had pushed the billlionaire backed team to the brink of defeat and forced them to pull off what has been called "a miracle" when really, the fact that ETNZ had gotten so close to where Oracle were was, was an unbelievable feat given the HUGE head start Oracle had over everyone else.

 

While the American media are pushing the "Greatest comeback in the history of sport" headline, the rest of the world knows how hard it was for any other team to even get close. Oracle had made it virtually impossible for anyone to win the Cup and when one team had got close they were forced to turn to Larry and his bottomless wallet.

 

Oracle Team USA would have you believe it was sheer hard work, belief and determination that turned their campaign around, but the public perception (thanks to the media) has meant people have had to ask themselves how it happened. While only OTUSA team members know the truth, perception in todays world can mean more than reality, which is why IMO ETNZ will have no problems finding either private or corporate backing

 

You are probably one of the better examples of what a distorted perspective kiwi fans have of this event.

 

I'll give you credit, you work pretty hard at it.



#53 Scarecrow

Scarecrow

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,559 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Aus

Posted 17 October 2013 - 03:14 AM

You need to add one serious French challenger. Frank Cammas certainly seems very keen and if anybody can get it together, he's the one I would bet on. He has his design team sorted and has already been doing development work. Not sure how this will play out with his Olympic campaign, but I wouldn't put it past him to find a way to do both!

My understanding is that Frank is trying to put together a French team for the AC. With his performance at the LAC I think his design team already have started to focus their efforts.  While it might not come to be, I think the LAC will see an increase in participation as well funded teams turn to the class as a useful and cost efficient test bed for ideas and concepts for an AC sailed on winged catamarans.  This should be interesting to watch.  My hope is that it does not push out people like Steve Clark, Fred & Magnus, Team Invitcus and so on.

The rise in C class competitors wont be due to AC teams getting involved, but instead due to AC hopefuls joining the ranks looking for a stepping stone.



#54 RickCat

RickCat

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 03:47 AM

 

Well I've done a fair bit of fund raising over the years in the film industry and don't envy anyone raising coin for a team on the wrong side of "the biggest sporting comeback in history". I notice even GD's pitch centers on internet hits around a team which the local press associated with "choker" articles on their front pages. As of two weeks ago sponsorship by E was not under consideration and that's a biggy. I think TNZ missed a big opportunity not challenging for COR asap regardless of whether they were going to or not. In addition their coach/management should had given them a bollocking for the way they handled the last leg and finish when O was on their winning streak.
 
I'm not too familiar with corporate sponsorship but aside from the above there will be issues if DB is front man at press conferences, he showed no charisma or initiative and JS demolished him every time. GA showed sparks and would have been a better choice as front person as did RD. In addition his winning AC record is not great and is becoming an important factor. I should point out that a sponsor type entity saying they are happy is totally unrelated to cash being handed over.
 
Regarding billionaires then they are strange beasties and by and large their reasons for investing in anything are NOT in the realms of our imaginations. Either way their reasons for investing in TNZ are not helped by the above.
 
It would be great and important for the AC to have a TNZ entry but in their present format they are a tough sell.

From what is being circulated in the news in NZ, it sounds like GD is looking at finding a private backer. The Government money is a plan to tide them through in the interim while they wait for details on the next cup. If GD can find a private backer (a billionaire) then sponsors would not be as major a factor as they have been in the past. Its been proven that New Zealand, on the whole, is dedicated to having a team, wether its ETNZ or some other form of a New Zealand challenge. Getting public support is not hard this time. Last time the fact that the government had publicly backed the team meant the public was pretty much forced to back the team wether we liked it or not, this time its by choice so IMO New Zealand doesn't really care where they get the funding, as long as they get it. I mean there's everyday people setting up automatic payments into the Team NZ account to help them get to th start line.

 

I really don't believe corporate sponsors will look at ETNZ as being a "choke" campaign. The majority of the feedback both through the media and from fans was very positive towards ETNZ. The only people who see ETNZ as chokers are OTUSA fans and medis who enjoy "putting the boot in".

 

The majority of NZ'ers see ETNZ as having done a great job representing their team, their fans and their country. Even the NZ media is praising them (for once) Oracle have spent most of their time defending themselves from accusations of using illegal systems while ETNZ had pushed the billlionaire backed team to the brink of defeat and forced them to pull off what has been called "a miracle" when really, the fact that ETNZ had gotten so close to where Oracle were was, was an unbelievable feat given the HUGE head start Oracle had over everyone else.

 

While the American media are pushing the "Greatest comeback in the history of sport" headline, the rest of the world knows how hard it was for any other team to even get close. Oracle had made it virtually impossible for anyone to win the Cup and when one team had got close they were forced to turn to Larry and his bottomless wallet.

 

Oracle Team USA would have you believe it was sheer hard work, belief and determination that turned their campaign around, but the public perception (thanks to the media) has meant people have had to ask themselves how it happened. While only OTUSA team members know the truth, perception in todays world can mean more than reality, which is why IMO ETNZ will have no problems finding either private or corporate backing

 

You are probably one of the better examples of what a distorted perspective kiwi fans have of this event.

 

I'll give you credit, you work pretty hard at it.

+1



#55 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 17 October 2013 - 06:36 AM

 

 

Well I've done a fair bit of fund raising over the years in the film industry and don't envy anyone raising coin for a team on the wrong side of "the biggest sporting comeback in history". I notice even GD's pitch centers on internet hits around a team which the local press associated with "choker" articles on their front pages. As of two weeks ago sponsorship by E was not under consideration and that's a biggy. I think TNZ missed a big opportunity not challenging for COR asap regardless of whether they were going to or not. In addition their coach/management should had given them a bollocking for the way they handled the last leg and finish when O was on their winning streak.
 
