Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 15.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

And we have liftoff!!

I for one was happy to finally see an American team that didn’t just reek of assholes. Terry was a great bloke to have in front of the cameras and the intimate videos behind the scenes I found quite f

Posted Images

Friends, Romans, countrymen, 

instead of hijacking this "Team NYYC" thread, let's discuss the actual "Evolutionary Draft Protocol of the NYYC " in a new clean thread.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The RNZYS has responded

https://www.sail-world.com/news/237432/Americas-Cup-Defender-rebuffs-NYYC-overtures

Basically they say:

A challenge has already been accepted from RYS.

Some of the suggestions  are topics we are already considering. But it is up to Defender ad Challenger to decide.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sailweb

Editor Note: The Challenger of Record for AC37 — the Royal Yacht Squadron Ltd (GBR) — have not invited other challengers to file for AC37. It is therefore not clear what status, if any, this document has.

The Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and Emirates Team New Zealand (current Defender of the America’s Cup) issued a statement in response that . . . ‘welcomed the New York Yacht Club’s interest in the next America’s Cup, but questions their motives for such a presumptuous statement when entries do not open for some time’.

Joint statement from Royal Yacht Squadron Ltd and INEOS TEAM UK – 9 May, 2021

As the Challenger of Record for the 37th America’s Cup, we are working collaboratively with the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and Team New Zealand to write the Protocol that will define the rules moving forward. We are delighted to hear that the New York Yacht Club are interested in continuing participation in the America’s Cup and we will keep them informed as we move forward

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

Bottom line here is that NYYC has chucked a bloody great rock in the pond.

It is pretty clear that the club is not enamoured of the hasty acceptance by RNZYS of the RYS challenge.  And of course all the palaver associated with challenges over recent decades.

The Yanks are set on a major reset. The original and sole challenger for the Auld Mug for many moons has delivered a Draft Protocol aimed at logical governance of all aspects of AC racing and associated activities.

It runs to 156 pages!  

So far, I've only read part of the intro but it appears to endorse and codify measures and approaches that have successfully been adopted in past events while attempting to nail down management and supporting roles that are typically reinvented every time there is a match.

https://nyyc.org/documents/10184/0/Draft+Protocol+37th+America's+Cup/bc4ab8b3-6404-4120-b333-1effa1be6889

"The America’s Cup is at a pivotal point in its 170-year history,” says Christopher J. Culver, Commodore of the New York Yacht Club. “Our proposed Protocol for the 37th America’s Cup is the product of months of work and countless conversations with America’s Cup stakeholders, including current and former challengers and defenders,” he said. “It includes the tools necessary to improve the long-term commercial viability and global reach of the competition, while remaining true to the Deed of Gift and to the spirit of one of international sport’s oldest competitions. Other established teams that have similar views on the future of the competition.”

In other words, none of this should be a surprise to the RNZYS or other key players!

Reading snippets of this vast protocol, they are proposing a complete overhaul of the AC.  The "commission seems to be a propsed controlling body.

1. The NYYC becomes permanently involved. They are automatically on the so-called "commission" even if not participating.

2. The commission comprises the Defender, the NYYC, and any prior winner of the cup who are participating in the current cup or participated in one of the last 3 cycles, the challenger of record.

3. The Challenger of Record is automatically the club defeated in the prior match.

Thus we deduce that if this protocol was in place today, the commission would consist of

RNZYS/TNZ representative

NYYC rep

Golden Gate YC/ Team Oracle Represntative

Luna Rossa Representative

That does not seem like a functional commission to me.

It also means that if you challenge using a club that has previously won the cup (San Diego YC , Geneva YC, Royal Pert YC etc) you immediately have a seat on the commission. If you challenge from another club....you do not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Budget Caps down to $ 75 M per Team according to that Draft Shit. Teams down to 85-120 People, 20 of them have to be Designers.

NYYC Commodore Culver needs to be BLASTED for that crap!

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Conspiracy theory....Grant secretly requested the NYYC issue this Challenge/Protocol. Why? Talks have stalled with the RYS/NZ Govt, and he needed something to nudge this along.

I seriously doubt that! I think NYYC issued this Challenge/Protocol to prevent 1 - 1 between the Kiwis and the Brits for AC37.

However if that was their (NYYC) goal they could have done it in a more elegant way and not provoke the RNZYS and the RYS + their respective Teams TNZ and INEOS!

Link to post
Share on other sites

NYYC lost the Cup back in 1983 and have not regain it since, that is 38 years ago!

Now they want a say in how to run the Cup?

