Jump to content

porthos

Members
  • Content Count

    909
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

202 F'n Saint

About porthos

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Profile Information

  • Location
    Michigan, USA
  • Interests
    Lex Navem Certamine

Recent Profile Visitors

4,288 profile views
  1. Thanks for finding that. Looking back at your original statement, I misconstrued what you said. That's my fault and I apologize. While there are no provisions in the existing hosting agreement or the AC36 protocol regarding AC37, TNZ certainly seems to have been inviting bids from non-NZ cities for quite a while. I do wonder how many cities put a bid in not knowing that NZ would even be the defender and have the ability to select them. I have no doubt (and have said so) that TNZ has been talking with other cities at least informally while also negotiating with the NZ government. Say what
  2. Right. The base leases were separate from the Host Venue Agreement. Section 10 of the Host Venue Agreement references the base leases and indicates teams can stay there post-AC36 if ACE agrees under those leases. Obviously, those provisions have nothing to do with the host agreement for AC37, or as dg suggested, that there were already agreements in place requiring cities to submit AC37 bids by February.
  3. Looks like TNZ circulated a draft tender agreement for AC37 in February, 2021. Perhaps that is what you are remembering. Obviously, the agreement was only a draft unless and until the Kiwis successfully defended. I've no idea if that draft ever became final, but don't doubt that the Kiwis have been talking to other potential hosts while they were fulfilling their contractually-obligated negotiation period with NZ. https://www.sail-world.com/news/235112/Kiwis-issue-tender-for-Americas-Cup-Venue-bid
  4. There is nothing in the AC36 Protocol about AC37. Nor is there anything about AC37 in the Host Venue Agreement for AC36. Which makes sense because neither of those documents had anything to do with AC37. Conversely, claiming that cities that wished to host AC37 had to get bids in by February 2021 makes no sense because AC36 hadn't finished yet. If I have missed the provisions, I'm sure you'll correct me with a proper cite.
  5. Now I'm really confused. They need money but don't need money. It's like Schrodinger's Team.
  6. So TNZ could fund a defense for AC37 itself in Auckland, which means that if RNZYS/TNZ decide to take AC37 somewhere else, it was because they chose to do that over holding the defense at home. That's even worse.
  7. Of course there are people in NZ who want AC37 to be held in NZ. There appears be differing opinions even within RNZYS itself. And while I suspect RNZYS ceded a lot of decision-making authority to TNZ, legally RNZYS can put its foot down and tell TNZ AC37 will be held in NZ. That might be in breach of the contract between RNZYS and TNZ, but TNZ cannot force RNZYS to make a different decision. The Deed gives that decision to RNZYS. What TNZ can do is tell RNZYS to find a new team. That would be an interesting game of chicken. But, yeah, all kinds of people have a variety of opinions on th
  8. Dunno. That is certainly what the rumor mill produced right after AC36. And TNZ and RNZYS don't seem entirely aligned, so perhaps TNZ suggested it. But all of that is rumor and rumors are of very limited value. Fun to discuss but largely worthless. Might as well just wait to see what happens. But if TNZ is in financial distress, holding AC37 offshore in exchange for an infusion of cash makes plenty sense.
  9. Why is that hard to fathom? I don't see how they need to reach an agreement now. TNZ (with RNZYS's blessing, if they get it) hold AC37 offshore and get a boatload (pun intended) of money for doing so, making the team financially able to hold AC38 in Auckland. After AC37, TNZ (with RNZYS's blessing) goes to Auckland and negotiates terms that are better for Auckland then than they would be now. If Auckland declines -- and I doubt it would, particularly if TNZ loses the cup in AC37 and has to participate in the challenger series -- I'm sure there are other places they can hold it in NZ. And if t
  10. Based on vigorous research consisting of reading this forum and the comments section on Facebook, which nobody should ever do, plenty of Kiwis appear to have no problem with TNZ taking AC37 offshore if AC38 will be in Auckland. In other words, plenty of Kiwis will welcome TNZ back. So maybe it makes some sense.
  11. The prevailing theory is that someone is going to pay them a handsome sum for holding AC37 offshore.
  12. That is a lot of smoke and innuendo. The NYYC has two levers: (1) their participation; and (2) legal action. I'm not sure how strong lever #1 is given that the NYYC has been more absent than present the last several cycles. Moreover, they may not be invited to participate in AC37 anyway. Lever #2 is also limited and can be easily remedied by a single change by the defender. By all means, feel free to correct me if I am missing some other lever the NYYC has.
  13. You can say that about any organization that is comprised of more than one individual. The meeting among those entitled to make decisions on behalf of RNZYS may be rather interesting; what is not in question is that the decision is RNZYS's to make.
  14. They are that cut and dry with respect to the Deed. Non-clubs like ETNZ (or AM or LRPP) have no standing regarding the Deed. I'm sure there is a thick contract between RNZYS and ETNZ, and there may well be some litigation between those parties over that contract. But as far as the cup goes, RNZYS gets the final say (along with RYS, if applicable), over where the defense occurs.
  15. This shouldn't be that hard. Nobody owns the cup, and the cup is not property belonging to anybody. The cup belongs to a New York charitable trust, and the defending club is the trustee of that trust. Here, that is RNZYS. ETNZ, which is a syndicate or team (i.e., hired labor), has no standing under the Deed. If RNZYS doesn't want the defense occurring somewhere else, RNZYS simply needs to say so. Now, RNZYS may need to find someone else to defend the cup as ETNZ may walk away, but nobody needs to go to court to determine who, between RNZYS and ETNZ, has the final authority to make
×
×
  • Create New...