I'm not too familiar with corporate sponsorship but aside from the above there will be issues if DB is front man at press conferences, he showed no charisma or initiative and JS demolished him every time. GA showed sparks and would have been a better choice as front person as did RD. In addition his winning AC record is not great and is becoming an important factor. I should point out that a sponsor type entity saying they are happy is totally unrelated to cash being handed over.
 
Regarding billionaires then they are strange beasties and by and large their reasons for investing in anything are NOT in the realms of our imaginations. Either way their reasons for investing in TNZ are not helped by the above.
 
It would be great and important for the AC to have a TNZ entry but in their present format they are a tough sell.

From what is being circulated in the news in NZ, it sounds like GD is looking at finding a private backer. The Government money is a plan to tide them through in the interim while they wait for details on the next cup. If GD can find a private backer (a billionaire) then sponsors would not be as major a factor as they have been in the past. Its been proven that New Zealand, on the whole, is dedicated to having a team, wether its ETNZ or some other form of a New Zealand challenge. Getting public support is not hard this time. Last time the fact that the government had publicly backed the team meant the public was pretty much forced to back the team wether we liked it or not, this time its by choice so IMO New Zealand doesn't really care where they get the funding, as long as they get it. I mean there's everyday people setting up automatic payments into the Team NZ account to help them get to th start line.

 

I really don't believe corporate sponsors will look at ETNZ as being a "choke" campaign. The majority of the feedback both through the media and from fans was very positive towards ETNZ. The only people who see ETNZ as chokers are OTUSA fans and medis who enjoy "putting the boot in".

 

The majority of NZ'ers see ETNZ as having done a great job representing their team, their fans and their country. Even the NZ media is praising them (for once) Oracle have spent most of their time defending themselves from accusations of using illegal systems while ETNZ had pushed the billlionaire backed team to the brink of defeat and forced them to pull off what has been called "a miracle" when really, the fact that ETNZ had gotten so close to where Oracle were was, was an unbelievable feat given the HUGE head start Oracle had over everyone else.

 

While the American media are pushing the "Greatest comeback in the history of sport" headline, the rest of the world knows how hard it was for any other team to even get close. Oracle had made it virtually impossible for anyone to win the Cup and when one team had got close they were forced to turn to Larry and his bottomless wallet.

 

Oracle Team USA would have you believe it was sheer hard work, belief and determination that turned their campaign around, but the public perception (thanks to the media) has meant people have had to ask themselves how it happened. While only OTUSA team members know the truth, perception in todays world can mean more than reality, which is why IMO ETNZ will have no problems finding either private or corporate backing

 

You are probably one of the better examples of what a distorted perspective kiwi fans have of this event.

 

I'll give you credit, you work pretty hard at it.

 

+1

 

Nothing like a dip-shit one-liner insults to bring absolute clarity and understanding   :P

 

From here in Auckland I'd say sclarke has provided a pretty decent perspective. Any distortion is perhaps due to the  myopia of jaundiced viewers. 



#56 bluesea

bluesea

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Location:HNL
  • Interests:The Ocean

Posted 17 October 2013 - 06:09 PM

The AC is worth a lot more to sponsors when located in the U.S. than down under.  



#57 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,410 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 17 October 2013 - 07:21 PM

While the American media are pushing the "Greatest comeback in the history of sport" headline, the rest of the world knows how hard it was for any other team to even get close. Oracle had made it virtually impossible for anyone to win the Cup and when one team had got close they were forced to turn to Larry and his bottomless wallet.

 

This bit I am having a hard time reading without laughing my ass off.  For basically the entire AC34 cycle ETNZ had been the standard which all other teams, including OR, had to catch up to.  ETNZ had their boat in the water first, were the first to foil, the first to flybe, etc...  Heading into the LVC the consensus theme on this site was that AC34 was ETNZ's to lose.  And that was reinforced during the LVC and up to 8-1 in the Cup final.  To now say that "Oracle had made it virtually impoosible for anyone to win the Cup" is completely absurd.

 

AC34 hasn't been over a month and people want to rewrite history.  Only on ACA.  :lol:

 

WetHog  :ph34r:



#58 Kia Ora

Kia Ora

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Location:Antigua
  • Interests:Currently - racing in the classics.

Posted 17 October 2013 - 07:44 PM

Wethog - I understand where you are coming from.

ETNZ kicked into overdrive and became the team that others used as a standard.

I believe that most people - Kiwis included (interestingly enough .... ) figured that after OR won the cup in the big try, with wing sail and all, that the most obvious move for OR was to use their research and expertise in wing sail design to keep ahead of the field.

Frankly, it stuck out like a dogs goolies. 

Up to that point, it had always been monohulls. Winning in a big multihull with wing sail, hell, it's a no brainer to retain the same format and keep ahead of the fleet. The advantage was huge. Bloody ginormous. (Now that's interesting - spell check didn't try to correct that puppy).

OR was the standard, and it wasn't until some twat posted a video of ETNZ foiling that the cat was out of the bag. That was the big screw up. Allowing it to go pubic. They should have had the NZ Air Force keeping people away. Okay, maybe not. I believe they still run Tiger Moth bi planes .... :)

Still, you get my drift.



#59 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,410 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 17 October 2013 - 08:03 PM

Wethog - I understand where you are coming from.

ETNZ kicked into overdrive and became the team that others used as a standard.

I believe that most people - Kiwis included (interestingly enough .... ) figured that after OR won the cup in the big try, with wing sail and all, that the most obvious move for OR was to use their research and expertise in wing sail design to keep ahead of the field.

Frankly, it stuck out like a dogs goolies. 

Up to that point, it had always been monohulls. Winning in a big multihull with wing sail, hell, it's a no brainer to retain the same format and keep ahead of the fleet. The advantage was huge. Bloody ginormous. (Now that's interesting - spell check didn't try to correct that puppy).