I think it is better to concentrate on how to win the Cup first.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Horn Rock said:

Conspiracy theory....Grant secretly requested the NYYC issue this Challenge/Protocol. Why? Talks have stalled with the RYS/NZ Govt, and he needed something to nudge this along.

If we’re going to go with conspiracy theories, let’s go all in!  NYYC submitted the challenge because TNZ (note the missing E) doesn’t have the funds to defend and plan to relinquish the Cup. NYYC want to be CoR with the Brits as defenders!

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

If we’re going to go with conspiracy theories, let’s go all in!  NYYC submitted the challenge because TNZ (note the missing E) doesn’t have the funds to defend and plan to relinquish the Cup. NYYC want to be CoR with the Brits as defenders!

I thought if defender relinquishes the cup, it goes back to the team that last won it, i.e. GGYC & Larry?

Link to post
Share on other sites

NYYC wants a spending cap because they blew away $150M for a last place finish.   Assuming $20M was for tangible items you can still conclude that Hutchinson overpaid A LOT of people.  Ignorance is not bliss in the AC.

While the NYYC may want another crack at the AC, does DeVos, Penske and Fauth really want to given Hutchinson more money.  Maybe Comm. Culver is writing a big check. 

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

NYYC wants a spending cap because they blew away $150M for a last place finish.   Assuming $20M was for tangible items you can still conclude that Hutchinson overpaid A LOT of people.  Ignorance is not bliss in the AC.

While the NYYC may want another crack at the AC, does DeVos, Penske and Fauth really want to given Hutchinson more money.  Maybe Comm. Culver is writing a big check. 

* Tied for last, remember after $150M they were tied on points with stars + stripes........

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cinnr said:

I thought if defender relinquishes the cup, it goes back to the team that last won it, i.e. GGYC & Larry?

and if Larry doesn't want to play it goes to Alinghi? :lol:

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

NYYC wants a spending cap because they blew away $150M for a last place finish.   Assuming $20M was for tangible items you can still conclude that Hutchinson overpaid A LOT of people.  Ignorance is not bliss in the AC.

While the NYYC may want another crack at the AC, does DeVos, Penske and Fauth really want to given Hutchinson more money.  Maybe Comm. Culver is writing a big check. 

There is no second and there is no last. It’s all or nothing

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2021 at 5:58 PM, porthos said:

Submitting a challenge when there is already a challenger makes more sense if it is a precursor to a court action by the second challenger to have the first challenge deemed invalid so they the second challenger ends up first in line. I sincerely hope that is not the case. 

Agreed. From a few weeks ago.. Culver:

"Each of those America's Cup cycles drew 10 or more teams to compete for the Auld Mug and the significant commercial interest necessary to support such a grand event. To waste this confluence of opportunity on a two-team event, to potentially once again plunge the competition into the New York State Courts, is not in the best interests of the America's Cup or the sport of sailing."

Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2021 at 12:58 PM, porthos said:

Submitting a challenge when there is already a challenger makes more sense if it is a precursor to a court action by the second challenger to have the first challenge deemed invalid so they the second challenger ends up first in line. I sincerely hope that is not the case. 

still doesn't mean that they can force their views on the defender. Still has to be agreed and clearly there may be some parts that don't fit well with the defenders view on things

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

if that is NYYC assumption either Grants accepts the new challenge or it goes to the NYSC as it did before, but Grant don't have the money for that, unless Ratcliffe helps. But why would he help the defender ? Not his interest. Accepting a protocol allowing him to race in UK would be easier and wiser for him. Dalt is broke and no sponsor would be willing to enter with a case in court, so he could not do anything but negociate. Thus the 3 venues in the protocol: Auckland, UK, US. It would a base for discussion, not sure they would even defend in Auckland. It would be a protocol decided by 3 parties and it is Deed compliant if the first two agree to it.

That would be a pretty smart plan.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MrBump said:

still doesn't mean that they can force their views on the defender. Still has to be agreed and clearly there may be some parts that don't fit well with the defenders view on things

One of the features of the AC and Deed is that a valid challenger can sort of force their views on a defender. That's basically what happened in 1988 and 2010. 

In any event, if RYS Ltd. is a valid challenger, RNZYS can tell NYYC to use its draft protocol as shit wipe. The deed is very clear that a defender cannot consider a second challenge if a valid one already exists. Surely NYYC's crack team of attorneys knows that. So why in the world would NYYC release a document that is DOA at the start?

One way -- and perhaps the only way -- that releasing what appears to be a pointless document actually makes some sense is if the NYYC is planning on doing something else that suddenly makes the draft protocol relevant, such as challenging the validity of RYS Ltd. 

N.B. I've actually read the incorporating documents of RYS Ltd., and I fully expect the NYSC to find RYS Ltd. to be a Deed-complaint challenger. Article 4 of the RYS Ltd's Articles of Association are particularly compelling. In other words, if NYYC is planning something like this, they will lose and look worse than they already do.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

I think the exact opposite. I've read the association documents for RYS Ltd. It's incorporated and formed for the purposes of being a yacht club. It's got an annual regatta. That's it. That's all the Deed requires.  And there is nothing to the name change. That happens all the time.  The entity itself has been around since 2014.  I fully expect the NYSC to reject any challenge to RYS Ltd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Stingray~ said:

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

Hamish Ross doesn't have the greatest track record when it comes to identifying deed compliant challengers :lol:

 

It is both hard to believe and utterly plausible that the blue blazer brigade would fall for this nonsense.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, idontwan2know said:

 

Hamish Ross doesn't have the greatest track record when it comes to identifying deed compliant challengers :lol:

 

It is both hard to believe and utterly plausible that the blue blazer brigade would fall for this nonsense.

:D True..

But, while it could be just coincidence, HR suggested some fairly specific things in that interview with TE that we do see in the Draft Protocol NYYC has suggested, including a multi-layered approach to differing teams' the nationality rules requirements. There's a reasonable chance that some of his ideas are in that proposal, he could have had a hand in it.. And again, while I have not done the research Porthos apparently has done, HR did definitely refer to RYS Ltd as a commercial entity, at least twice, as opposed to it being an actual YC. Whether that is his own legal opinion or is what he has been convinced of from elsewhere, I have no idea.

  

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

:D True..

But, while it could be just coincidence, HR suggested some fairly specific things in that interview with TE that we do see in the Draft Protocol NYYC has suggested, including a multi-layered approach to differing teams' the nationality rules requirements. There's a reasonable chance that some of his ideas are in that proposal, he could have had a hand in it.. And again, while I have not done the research Porthos apparently has done, HR did definitely refer to RYS Ltd as a commercial entity, at least twice, as opposed to it being an actual YC. Whther that is his own legal opinion or is what he has been convinced of from elsewhere, I have no idea.

  

RYS Ltd. is incorporated as a non-profit equivalent in the UK and its first express purpose written into its Articles is to operate as a yacht club. HR can think whatever he wants but facts are stubborn things. 

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

RYS Ltd. is incorporated as a non-profit equivalent in the UK and its first express purpose written into its Articles is to operate as a yacht club. HR can think whatever he wants but facts are stubborn things. 

You could well be right.

The exchange I am (mis?)remembering was at around 1:21:45 of this hopefully-working link

https://www.facebook.com/SailingIllustratedBlog/videos/290055859176852/

 

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

You could well be right.

The exchange I am (mis?)remembering was at around 1:21:45 of this hopefully-working link

https://www.facebook.com/SailingIllustratedBlog/videos/290055859176852/

 

Thanks. There’s a fair amount of unnecessary speculation, irrelevant discussion, and legal misunderstanding in that segment. For example, HR speculated about whether RYS Ltd. is a yacht club and whether it holds a regatta. It does hold an annual regatta. @dogwatch already provided a link to it I think in this thread. Moreover, and as I said, the primary purpose listed in the company’s articles is to be a yacht club. So there was really no reason to speculate. 
 

On the irrelevant side, they talked about the recent name change, hinting that the recent name change must be nefarious. They even posted some of the company filings about the name change. I wish they would have gone back further in the filings. They would have seen that they were wrong about the company originally being named “Royal Yacht Squadron Racing Ltd.” The company was originally named “Yacht Squadron Racing Ltd.” and later changed its name to “Royal Yacht Squadron Racing, Ltd.” And as long as they were pulling company filings, why not pull the actual articles and read them? It probably would have cleared up a few things, like that it’s a non-profit and not a commercial enterprise as HR asserted. 
 

In any event, the whole name change is a non-sequitur. The Deed has no requirements about names, so they could change the name to “NYYC_Sux111!!!, Ltd.” and it would still be legal. Plus, companies sometimes change their names. It happens.

Finally, TE’s suggestion that the NYYC has standing in the courts because it is a past trustee is a legal howler. The club would have standing as a potential challenger and nothing else. The cup is very much “what have you done for me lately” and the NYYC has no more standing in the NY courts with respect to the Deed than does the Chicago Yacht Club. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, porthos said:

One of the features of the AC and Deed is that a valid challenger can sort of force their views on a defender. That's basically what happened in 1988 and 2010. 