OR was the standard, and it wasn't until some twat posted a video of ETNZ foiling that the cat was out of the bag. That was the big screw up. Allowing it to go pubic. They should have had the NZ Air Force keeping people away. Okay, maybe not. I believe they still run Tiger Moth bi planes .... :)

Still, you get my drift.

 

I get your drift, and I agree.  Prior to the OR1 PP and photo/video proof of ETNZ foiling it was universally assumed that OR had a huge advantage and the rest were desperately trying to catch up, but after the OR1 PP and ETNZ foiling it was a 180 degree shift to ETNZ.  And it stayed that way until 8-1 in the finals.

 

WetHog  :ph34r:



#60 sclarke

sclarke

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 481 posts
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Americas Cup

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:35 PM

Wethog - I understand where you are coming from.

ETNZ kicked into overdrive and became the team that others used as a standard.

I believe that most people - Kiwis included (interestingly enough .... ) figured that after OR won the cup in the big try, with wing sail and all, that the most obvious move for OR was to use their research and expertise in wing sail design to keep ahead of the field.

Frankly, it stuck out like a dogs goolies. 

Up to that point, it had always been monohulls. Winning in a big multihull with wing sail, hell, it's a no brainer to retain the same format and keep ahead of the fleet. The advantage was huge. Bloody ginormous. (Now that's interesting - spell check didn't try to correct that puppy).

OR was the standard, and it wasn't until some twat posted a video of ETNZ foiling that the cat was out of the bag. That was the big screw up. Allowing it to go pubic. They should have had the NZ Air Force keeping people away. Okay, maybe not. I believe they still run Tiger Moth bi planes .... :)

Still, you get my drift.

 

I get your drift, and I agree.  Prior to the OR1 PP and photo/video proof of ETNZ foiling it was universally assumed that OR had a huge advantage and the rest were desperately trying to catch up, but after the OR1 PP and ETNZ foiling it was a 180 degree shift to ETNZ.  And it stayed that way until 8-1 in the finals.

 

WetHog  :ph34r:

The thing is...ETNZ looked as strong as they did because the standard of the Louis Vuitton challenger series was sorely lacking. Niether ETNZ or OTUSA had any idea of their relative performance against each other. It was only made evident in the first few races that the boats were "even at best"

 

In terms of OTUSA being the "underdog" and "playing catch up" that was never the case.

The fact that OTUSA was able to turn their fortunes around with "sheer hard work" showed that the OTUSA design was always even or faster than ETNZ. You can work as hard as you want, and "Believe in yourself" all you want, but if the tool isn't up to the job, it's all for nothing (as proved by ETNZ).

 

The ability to foil first by ETNZ was IMO was a calculated decision between putting it out there early to give the team more time to adjust to a completely new form and discipline of sailing and being careful not let it be seen too early to limit the ability of other teams to "copy" the idea.

 

IMO ETNZ could not have kept it secret for much longer than they did without sacrificing learning time with the boat, remembering ETNZ were until then, a monohull sailing team. Sailing a large multihull was brand new to most of the Kiwi team, let alone learning to fly the AC72. IMO the only way they could have kept it from OTUSA would've been to not have foiled until they got to San Francisco. By then OTUSA would have been foiling anyway, and the Kiwi's would've had a much shorter period to learn the ins and outs of foiling.

 

And as long as there was an Oracle spyboat trailing closely behind in Auckland, they could not keep it a secret from the opposition. OTUSA had always planned to foil, as seen by the adapted AC45's. The kiwi's just showed the Oracle team 1: It was actually possible, and 2: How to foil properly and what was needed to sustain stable flight for long periods of time.

 

With the addition of OTUSA being able to see and make use of the challengers course data during racing, and the challengers not being afforded the same opportunity, this made it even more of an uphill climb for ETNZ than it originally was.

 

At the end of the day, OTUSA had the faster boat, and they won, just as GD and DB had said all along. But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. The pitchpole was a setback, but through the amount of resource OTUSA had at their disposal, they were able to rebuild both boat and wing, while modifying both boat and wing, while building a second boat, modifying that boat, building 2 more wings and maintaining at least four AC45's. Every other challenger struggled to get one boat, one team on the start line while OTUSA were able to get two fully operational fast boats and teams out on the water. This proves how much of a head start and advantage OTUSA had.



#61 tls

tls

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:53 PM

 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 

What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.



#62 sclarke

sclarke

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 481 posts
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Americas Cup

Posted 18 October 2013 - 12:25 AM

 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 

What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.

Ok, i'll admit in the betting houses the odds were pretty stiff for OTUSA to win the Cup. But in terms of the big picture, when you look back at the 2 campaigns as a whole: ETNZ had less resource (Both personnnel and financial) less of a base to work from (in terms of design tools and expertise) and less experience in large wing-sailed multihull sailing, pretty much less of everything (a lot less) so the campaign they ran reflected what they had to work with, and to get as close as they did to beating a near unbeatable opponent was an amazing feat.

 

The only thing ETNZ could do was get a big enough lead and try and hold onto it. Ultimately they weren't able to hold onto it and the faster boat won.

 

This takes nothing away from the OTUSA win, but puts it back into perspective.



#63 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 18 October 2013 - 01:17 AM


 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 
What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.
10:1 in Oz

#64 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 18 October 2013 - 01:44 AM

 

 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 

What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.

Ok, i'll admit in the betting houses the odds were pretty stiff for OTUSA to win the Cup. But in terms of the big picture, when you look back at the 2 campaigns as a whole: ETNZ had less resource (Both personnnel and financial) less of a base to work from (in terms of design tools and expertise) and less experience in large wing-sailed multihull sailing, pretty much less of everything (a lot less) so the campaign they ran reflected what they had to work with, and to get as close as they did to beating a near unbeatable opponent was an amazing feat.