In any event, if RYS Ltd. is a valid challenger, RNZYS can tell NYYC to use its draft protocol as shit wipe. The deed is very clear that a defender cannot consider a second challenge if a valid one already exists. Surely NYYC's crack team of attorneys knows that. So why in the world would NYYC release a document that is DOA at the start?

One way -- and perhaps the only way -- that releasing what appears to be a pointless document actually makes some sense is if the NYYC is planning on doing something else that suddenly makes the draft protocol relevant, such as challenging the validity of RYS Ltd. 

N.B. I've actually read the incorporating documents of RYS Ltd., and I fully expect the NYSC to find RYS Ltd. to be a Deed-complaint challenger. Article 4 of the RYS Ltd's Articles of Association are particularly compelling. In other words, if NYYC is planning something like this, they will lose and look worse than they already do.

Absolutely

 

LInk here for the Articles

ROYAL YACHT SQUADRON LTD Articles of Association

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, porthos said:

Thanks. There’s a fair amount of unnecessary speculation, irrelevant discussion, and legal misunderstanding in that segment. For example, HR speculated about whether RYS Ltd. is a yacht club and whether it holds a regatta. It does hold an annual regatta.

Thanks to you too. There's not much else fresh AC-wise going on, may as well entertain this 'Challenge' for whatever fun can be made of it.

On the part above, does RYS Ltd hold its own annual regatta, or does RYS Ltd instead help to run the annual regatta of the RYS proper? 

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

There’s a fair amount of unnecessary speculation, irrelevant discussion, and legal misunderstanding in that ...

That is most succinct summary of TE's "content" I have read in a long time. It baffles me that anyone still takes him seriously.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Thanks to you too. There's not much else fresh AC-wise going on, may as well entertain this 'Challenge' for whatever fun can be made of it.

On the part above, does it hold its own annual regatta, or does it instead help to run that of the RYS? 

From what I saw, it appeared to have its own regatta. The regatta was certainly organized and held by RYS, Ltd. Now, the Venn diagrams of members of RYS and members of RYS, Ltd. consist of a single circle, as a member of one is a member of the other, so practically there may be no difference. 
 

But RYS, Ltd. has members and organizes a regatta.

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

From what I saw, it appeared to have its own regatta. The regatta was certainly organized and held by RYS, Ltd. Now, the Venn diagrams of members of RYS and members of RYS, Ltd. consist of a single circle, as a member of one is a member of the other, so practically there may be no difference. 
 

But RYS, Ltd. has members and organizes a regatta.

Do you know RYS Ltd's own annual regatta's name?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You or Hamish Ross may think what you want, it doesn't matter, the NYSC does, and the means to pay lawyers to win, you know that.

Except even the best paid lawyers can’t change facts. Nor can they change court precedent or the manner in which a court analyzes a dispute. Those are all fixed. To give HR some credit, he correctly noted that the NYSC would get out the deed and start ticking boxes to see if RYS Ltd. met the requirements. That’s pretty much it. Is it a yacht club? Is in incorporated or recognized? Does it hold and annual regatta? The court won’t do much else beyond looking for those answers. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Do you know RYS Ltd's own annual regatta's name?

I’m on my phone and the chance of me finding it successfully rounds to zero. Search the forum for “cowes” and you’ll find the info you want. Dogwatch posted it.

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

Except even the best paid lawyers can’t change facts. Nor can they change court precedent or the manner in which a court analyzes a dispute. Those are all fixed. To give HR some credit, he correctly noted that the NYSC would get out the deed and start ticking boxes to see if RYS Ltd. met the requirements. That’s pretty much it. Is it a yacht club? Is in incorporated or recognized? Does it hold and annual regatta? The court won’t do much else beyond looking for those answers. 

And the court would take a lot of time to schedule all that. EB used that to his advantage, to try build a boat in time to meet DZ, there were something like 15 cases heard and he lost 14 of them but did gain time. 

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

And the court would take a lot of time to schedule all that. EB used that to his advantage, to try build a boat in time to meet DZ, there were something like 15 cases heard and he lost 14 of them but did gain time. 

Nothing would change unless the court issued an injunction at outset. 
 

I think I found dog’s info: https://www.rys.org.uk/assets/documents/nor-members-regatta-2019-v10.pdf

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

Except even the best paid lawyers can’t change facts. Nor can they change court precedent or the manner in which a court analyzes a dispute. Those are all fixed. To give HR some credit, he correctly noted that the NYSC would get out the deed and start ticking boxes to see if RYS Ltd. met the requirements. That’s pretty much it. Is it a yacht club? Is in incorporated or recognized? Does it hold and annual regatta? The court won’t do much else beyond looking for those answers. 

You may be right, but if there is some incertainty about meeting the requirements, the question is to know if the defender is willing or even able to go to court. The NYYC may just be playing on that.

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

Nothing would change unless the court issued an injunction at outset. 
 

I think I found dog’s info: https://www.rys.org.uk/assets/documents/nor-members-regatta-2019-v10.pdf

Agreed, looks like a legit own annual regatta, although this part is touch funny..

VENUE 8.1 The venue for the Regatta will be the Solent and the Official Notice Board will be at the Royal Yacht Squadron.

 

 

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

Nothing would change unless the court issued an injunction at outset. 
 

I think I found dog’s info: https://www.rys.org.uk/assets/documents/nor-members-regatta-2019-v10.pdf

"ROYAL YACHT SQUADRON RACING MEMBER’S REGATTA 14 – 16th JUNE 2019 COWES ORGANIZING AUTHORITY: ROYAL YACHT SQUADRON RACING LTD"

Hard for their lawyers to get around that and the Articles of Association. Plus RYS members are also RYS Ltd members.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You may be right, but if there is some incertainty about meeting the requirements, the question is to know if the defender is willing or even able to go to court. The NYYC may just be playing on that.

I suspect if it comes to that, the funds to fight it will appear from some place. The AC actually makes lawyers look cheap.

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

Agreed, looks like a legit own annual regatta, although this part is touch funny..

VENUE 8.1 The venue for the Regatta will be the Solent and the Official Notice Board will be at the Royal Yacht Squadron.

 

 

And that is the kind of compelling thing lawyers for NYYC would have as their bullets. “But, but, it MENTIONED Royal Yacht Squadron”.  I just don’t see the NYSC getting into those weeds. There is pretty clear and obvious evidence that RYS Ltd.  is a yacht club with members and those members have an annual regatta. Q.E.D.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, porthos said:

And that is the kind of compelling thing lawyers for NYYC would have as their bullets. “But, but, it MENTIONED Royal Yacht Squadron”.  I just don’t see the NYSC getting into those weeds. There is pretty clear and obvious evidence that RYS Ltd.  is a yacht club with members and those members have an annual regatta. Q.E.D.

"But, but, why would they not post on the Official Notice Board their own Club's Official Notice Board, if they had a Club?" :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

"But, but, why would they not post on the Official Notice Board their own Club's Official Notice Board, if they had a Club?" :)

 

 

Yep. That’s what NYYC would be left with. The notice board argument. Eddie Izzard would love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, porthos said:

I suspect if it comes to that, the funds to fight it will appear from some place. The AC actually makes lawyers look cheap.

Well, you would have to persuade a sponsor that they have to pay to go to court to prove that the CoR is ligit, and even if they win in court they don't know if they can win on the water. The more we go the more i may think that the NYYC is using it as a ploy to negotiate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tornado-Cat said:

Well, you would have to persuade a sponsor that they have to pay to go to court to prove that the CoR is ligit, and even if they win in court they don't know if they can win on the water. The more we go the more i may think that the NYYC is using it as a ploy to negotiate.

Jim would just check his couch cushions for some loose change. 

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

Jim would just check his couch cushions for some loose change. 

Yes, but why would Jim use his spare change to help the defender ? mainly if the NYYC offers a race in UK in his protocol ? Why would Jim risk to be in court for years if he can challenge or defend in UK,  included in the prot ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Yes, but why would Jim use his spare change to help the defender ? mainly if the NYYC offers a race in UK in his protocol ? Why would Jim risk to be in court for years if he can challenge or defend in UK,  included in the prot ?

Jim's pov re funding Cowes event which seems to be the source of NYYC grief

“The fact is,” he says, “New Zealand are a commercially-funded team. Grant Dalton, their boss, does not have an Ineos behind him. This event, if it happens, would be a platform, which might help them raise funding to keep that team together.”

Ratcliffe says he would not fund the event himself. “Absolutely not,” he says. “I want to be clear about that. Because that would be sort of like buying the Cup into the UK and I don't think that's appropriate.”

He's also quite possibly ahead of the game as well viz

Ratcliffe admits they might get “a bit of flak” from other syndicates. But he points out that no one else would really be ready to contest another Cup so soon anyway. 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sailing/2021/03/24/sir-jim-ratcliffe-continuing-americas-cup-quest-chance-magical/

 

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

 

Ratcliffe admits they might get “a bit of flak” from other syndicates. But he points out that no one else would really be ready to contest another Cup so soon anyway.