 

The only thing ETNZ could do was get a big enough lead and try and hold onto it. Ultimately they weren't able to hold onto it and the faster boat won.

 

This takes nothing away from the OTUSA win, but puts it back into perspective.

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat). Factor in Oracle's PP, and I would say tht OR went into the summer WAAAAY behind. Hence the long odds.

As for the 'International perception', most of the people I know (and admittedly, this is anecdotal) thought the Kiwis essentially bitched, whined, and complained their way throught the entire Cup cycle - NZ hated the format, they hated the venue, they hated the sailing rules, they hated the safety regs, they hated the fact that LE was rich, and last but not least, they hated - VERY publicly - Ruseell Couts. And now there are the endless accusations of cheating, and 'illegal foil control systems' and so many other dumbass conspiracy theories that I've just stopped paying attention.

None-the-less, they put together a great effort on the water, showing their heels to the other challengers, and coming into the cup at I would estimate 95% of their potential. Sadly for them, Team OR - who were just beginning to 'crack the code' on their much more radical boat - had a lot more untapped potential.

But that's not why OR won. They won because (in order)

1) When ETNZ had a clear speed advantage, they failed to close the deal - don't forget that OR won several races when they were dog slow.
2) When OR changed up their afterguard, ETNZ failed to adapt and began losing a greater percentage of starts and making tactical mistakes.

3) When OR finally began demonstrating a speed advantage, ETNZ just broke as a team, looking more like dead men walking with each race.

You can pretend all you want that your 'plucky fellow countrymen took on Goliath and nearly won'....but the reality is that ETNZ - with USD40,000,000 from your own government on top of all the real sponsorship money - was every bit as much of a 'Goliath' as OR. Bottom line - they just plain lost in the end, when they only needed to win ONE race. You can be sure that - had the shoe been on the other foot - Spithill et all would have pulled that off and won the cup. <light bulb >

I personally don't think ANY of that will endear them to potential non-NZ based sponsors, but hey, what do I know?

 



#65 sailglobal

sailglobal

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 02:06 AM

Obviously not much,,,,,,,,,



#66 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 02:24 AM

 

 

 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 

What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.

Ok, i'll admit in the betting houses the odds were pretty stiff for OTUSA to win the Cup. But in terms of the big picture, when you look back at the 2 campaigns as a whole: ETNZ had less resource (Both personnnel and financial) less of a base to work from (in terms of design tools and expertise) and less experience in large wing-sailed multihull sailing, pretty much less of everything (a lot less) so the campaign they ran reflected what they had to work with, and to get as close as they did to beating a near unbeatable opponent was an amazing feat.

 

The only thing ETNZ could do was get a big enough lead and try and hold onto it. Ultimately they weren't able to hold onto it and the faster boat won.

 

This takes nothing away from the OTUSA win, but puts it back into perspective.

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat). Factor in Oracle's PP, and I would say tht OR went into the summer WAAAAY behind. Hence the long odds.

As for the 'International perception', most of the people I know (and admittedly, this is anecdotal) thought the Kiwis essentially bitched, whined, and complained their way throught the entire Cup cycle - NZ hated the format, they hated the venue, they hated the sailing rules, they hated the safety regs, they hated the fact that LE was rich, and last but not least, they hated - VERY publicly - Ruseell Couts. And now there are the endless accusations of cheating, and 'illegal foil control systems' and so many other dumbass conspiracy theories that I've just stopped paying attention.

None-the-less, they put together a great effort on the water, showing their heels to the other challengers, and coming into the cup at I would estimate 95% of their potential. Sadly for them, Team OR - who were just beginning to 'crack the code' on their much more radical boat - had a lot more untapped potential.

But that's not why OR won. They won because (in order)

1) When ETNZ had a clear speed advantage, they failed to close the deal - don't forget that OR won several races when they were dog slow.
2) When OR changed up their afterguard, ETNZ failed to adapt and began losing a greater percentage of starts and making tactical mistakes.

3) When OR finally began demonstrating a speed advantage, ETNZ just broke as a team, looking more like dead men walking with each race.

You can pretend all you want that your 'plucky fellow countrymen took on Goliath and nearly won'....but the reality is that ETNZ - with USD40,000,000 from your own government on top of all the real sponsorship money - was every bit as much of a 'Goliath' as OR. Bottom line - they just plain lost in the end, when they only needed to win ONE race. You can be sure that - had the shoe been on the other foot - Spithill et all would have pulled that off and won the cup. <light bulb >

I personally don't think ANY of that will endear them to potential non-NZ based sponsors, but hey, what do I know?

 

 

Great post.

 

I'd add that two of the reasons they won are that they had far superior leadership when the chips were down (Spithill and Coutts) and that they believed their boat was faster.

 

LE's comment - something like "what does being down 8 to 1 mean ?". JS response "the motivation to win". That in itself defines a winner. 

 

Another JS classic at the press conference no less when they were down 8 to 1, "Can you imagine what it would mean if we came back to win ?"

 

Full credit to JS for leading the team back from a near impossible comeback.

 

For those that site luck when the race didn't meet the time limit, same thing when ET came within 0.5 degrees of capsizing the boat which could also have cost them the series - I believe that was the turning point of the finals for ET..



#67 Brutal

Brutal

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 456 posts
  • Location:Ashburn, VA

Posted 18 October 2013 - 03:51 AM

DoGzilla (aka USA-17) wasn't designed by Melvin & Morelli...

 

She was designed by VPLP Yacht Design!!!

 

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat). 



#68 tls

tls

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 03:56 AM

 

 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 

What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.