Jim was visionary about that, but the cup is not only about winning on the water, he knows it. He is in a strong position anyway, whatever happens, the defender is not.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Jim was visionary about that, but the cup is not only about winning on the water, he knows it. He is in a strong position anyway, whatever happens, the defender is not.

Yep and one would have to be wondering what's happening inside their Portsmouth HQ and Carrington's. Wont be standing still that's for sure.

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

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

I love some of the comments on these forums. The title given to the 'head' of a club is immaterial. COmmodore, CEO, GM - it's all the same - it is the guy (or gal) where the buck stops. I understand there are some clubs so egalitarian where there is not even an individual as a 'commodore' and some clubs even have an Admiral (RYS included) and I myself was the honorary admiral of our club. 

For the avoidance of doubt the DoG requires certain things of a club and as evidenced from the past it doesn't even need to be called a "Club" - RYS & RNZYS for example. It does however have to be recognised by legislature etc etc. The Royal Yacht Squadron Limited which runs a good percentage of the RYS races is indeed recognised by the Royal Yacht Association as a bona fide club - end of discussion.

By the way Team INEOS UK challenged under the burgee of the RYSL for AC35 & AC36

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Lynn F, apparently arguing the case that the Defender should be able to shop the venue for their own financial benefit. The NYYC does not seem to feel it’s any necessity. 
 

https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2021/05/10/americas-cup-a-view-from-the-trenches/

Funny how it was OK for one USA team to defend in other than home waters (GGYC & Bermuda) but another USA Team (NYYC) seems to feel it shouldn't be a necessity.

 

2 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

"But, but, why would they not post on the Official Notice Board their own Club's Official Notice Board, if they had a Club?" :)

 

 

You mean like this?

joint-statement-from-royal-yacht-squadron-ltd-and-ineos-team-uk.pdf (rys.org.uk)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, shanghaisailor said:

Funny how it was OK for one USA team to defend in other than home waters (GGYC & Bermuda) but another USA Team (NYYC) seems to feel it shouldn't be a necessity.

 

You mean like this?

joint-statement-from-royal-yacht-squadron-ltd-and-ineos-team-uk.pdf (rys.org.uk)

It might be of assistance to  some  if one translates that press release from English into English

1048938_4197066504933_767524735_o.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

HR also wanted to make us believe that the RNZYS is not Deed legit. That was the moment he lost it all.

3 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Agreed, looks like a legit own annual regatta, although this part is touch funny..

VENUE 8.1 The venue for the Regatta will be the Solent and the Official Notice Board will be at the Royal Yacht Squadron.

Would the window of the local butcher be better? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

"But, but, why would they not post on the Official Notice Board their own Club's Official Notice Board, if they had a Club?

They are the club, so that is their official notice board. Please do not get distracted by the "ltd" in the name, that is required for any entity "limited by guarantee" in the UK.

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

I love some of the comments on these forums. The title given to the 'head' of a club is immaterial. COmmodore, CEO, GM - it's all the same - it is the guy (or gal) where the buck stops. I understand there are some clubs so egalitarian where there is not even an individual as a 'commodore' and some clubs even have an Admiral (RYS included) and I myself was the honorary admiral of our club. 

For the avoidance of doubt the DoG requires certain things of a club and as evidenced from the past it doesn't even need to be called a "Club" - RYS & RNZYS for example. It does however have to be recognised by legislature etc etc. The Royal Yacht Squadron Limited which runs a good percentage of the RYS races is indeed recognised by the Royal Yacht Association as a bona fide club - end of discussion.

By the way Team INEOS UK challenged under the burgee of the RYSL for AC35 & AC36

if it's ok to race under the burgee, then it's ok to challenge under it

homebanner-5-1.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Yes, but why would Jim use his spare change to help the defender ? mainly if the NYYC offers a race in UK in his protocol ? Why would Jim risk to be in court for years if he can challenge or defend in UK,  included in the prot ?

I may be missing something, but it's pretty much self-interest on Jim's part. If Jim doesn't use his spare change to help prove RYS Ltd. is a legitimate club, then Jim doesn't get to participate in the AC. In other words, if nobody shows up in court to contest a claim by NYYC that RYS Ltd. is not a deed-compliant club, the court will grant NYYC's petition and RYS Ltd. will not be able to participate in the AC.  And if RYS Ltd. cannot participate in the AC, then Jim is out of a club. INEOS can't just show up and race, regardless of who is hosting the AC or which protocol is being used -- INEOS must be affiliated with a club.  I suppose RYS could step in and then be the club of record for INEOS, but why would RYS do that for Jim he couldn't be bothered to defend RYS Ltd. the first time around? Why would any club throw in with INEOS if Jim showed he wasn't willing to defend the legitimacy of the club in court?