Ok, i'll admit in the betting houses the odds were pretty stiff for OTUSA to win the Cup. But in terms of the big picture, when you look back at the 2 campaigns as a whole: ETNZ had less resource (Both personnnel and financial) less of a base to work from (in terms of design tools and expertise) and less experience in large wing-sailed multihull sailing, pretty much less of everything (a lot less) so the campaign they ran reflected what they had to work with, and to get as close as they did to beating a near unbeatable opponent was an amazing feat.

 

The only thing ETNZ could do was get a big enough lead and try and hold onto it. Ultimately they weren't able to hold onto it and the faster boat won.

 

This takes nothing away from the OTUSA win, but puts it back into perspective.

 

Since you were just about the only person on the planet who knew that Oracle was likely to win, I guess you must have made a ton of money.  Otherwise, this is all just retrospective bias in which you completely reinterpret the past in a way that makes you feel better about the present. 



#69 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 04:05 AM

DoGzilla (aka USA-17) wasn't designed by Melvin & Morelli...

 

She was designed by VPLP Yacht Design!!!

 

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat). 

Correct - and subsequently modified by by BMWO design team, siginficantly.



#70 Kia Ora

Kia Ora

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Location:Antigua
  • Interests:Currently - racing in the classics.

Posted 18 October 2013 - 07:10 AM

sclarke - very good summary.

 

surfsailor - yours: As for the 'International perception', most of the people I know (and admittedly, this is anecdotal) thought the Kiwis essentially bitched, whined, and complained their way throught the entire Cup cycle - NZ hated the format, they hated the venue, they hated the sailing rules, they hated the safety regs, they hated the fact that LE was rich, and last but not least, they hated - VERY publicly - Ruseell Couts. And now there are the endless accusations of cheating, and 'illegal foil control systems' and so many other dumbass conspiracy theories that I've just stopped paying attention.

 

I agree with what you say - about a few on SA. That being said, there are many that realize that OR did a bloody good job and deserved to win. You have encompassed a rather broad generalization based on some posters that tend to repeat themselves I say, tend to repeat themselves. I for one have always admired RC. Great sailor and a first class organizer. LE could not wish for a better CEO. I have no problem that RC moved to the money. He was shafted by the rank and defile in Jafa land. Sure - some bitched and whined during the cycle, but not everyone. SF? one of the best venues that it could be held at. LE being rich? it is a challenge going up against someone that has already spent (so I read somewhere) close to a billion on legal fees and his several challenges. As he has said, he doesn't like to lose. I wish we had one. A billionaire that is ...  ;) 

I also get pissed off with the endless accusations of cheating et. al. Sour grapes. OR won fair and square. You can be sure that if they didn't, ETNZ would have been in the courts. They sorted out their foiling "just in time". FFS, how close is that? An excellent combination of little pieces that all came together at 2300 hrs. That is the beauty of the eye of RC. Also JS. He did a great job. It is incredible how far "confidence" will take a man.

 

Early on GD said that OR was very fast. They had spies on the job as well, so they had a fair idea, just not sure by how much.

OR was the faster boat - end of story. If it had not been, OR would not have won.



#71 PYC

PYC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 75 posts
  • Interests:Moth, A class, F16 & F18HT sailing.

Posted 18 October 2013 - 11:03 AM

Don't forget that while Oracle was designing a flex-boat, (and I prefer not to mention Artemis), ETNZ were doing many studies to invent the best way (design and handling) to foil on a catamaran. 

What they did was so smart that it worked immediately on AC72 and others just had to copy everything. This kind of development has a cost....

 

 

 

DoGzilla (aka USA-17) wasn't designed by Melvin & Morelli...

 

She was designed by VPLP Yacht Design!!!

 

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat). 

Correct - and subsequently modified by by BMWO design team, siginficantly.



#72 sam75

sam75

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 134 posts
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 18 October 2013 - 01:14 PM

But that's not why OR won. They won because (in order)

1) When ETNZ had a clear speed advantage, they failed to close the deal - don't forget that OR won several races when they were dog slow.
2) When OR changed up their afterguard, ETNZ failed to adapt and began losing a greater percentage of starts and making tactical mistakes.

3) When OR finally began demonstrating a speed advantage, ETNZ just broke as a team, looking more like dead men walking with each race.

To my eye, OR won one race with a slower boat (race 4) and ETNZ won two when they were slower (races 10 & 11). OR upwind speed advantaged first emerged in race 8 (when ETNZ nearly capsized). Prior to the capsize, OR was steadily eating away at ETNZ's lead, before passing and extending while ETNZ regained composure. After that race, whenever OR was in front at mark 2 they extended upwind and ETNZ just hung on (in races 10 & 11) or got passed upwind.



#73 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,410 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 18 October 2013 - 01:32 PM

 

DoGzilla (aka USA-17) wasn't designed by Melvin & Morelli...

 

She was designed by VPLP Yacht Design!!!

 

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat).

Correct - and subsequently modified by by BMWO design team, siginficantly.

 

Indeed:

 

352n95g.jpg

BEGINNING

 

fly6hd.jpg

MIDDLE

 

28bd2cl.jpg

END

 

WetHog :ph34r:



#74 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 18 October 2013 - 07:59 PM

DoGzilla (aka USA-17) wasn't designed by Melvin & Morelli...

 

She was designed by VPLP Yacht Design!!!

 

Actually, from what I understand, ETNZ had a larger design team offsetting their smaller sailing team, the budgets were within 10% of each other, and in fact ETNZ had the initial design advantage since THEY were the ones who used Morelli and Melvin (who designed Oracle's AC 33 boat). 

Ooops...my bad. Sorry. I would still posit that ETNZ was absolutely NOT lacking in the design department.



#75 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 18 October 2013 - 08:11 PM

But that's not why OR won. They won because (in order)

1) When ETNZ had a clear speed advantage, they failed to close the deal - don't forget that OR won several races when they were dog slow.
2) When OR changed up their afterguard, ETNZ failed to adapt and began losing a greater percentage of starts and making tactical mistakes.

3) When OR finally began demonstrating a speed advantage, ETNZ just broke as a team, looking more like dead men walking with each race.

To my eye, OR won one race with a slower boat (race 4) and ETNZ won two when they were slower (races 10 & 11). OR upwind speed advantaged first emerged in race 8 (when ETNZ nearly capsized). Prior to the capsize, OR was steadily eating away at ETNZ's lead, before passing and extending while ETNZ regained composure. After that race, whenever OR was in front at mark 2 they extended upwind and ETNZ just hung on (in races 10 & 11) or got passed upwind.

 

To my eye, both race 8 and 9 were tactics - especially OR's gain when they went for the left side of the course in race 8. Yes, OR had reduced their speed deficit, but it looked to me as though ETNZ still had the edge. For sure, race 8 was the psychological turning point, but I think OR's speed advantage wasn't solidified until race 13. But who really knows - for sure it was the best AC I've ever watched!


 



#76 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 18 October 2013 - 08:23 PM

sclarke - very good summary.

 

surfsailor - yours: As for the 'International perception', most of the people I know (and admittedly, this is anecdotal) thought the Kiwis essentially bitched, whined, and complained their way throught the entire Cup cycle - NZ hated the format, they hated the venue, they hated the sailing rules, they hated the safety regs, they hated the fact that LE was rich, and last but not least, they hated - VERY publicly - Ruseell Couts. And now there are the endless accusations of cheating, and 'illegal foil control systems' and so many other dumbass conspiracy theories that I've just stopped paying attention.

 

I agree with what you say - about a few on SA. That being said, there are many that realize that OR did a bloody good job and deserved to win. You have encompassed a rather broad generalization based on some posters that tend to repeat themselves I say, tend to repeat themselves. I for one have always admired RC. Great sailor and a first class organizer. LE could not wish for a better CEO. I have no problem that RC moved to the money. He was shafted by the rank and defile in Jafa land. Sure - some bitched and whined during the cycle, but not everyone. SF? one of the best venues that it could be held at. LE being rich? it is a challenge going up against someone that has already spent (so I read somewhere) close to a billion on legal fees and his several challenges. As he has said, he doesn't like to lose. I wish we had one. A billionaire that is ...  ;) 

I also get pissed off with the endless accusations of cheating et. al. Sour grapes. OR won fair and square. You can be sure that if they didn't, ETNZ would have been in the courts. They sorted out their foiling "just in time". FFS, how close is that? An excellent combination of little pieces that all came together at 2300 hrs. That is the beauty of the eye of RC. Also JS. He did a great job. It is incredible how far "confidence" will take a man.

 

Early on GD said that OR was very fast. They had spies on the job as well, so they had a fair idea, just not sure by how much.

OR was the faster boat - end of story. If it had not been, OR would not have won.


Dalton was personally responsible for a good amount of the negativity, and the NZ sailing press - which I would note wass the go-to source for most of the mainstream media reporting on the AC here in the states - was happy to catapult the BS plus ad their own endless accusations of 'cheating' and 'conflict of interest'. The fact that my 81 year old mom is aware of 'ruddergate' - a crisis manufactured by challengers who were absolutely convinced OR was trying to use Bart Simpson's death to gain an advantage - shows just how effectively the media game was played. I'd say 90% of the NZ Herald articles basically amounted to bad-mouthing if not slander of Team OR, and you know who their source was.

At the same time, it did seem like Barker and the rest of the crew were separate from and above that sort of thing, and they certainly sailed like champions for the first half of the series - I have nothing but respect for their efforts even if they did come up short (by a whisker) in the end. I just take exception to the idea that LE 'bought' the cup etc.

:)



 



#77 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 18 October 2013 - 08:51 PM

^
Heaven knows LE has failed to "buy" the cup in the past. In fact, his efforts are pointed to as evidence that the cup cannot be won by money alone.

It's team OR that won it - sailors, designers, builders - and saying otherwise is simply not sporting.

#78 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,966 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 10:06 PM

 


 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 
What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.
10:1 in Oz

 

I was thinking about those long odds when OR won. I wonder how many of those bookies have had to take out a second mortgage to cover those bets ?



#79 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 19 October 2013 - 02:39 AM

sclarke - very good summary.

 

surfsailor - yours: As for the 'International perception', most of the people I know (and admittedly, this is anecdotal) thought the Kiwis essentially bitched, whined, and complained their way throught the entire Cup cycle - NZ hated the format, they hated the venue, they hated the sailing rules, they hated the safety regs, they hated the fact that LE was rich, and last but not least, they hated - VERY publicly - Ruseell Couts. And now there are the endless accusations of cheating, and 'illegal foil control systems' and so many other dumbass conspiracy theories that I've just stopped paying attention.

 

I agree with what you say - about a few on SA. That being said, there are many that realize that OR did a bloody good job and deserved to win. You have encompassed a rather broad generalization based on some posters that tend to repeat themselves I say, tend to repeat themselves. I for one have always admired RC. Great sailor and a first class organizer. LE could not wish for a better CEO. I have no problem that RC moved to the money. He was shafted by the rank and defile in Jafa land. Sure - some bitched and whined during the cycle, but not everyone. SF? one of the best venues that it could be held at. LE being rich? it is a challenge going up against someone that has already spent (so I read somewhere) close to a billion on legal fees and his several challenges. As he has said, he doesn't like to lose. I wish we had one. A billionaire that is ...  ;) 

I also get pissed off with the endless accusations of cheating et. al. Sour grapes. OR won fair and square. You can be sure that if they didn't, ETNZ would have been in the courts. They sorted out their foiling "just in time". FFS, how close is that? An excellent combination of little pieces that all came together at 2300 hrs. That is the beauty of the eye of RC. Also JS. He did a great job. It is incredible how far "confidence" will take a man.