And just to be clear, if a challenge came from NYYC regarding the legitimacy of RYS Ltd., RYS Ltd. would have standing to show up and defend itself. This wouldn't have to go through ETNZ.

Plus, I think there is another reason. This is rank speculation on my part so give it the value it is due. But I don't think someone gets to Jim's rank and station by being pushed around by a bully. I don't think he would personally countenance that now, either.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JonRowe said:

 

They are the club, so that is their official notice board. Please do not get distracted by the "ltd" in the name, that is required for any entity "limited by guarantee" in the UK.

Yeah, but I will say it's a bit like Schrodinger's Club -- it's two clubs and one club at the same time. They are legally separate. RYS remains an unincorporated association and RYS Ltd. is very much incorporated. I'm quite certain the members would like a court to get distracted by the "Ltd." should any liability arise.

At the same time, the members of both clubs are identical -- if you are a member of one,  you are a member of another. If you no longer are a member of RYS, you cannot be a member of RYS Ltd. RYS Ltd. holds its regatta using RYS's facilities, and the members sailing in the regatta are simultaneously members of RYS and RYS Ltd.

None of that is going to cause the NYSC any heartburn. But you can't say that they are entirely separate clubs, nor can you say they are entirely the same club. They are essentially the same club for some purposes, but different ones for other purposes. It's a distinction perhaps only a lawyer could love. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, porthos said:

Yeah, but I will say it's a bit like Schrodinger's Club -- it's two clubs and one club at the same time. They are legally separate. RYS remains an unincorporated association and RYS Ltd. is very much incorporated. I'm quite certain the members would like a court to get distracted by the "Ltd." should any liability arise.

At the same time, the members of both clubs are identical -- if you are a member of one,  you are a member of another. If you no longer are a member of RYS, you cannot be a member of RYS Ltd. RYS Ltd. holds its regatta using RYS's facilities, and the members sailing in the regatta are simultaneously members of RYS and RYS Ltd.

None of that is going to cause the NYSC any heartburn. But you can't say that they are entirely separate clubs, nor can you say they are entirely the same club. They are essentially the same club for some purposes, but different ones for other purposes. It's a distinction perhaps only a lawyer could love. 

I believe the RYS is an incorporated association. I may be mistaken but I believe I read that somewhere.

The challenge is from RYS Racing Ltd, which is an incorporated club established to run the racing of RYS. So you are correct that there are two legal entities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

My guess is that there's a real possibility that even under their new name (and... which name did the Ineos team Challenge under?) the now-named RYS Limited is still a commercial entity and not a YC. They have no Commodore and no YC.  

I heard Hamish Ross get pretty deep into all this a few weeks back when he was on TE's Sailing Illustrated show, it was show # 408 I think and that discussion happened starting at around 120 minutes into the show.

 

It’s been RYS ltd for the ac35,36 and now 37.

 

stop being stupid

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

It’s been RYS ltd for the ac35,36 and now 37.

 

stop being stupid

Actually it was "Royal Yacht Squadron Racing, Ltd." for AC 35 and AC36, and then it changed its name to "Royal Yacht Squadron, Ltd." for AC37, which has some people in a tizzy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, porthos said:

But you can't say that they are entirely separate clubs, nor can you say they are entirely the same club.

It is the legal entity that represents the club, it is not distinct, nor is it the club, but it is the bit of paper for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, cbulger said:

Does anyone else think having the Cup bogged down in court by a coup attempt may be the fastest way to promote SailGP as the pinnacle event in the sport?

Ain’t no bogging down on these facts. I have a feeling a few lawyers are overpromising because they need to get some revenues in to replace all that Stop the Steal billing. It’s fascinating how gullible billionaires can be when it comes to their hobbies. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Agreed, looks like a legit own annual regatta, although this part is touch funny..

VENUE 8.1 The venue for the Regatta will be the Solent and the Official Notice Board will be at the Royal Yacht Squadron.

 

 

Not every yacht club has its own physical facilities. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, accnick said:

Not every yacht club has its own physical facilities. 

Yes, it seems hard to make a case for arguing the illegitimacy of RYS Ltd. 

But as Porthos has pointed out, this Challenge being handed in (apparently in-person) at the RNZYS makes a lot more sense if there are some kind of questions being raised about the legitimacy of the first Challenge. 