 

Early on GD said that OR was very fast. They had spies on the job as well, so they had a fair idea, just not sure by how much.

OR was the faster boat - end of story. If it had not been, OR would not have won.

 

Thanks for setting surfsailor, and the record, straight.  Looks as ifsurfsailor got somewhat trapped in his own perceptions,, i.e.:  ETNZ - "with USD40,000,000 from your own government ..."  

 

Ummm, as you know, the actual amount was NZ$36 mil. Using an average exchange rate of .75, that was only US$27,000,000. But I guess when you're straining to prove a point, being two-thirds right is close enough.



#80 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 19 October 2013 - 07:27 AM


 

Thanks for setting surfsailor, and the record, straight.  Looks as ifsurfsailor got somewhat trapped in his own perceptions,, i.e.:  ETNZ - "with USD40,000,000 from your own government ..."  

 

Ummm, as you know, the actual amount was NZ$36 mil. Using an average exchange rate of .75, that was only US$27,000,000. But I guess when you're straining to prove a point, being two-thirds right is close enough.


Actually the exchange rate is 0.85, so it works out to USD30,000,000. That's still a shit ton of dosh courtesy of the Nz taxpayer, and certainly adaquate to prove my point.



#81 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,671 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 19 October 2013 - 02:46 PM

I realize not all posts can be as thoughtful as Tom Speer's, still it's hard for me to understand why somebody should make plainly asinine comments, in a futile attempt to stick to one's - irrelevant, at that - position.

A quick look at the historical NZD/USD exchange rates shows that, over the past three years, the average was indeed in the order of 0.75. Furthermore, the government contributed essentially seed money - so one should consider it as spent earlier, with the rate being about 0.70

#82 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 19 October 2013 - 05:30 PM

I realize not all posts can be as thoughtful as Tom Speer's, still it's hard for me to understand why somebody should make plainly asinine comments, in a futile attempt to stick to one's - irrelevant, at that - position.

A quick look at the historical NZD/USD exchange rates shows that, over the past three years, the average was indeed in the order of 0.75. Furthermore, the government contributed essentially seed money - so one should consider it as spent earlier, with the rate being about 0.70

 

My point was that ETNZ's total budget was in the same ballpark as OR's. Hardly irrelevent in the face of all the claims that ETNZ lost because they were 'outspent'.

 



#83 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,239 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 19 October 2013 - 05:54 PM

^

 

Why do you think any of us have a clue as to OR's budget?



#84 ro!

ro!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,189 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:34 AM

I realize not all posts can be as thoughtful as Tom Speer's, still it's hard for me to understand why somebody should make plainly asinine comments, in a futile attempt to stick to one's - irrelevant, at that - position.

A quick look at the historical NZD/USD exchange rates shows that, over the past three years, the average was indeed in the order of 0.75. Furthermore, the government contributed essentially seed money - so one should consider it as spent earlier, with the rate being about 0.70

 

My point was that ETNZ's total budget was in the same ballpark as OR's. Hardly irrelevent in the face of all the claims that ETNZ lost because they were 'outspent'.

 

Why don't you tell us what the ballpark figures are for both teams?...enquiring minds want to know....

Oh ....Russell quotes don't count.. he doesn't know or care what the budget was for either team...



#85 Pukka

Pukka

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Location:NZ

Posted 20 October 2013 - 03:33 AM

http://www.nzherald....jectid=11143161

 

YES!

We just have to be there.

 

Keep it alive TNZ, good luck & hit Larry up for an appearance fee.



#86 abroad

abroad

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 20 October 2013 - 04:55 AM

http://www.nzherald....jectid=11143161

 

YES!

We just have to be there.

 

Keep it alive TNZ, good luck & hit Larry up for an appearance fee.

 

haha :)



#87 tls

tls

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 05:17 AM

 

 


 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 
What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.
10:1 in Oz

 

I was thinking about those long odds when OR won. I wonder how many of those bookies have had to take out a second mortgage to cover those bets ?

 

None.  Betting odds are generally set in a manner that the house cannot lose no matter who wins the competition. The house can only offer 1 to 10 odds on Oracle if everyone is betting on ETNZ to win. 



#88 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 20 October 2013 - 05:29 AM


 



 But never at any stage was OTUSA ever an underdog. 

 
What do you mean by that statement?  At one point major betting houses were giving 8:1 odds against a win by Oracle.  You don't get much more underdog than that.
10:1 in Oz
 
I was thinking about those long odds when OR won. I wonder how many of those bookies have had to take out a second mortgage to cover those bets ?
i was thinking about those odds at the the time - kind of heady

#89 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,439 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 20 October 2013 - 05:57 AM

I am under the impression that bookies don't lose...  They set odds based on bets taken, so which ever way it goes, they make a percentage...  If they are offering those long odds, it means that they are taking more bets for the other side...  That's why they give odds, so that people will bet on both sides and they can make money taking bets, No?  It's the people who bet on ETNZ who lost money.



#90 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,439 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 20 October 2013 - 06:08 AM

But that is off topic.  I am heartened by the idea that ETNZ will be back.  I wanted OR to win, because I am American, and because I live in the SF Bay Area, and I wanted the cup to perhaps stay here.  But I am also a big fan of Dalts, TNZ, and the whole NZ sailing community.  A legendary history!

 

I do think they need some new blood somewhere on the team.  I think their reaction to Oracle's improvements were too conservative and ultimately too little, too late.  And that was in no small part due to the fact that the average age on the boat was 10 years older than that on the OR boat.  It kind of kills me to say that, since I am older than most of them!  The good think is that they have plenty of young talent available to them!



#91 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,685 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 03:57 PM

Food for trolls... :)

 

 

Oracle regatta brings 'unique' NZ unity

 

Ironically, says Barker, the "amazing" support in New Zealand for a beaten team at least partly came about because of Ellison's and Coutts' much maligned vision of 'a summer of sailing' in the compelling AC72 catamarans. The well-publicised capsizes, the death of Andrew Simpson, the much-criticised danger and on-the-edge nature of the boats (with Dalton doing some of the most vociferous criticising) saw only three challengers turn up and, of them, only ETNZ were able to foot it with Oracle.

Dalton's views were accurate enough-the boats were too expensive and the danger and advantage OTUSA had in handling the big cats was enough to put off.

 

"There's no question that unless the Cup match [between OTUSA and ETNZ] was what it was, the 34th America's Cup probably would have gone down in history as one of the most under delivered events of all time," says Barker.

 

Dalton, in particular, has benefited from the up swelling of public and Government support.

 

http://www.nzherald....jectid=11143157



#92 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 20 October 2013 - 07:28 PM

Why don't you tell us what the ballpark figures are for both teams?...enquiring minds want to know....

 

Oh ....Russell quotes don't count.. he doesn't know or care what the budget was for either team...


You seriously think RC doesn't know the ball park figure for ETNZ, and the exact figure for Oracle Racing?!

< face palm >



#93 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 20 October 2013 - 07:46 PM

Food for trolls... :)

 

 

Oracle regatta brings 'unique' NZ unity

 

Ironically, says Barker, the "amazing" support in New Zealand for a beaten team at least partly came about because of Ellison's and Coutts' much maligned vision of 'a summer of sailing' in the compelling AC72 catamarans. The well-publicised capsizes, the death of Andrew Simpson, the much-criticised danger and on-the-edge nature of the boats (with Dalton doing some of the most vociferous criticising) saw only three challengers turn up and, of them, only ETNZ were able to foot it with Oracle.

Dalton's views were accurate enough-the boats were too expensive and the danger and advantage OTUSA had in handling the big cats was enough to put off.

 

"There's no question that unless the Cup match [between OTUSA and ETNZ] was what it was, the 34th America's Cup probably would have gone down in history as one of the most under delivered events of all time," says Barker.

 

Dalton, in particular, has benefited from the up swelling of public and Government support.

 

http://www.nzherald....jectid=11143157


Even the Nz Herald 'gets it' at this point - from the article:

"...the much-criticised danger and on-the-edge nature of the boats (with Dalton doing some of the most vociferous criticising)..."

LOL



#94 ro!

ro!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,189 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 09:38 PM

Why don't you tell us what the ballpark figures are for both teams?...enquiring minds want to know.... 
Oh ....Russell quotes don't count.. he doesn't know or care what the budget was for either team...


You seriously think RC doesn't know the ball park figure for ETNZ, and the exact figure for Oracle Racing?!
< face palm >

What I do think is that the TNZ "ballpark"" and the OR "exact" figures aren't even close and Russ knows it....but as you know them, why don't you enlighten us....

#95 pjh

pjh

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,741 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 21 October 2013 - 03:21 AM

Govt pledges $5 million dollar bridging funding to next America's Cup



#96 SIR CLEAN

SIR CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 931 posts
  • Location:Paros
  • Interests:Integrity.

Posted 21 October 2013 - 03:36 AM

To summarize...

Dalton had ,millions of dollars, an edge with foiling first, never wanted for anything, moaned a lot, exposed his advantage to early, moaned a lot, thought OR had a auto adjust foiling system, spent the same amount as Larry, spent more on salaries than Larry ( by %) and ....LOST...

Yip keep the loser in charge, keep the other loser Barker, take more Kiwi money...

And LOSE again.

#97 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,652 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 21 October 2013 - 03:38 AM

Govt pledges $5 million dollar bridging funding to next America's Cup

Magic! So from this day onward,any Kiwis that sign up for overseas teams will be called traitors!!



#98 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 21 October 2013 - 03:40 AM

Govt pledges $5 million dollar bridging funding to next America's Cup

 

Sensible move by the Economic Development Minister.  Jobs guaranteed until next May. Should help Dalts' efforts to keep the team intact as he heads overseas in search of sponsorship committments.   



#99 KiwiJoker

KiwiJoker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,748 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 21 October 2013 - 03:46 AM

To summarize...

Dalton had ,millions of dollars, an edge with foiling first, never wanted for anything, moaned a lot, exposed his advantage to early, moaned a lot, thought OR had a auto adjust foiling system, spent the same amount as Larry, spent more on salaries than Larry ( by %) and ....LOST...

Yip keep the loser in charge, keep the other loser Barker, take more Kiwi money...

And LOSE again.

 

 

:lol:

 

Funny!  That's not what I read.



#100 Bill R

Bill R

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 183 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 21 October 2013 - 03:54 AM

But he didn't have everything thing yankee, he didn't have you. If only Dalton had signed you up as a guiding light for the team.

what a change that would have made! 8-0 easily, in fact the boat would have gone at least 23.5% faster and team dynamics would have been at least 36.3% up. Please make sure you are selected for next time. 

 

To summarize...

Dalton had ,millions of dollars, an edge with foiling first, never wanted for anything, moaned a lot, exposed his advantage to early, moaned a lot, thought OR had a auto adjust foiling system, spent the same amount as Larry, spent more on salaries than Larry ( by %) and ....LOST...

Yip keep the loser in charge, keep the other loser Barker, take more Kiwi money...

And LOSE again.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Emirates, ETNZ, Grant Dalton, NZ Govt.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users