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

Does anyone else think having the Cup bogged down in court by a coup attempt may be the fastest way to promote SailGP as the pinnacle event in the sport?

Good point, the irony is that both Larry, Ernesto and the NYYC could a common interest in it.

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

 

It is the legal entity that represents the club, it is not distinct, nor is it the club, but it is the bit of paper for it.

The Royal Yacht Squadron is an incorporated organization. I'm not sure of the full name of the organization. It should be easy to find out. That means it is a legal entity in itself. A legal entity is created with paper but it is a real thing which owns assets, employs people and creates contractual obligations.  

The legal entity may be represented by employees and members , but they are representing the entity, not the other way around.  @MR.CLEAN can explain this much better than me.

Anyway RYS(r) ltd was the person who challenged for the cup. RYS(r) Ltd was represented by a natural person....the commodore . 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

The Royal Yacht Squadron is an incorporated organization. I'm not sure of the full name of the organization. It should be easy to find out. That means it is a legal entity in itself. A legal entity is created with paper but it is a real thing which owns assets, employs people and creates contractual obligations.  

The legal entity may be represented by employees and members , but they are representing the entity, not the other way around.  @MR.CLEAN can explain this much better than me.

Anyway RYS(r) ltd was the person who challenged for the cup. RYS(r) Ltd was represented by a natural person....the commodore . 

 

Not that it much matters, but there are no records on the UK Companies House website indicating Royal Yacht Squadron is incorporated. If RYS were incorporated, records of that incorporation should show up there. If it were incorporated, there also would have been no need to incorporate Yacht Squadron Racing, Ltd. back in 2014 (which eventually changed its name to Royal Yacht Squadron Racing, Ltd. and then to Royal Yacht Squadron, Ltd.)  The fact that they incorporated RYS, Ltd. suggests that RYS remains an unincorporated association. Moreover, others here who certainly seem to know, like @dogwatch, have indicated that RYS is unincorporated and that RYS, Ltd. is the incorporated arm of the unincorporated RYS. 

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

Not that it much matters, but there are no records on the UK Companies House website indicating Royal Yacht Squadron is incorporated. If RYS were incorporated, records of that incorporation should show up there. If it were incorporated, there also would have been no need to incorporate Yacht Squadron Racing, Ltd. back in 2014 (which eventually changed its name to Royal Yacht Squadron Racing, Ltd. and then to Royal Yacht Squadron, Ltd.)  The fact that they incorporated RYS, Ltd. suggests that RYS remains an unincorporated association. Moreover, others here who certainly seem to know, like @dogwatch, have indicated that RYS is unincorporated and that RYS, Ltd. is the incorporated arm of the unincorporated RYS. 

I can remember that - probably during AC33 - someone wrote that the "Royal" means that a certain form of incorporation/registration/patent/license according to the DoG must have taken place.
Could that be?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rennmaus said:

I can remember that - probably during AC33 - someone wrote that the "Royal" means that a certain form of incorporation/registration/patent/license according to the DoG must have taken place.
Could that be?

I can't remember what I wore last week.

I know RYS has challenged for the cup many times under the Deed, and as far as I know nobody then questioned whether RYS was a recognized yacht club. So I assume RYS is recognized at least as much as the Deed requires. The name "Royal" may denote that recognition, but I certainly can't confirm that. 

What I do know is that "incorporation" has a specific legal meaning that I assume means the same thing in the UK that it means where I practice, which is to say the government has recognized the entity as a specific corporate form and there are certain filing requirements associated with it. 

So the problem -- and it really isn't a problem at all -- may be one of nomenclature between "recognized" and "incorporated", with the former being informally formal and the latter being formally formal.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rennmaus said:

I can remember that - probably during AC33 - someone wrote that the "Royal" means that a certain form of incorporation/registration/patent/license according to the DoG must have taken place.
Could that be?

Can't be done without royal consent in the case of clubs , but things like the Royal Oak pub are more of an ecumenical matter to quote Father Ted.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chesirecat said:

Can't be done without royal consent in the case of clubs , but things like the Royal Oak pub are more of an ecumenical matter to quote Father Ted.

I remember that the "Royal" is a name of hono(u)r given by the King or Queen and signaling official recognition = patent/license. I may be wrong tho. 

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

I remember that the "Royal" is a name of hono(u)r given by the King or Queen and signaling official recognition = patent/license. I may be wrong tho. 

Pretty much I believe. There's at least one person here well qualified to lay it out so I'll invite them take the stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites