Jump to content

Recommended Posts

'One Hears' it's $100million to ETNZ.

A match in the Solent/IoW.

ETNZ Win, AC38 in Auckland with ITUK as CoR.

ITUK Win, AC38 in the UK, ETNZ as CoR.

 

ETNZ just have to sell it to the public and the gummint. Good luck with that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 18.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's pissing down outside and yes, we are back to Level 3. To all those moaning and bitching about it and calling the PM childish names, get a grip, we are the luckiest people in the world right

After many hours of consideration, a lot of in-depth research on the SA technical threads, extensive computational modelling and a few quick & dirty minutes in Photoshop, I have produced this anal

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, marlowe said:

What's the difference in Grant allowing Ratty to buy the Cup in this way and Coutts, Butterworth, et al taking Ernie's cash and bringing him the Cup?

Better, but still a bit shit.

The real cuntery afoot is around trying to enfore the use of AC75s for AC38 also.

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

Better, but still a bit shit.

The real cuntery afoot is around trying to enfore the use of AC75s for AC38 also.

Yes, in as much as it's against the DoG and seeks to tie the hands of the next defender. But, as has been pointed out, I'm not sure they could make it binding.

However all current teams appear happy with the AC75 and agree there needs to be stability with the class. I know you're not keen on the AC75 but I do think stability of the class is a good thing.

 

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

Yes, in as much as it's against the DoG and seeks to tie the hands of the next defender. But, as has been pointed out, I'm not sure they could make it binding.

However all current teams appear happy with the AC75 and agree there needs to be stability with the class. I know you're not keen on the AC75 but I do think stability of the class is a good thing.

 

So despite disliking the AC75s I agree that class stability is a good thing.

However, I still take massive umbrage at the attempt to do this.

Its not getting away with it that makes you a cunt, its the very attempt to do so.

If you'd like proof of this, go with your wife/husband to some place, single out the hottest chick/dude there and go try to get him to take you home for some sweet loving.

I doubt that you getting rejected will put you in any less of a sticky situation.

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

I know, I know - was there for AC33 <_<

But prior to that, wasn’t there a fuss over the Australia II tank tests in Holland and related intellectual property?

 

Yes. There was lots of fuss from the yanks, but the Aussies prevailed. Which is just as well, because otherwise NZL would never have imagined such a thing as winning the AC remotely possible. Thanks Aussie.

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

So despite disliking the AC75s I agree that class stability is a good thing.

However, I still take massive umbrage at the attempt to do this.

Its not getting away with it that makes you a cunt, its the very attempt to do so.

If you'd like proof of this, go with your wife/husband to some place, single out the hottest chick/dude there and go try to get him to take you home for some sweet loving.

I doubt that you getting rejected will put you in any less of a sticky situation.

Fair enough. Might come down to whether anyone objects enough to want to put up a legal fight.

It would be ironic if EB were the one to take a dodgy protocol to the NYSC and end up in a DoG with ETNZ!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, marlowe said:

Fair enough. Might come down to whether anyone objects enough to want to put up a legal fight.

It would be ironic if EB were the one to take a dodgy protocol to the NYSC and end up in a DoG with ETNZ!

Oh that would be beautiful except that Ernie would behave the same.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, marlowe said:

So hypothetically ETNZ (once again hard up) agrees to an AC match with INEOS around the Is of W and loses.

What's the difference in Grant allowing Ratty to buy the Cup in this way and Coutts, Butterworth, et al taking Ernie's cash and bringing him the Cup?

At least in 2003 Kiwis got to lose it in home waters. Would the compensation of being amongst the challengers in Auckland at the next AC be enough?

Nope.

 

34 minutes ago, trig42 said:

'One Hears' it's $100million to ETNZ.

That's a lot of chump change. Seems like 30 pieces of silver will no longer cut it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Yes. There was lots of fuss from the yanks, but the Aussies prevailed. Which is just as well, because otherwise NZL would never have imagined such a thing as winning the AC remotely possible. Thanks Aussie.

 

I also remembered that Azzurra had to have nominally Italian designers. So definitely in 1983 there was a nationality requirement for designers too

 

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

Plenty of Sheepshaggersconi's in Italy - especially Sardinia!

Really. Ewe've definitely piqued my interest in the place. ;-)

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

 

I also remembered that Azzurra had to have nominally Italian designers. So definitely in 1983 there was a nationality requirement for designers too

 

Interesting. Thanks, Xlot.

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

 

I also remembered that Azzurra had to have nominally Italian designers. So definitely in 1983 there was a nationality requirement for designers too

 

Vallicelli?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Xlot said:
41 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Yes. There was lots of fuss from the yanks, but the Aussies prevailed. Which is just as well, because otherwise NZL would never have imagined such a thing as winning the AC remotely possible. Thanks Aussie.

 

I also remembered that Azzurra had to have nominally Italian designers. So definitely in 1983 there was a nationality requirement for designers too

Indeed.

Seems to be some real "picking" about what "origins" want to be returned to.

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

 

I also remembered that Azzurra had to have nominally Italian designers. So definitely in 1983 there was a nationality requirement for designers too

 

Oh, didn't know that. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, strider470 said:

Vallicelli?

Yup, he was 29 at the time, that tells you all. Made me remember when, a few years earlier - he lived on Via Cassia, near me - I lent him my copy of Abbott’s Theory of Wing Sections for his first boat, a half tonner called Ziggurat ...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the CIC during the 12 Metre era of the NYYC reign, I can tell you that this was total, 100% of design, build including all materials, sails (incl cloth), winches, rigging, the fucking lot. Tank testing in an other country was somehow allowed and when Ben Lexcen came up with the idea of a wing keel, he went to a Dutch test tank to test and develop the idea. 

After the Americans lost, they tried to get an affidavit from the Dutch co-designers stating their involvement, but they refused to collaborate and the NYYC gave up their case. Ironically years later both of the two Dutch lead designers claimed to be the principal designer, but the original idea was definitely from genius Ben Lexcen, aka Bob Miller.

I remember the whole story very well, and have talked to some of the Aussie team about it, just don't remember where I read it all... :)

 

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

Regarding the CIC during the 12 Metre era of the NYYC reign, I can tell you that this was total, 100% of design, build including all materials, sails (incl cloth), winches, rigging, the fucking lot. Tank testing in an other country was somehow allowed and when Ben Lexcen came up with the idea of a wing keel, he went to a Dutch test tank to test and develop the idea. 

After the Americans lost, they tried to get an affidavit from the Dutch co-designers stating their involvement, but they refused to collaborate and the NYYC gave up their case. Ironically years later both of the two Dutch lead designers claimed to be the principal designer, but the original idea was definitely from genius Ben Lexcen, aka Bob Miller.

I remember the whole story very well, and have talked to some of the Aussie team about it, just don't remember where I read it all... :)

 

What is CIC?

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

Oh, didn't know that. Thanks.

Yeah, I remember that.

It was even in one of the old timey movies about Australia II so presumably it was a thing right up until 1983.

IIRC America even tried to ban Oz II because they claimed it was tank tested in the Netherlands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, trig42 said:

'One Hears' it's $100million to ETNZ.

A match in the Solent/IoW.

ETNZ Win, AC38 in Auckland with ITUK as CoR.

ITUK Win, AC38 in the UK, ETNZ as CoR.

 

ETNZ just have to sell it to the public and the gummint. Good luck with that.

Interesting......Not without risk for ETNZ, but if they do this in the current boats TR would have to be favourite.

Lots of hand wringing about the proposal....I don't have too much of a problem with it. All these people whinging don't have the reality of a 150 staff wage bill - which would be considerable. Things change, organisations have to be innovative to survive.

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

if you loose respect to win, then you've won nothing.

It's not about winning, it's about survival........Have you got any good ideas about keeping the team together?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horn Rock said:

It's not about winning, it's about survival........Have you got any good ideas about keeping the team together?

 

Yes, have $20 mil budgeted to get you through to the next cycle. 

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

It's not about winning, it's about survival........Have you got any good ideas about keeping the team together?

 

If the team behaves like this, it is not worth keeping together.

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

Yes, have $20 mil budgeted to get you through to the next cycle. 

They probably need at least 5 mill a month to keep going - and that could be conservative......so the NZ Govt offer of their usual 5 mill, while nice, buys them a month.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horn Rock said:

They probably need at least 5 mill a month to keep going - and that could be conservative......so the NZ Govt offer of their usual 5 mill, while nice, buys them a month.....

Come on mate, that figure has to be a fart.

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

If the team behaves like this, it is not worth keeping together.

I'd rather see the team stay together...If it takes a bit of whoring, then so be it. You as much as anyone should understand that......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Horn Rock said:

What, 5 mill a month as operating costs?

Yes, for between cycles. I figure $1-$1.2 mil a month retaining all 150 staff.

I don't disagree that $5 mil won't go far though, that's why I suggested 20.

A non sailing kiwi friend remarked how great it was the government was pitching in, I replied that $5 mil was like pissing into a 144 gallon drum thinking you could fill it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horn Rock said:

I'd rather see the team stay together...If it takes a bit of whoring, then so be it. You as much as anyone should understand that......

Me? Understand? Are you suggesting I am attractive enough to sell my body? NICE!

I'm not particularly worried about whoring out the team to the Isle of Wight. Besides, I think it is a negotiation ploy with the Government.

I am however seriously fucked off about trying to entrench the AC75s for 2 cup cycles.

If you remember correctly, a LOT of Kiwis were apoplectic at Oracle when they tried something similar in Bermuda. But this is worse because ETNZ are suggesting that they will reject you entry if you don't sign up for it.

So, if ETNZ push ahead with that then I am happy for them to fold.

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

Me? Understand? Are you suggesting I am attractive enough to sell my body? NICE!

I'm not particularly worried about whoring out the team to the Isle of Wight. Besides, I think it is a negotiation ploy with the Government.

I am however seriously fucked off about trying to entrench the AC75s for 2 cup cycles.

If you remember correctly, a LOT of Kiwis were apoplectic at Oracle when they tried something similar in Bermuda. But this is worse because ETNZ are suggesting that they will reject you entry if you don't sign up for it.

So, if ETNZ push ahead with that then I am happy for them to fold.

You have said this so many times. Maybe people might hear you soon.

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

I figure $1-$1.2 mil a month retaining all 150 staff.

That averages out to around 80k a year per person......Too low I'm thinking.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Horn Rock said:

That averages out to around 80k a year per person......Too low I'm thinking.......

Remember that they would retain the sailing crew and the design team.

However, throw on the $3 Million per annum for Dalts, plus the fact that the design and sailing team will be VERY well paid and yeah, too low.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Horn Rock said:

That averages out to around 80k a year per person......Too low I'm thinking.......

Between cycles, put a number on retainers and send them back to their consultant jobs?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the suggestion is that GD has to maintain the team at full strength outside of the Cup cycle, good luck with that. Plenty more f the team have other income options to go do in the mean time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Advocate said:

If the suggestion is that GD has to maintain the team at full strength outside of the Cup cycle, good luck with that.

The curse of being the winning team.........All the guys in the other teams will have cashed their last cheques......not many would still be on retainers...Maybe Ben and a few other top guys.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Advocate said:

Two of the ETNZ crew are doing Finn Olympic campaigns, are the sponsored by the team as well?

Only one of them gets through though.......Sailing NZ is probably picking up the tab for that......

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, The Advocate said:

Two of the ETNZ crew are doing Finn Olympic campaigns, are the sponsored by the team as well?

I've heard of some others going in the 49er, might be a rumour.

And there seems to be a FailGP team, and they must pay a 10% commission to Dalts.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, jaysper said:

I am however seriously fucked off about trying to entrench the AC75s for 2 cup cycles.

If the DoG event goes ahead, with respect to the other challengers, they're really only trying to lock it in for AC38....to give them some certainty about their existing investments, and planning going forward. AC38 is looking like the next multi challenger event.

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

AC38 is looking like the next multi challenger event.

In 3 years time, instead of the usual 4.

What is not to like, must be a very infectious Whine virus going round here. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

If the DoG event goes ahead, with respect to the other challengers, they're really only trying to lock it in for AC38....to give them some certainty about their existing investments, and planning going forward. AC38 is looking like the next multi challenger event.

Well the way they lock it out is to run and win AC37.

If they want to provide certainty then make a statement that they will hold the cup in AC38 if they win AC37.

But don't for the love of fucking god pull this shit where they will bar teams from entry if they don't likewise commit to AC75s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

So you want everyone to invest in a completely NEW design or sail Optimists?

The problem is that it is a slimy trick.

When Orifice tried it, people including kiwis on here went fucking mental and quite rightly so.

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

I think it was Paul Elvstrom that said something like if you loose respect to win, then you've won nothing.

Innovating is an interesting spin.

More accurately:

Paul Elvstrøm

 "You haven't won the race, if in winning the race you have lost the respect of your competitors."

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

But don't for the love of fucking god pull this shit where they will bar teams from entry if they don't likewise commit to AC75s.

Considering that AC37 is going to be a DoG event, that clause does seem weird, as LR, NYYC, can't enter AC37.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said:

What is not to like,

Considering the circumstances and financial realities of ETNZ, I don't have a problem with the proposed plans.....They better beat the Poms though......I wonder if they'll allow Ben a new set of foils......probably will.......Hard to see Rita beating TR, even on home waters.....

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

I am however seriously fucked off about trying to entrench the AC75s for 2 cup cycles.

If you remember correctly, a LOT of Kiwis were apoplectic at Oracle when they tried something similar in Bermuda. But this is worse because ETNZ are suggesting that they will reject you entry if you don't sign up for it.

So, if ETNZ push ahead with that then I am happy for them to fold.

Does it really matter?  All teams at AC36 loved the AC75s.  I suspect no other teams will have an issue with it as they know it is a great class.  Quite likely if they get push back from a team wanting to enter they will pull the condition.  It think they've put it in there as they expected everyone will agree. Remember that pre-Bermuda noone had any real idea whether the boats would work or not.  Also, more importantly they were asking teams to agree to not only the class of boat but how the competitions would run (frequency etc) - I can't remember the details but it was pretty comprehensive and would have taken the AC away from what it is. This time round all competing teams said they wanted the class to return and they are only asking them to commit to the class of boat.

I agree that it is strange to make it a condition and that it's in breach of the DoG... but for it to make you want ETNZ fold... an overreaction maybe?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 1eyedkiwi said:

Does it really matter?  All teams at AC36 loved the AC75s.  I suspect no other teams will have an issue with it as they know it is a great class.  Quite likely if they get push back from a team wanting to enter they will pull the condition.  It think they've put it in there as they expected everyone will agree. Remember that pre-Bermuda noone had any real idea whether the boats would work or not.  Also, more importantly they were asking teams to agree to not only the class of boat but how the competitions would run (frequency etc) - I can't remember the details but it was pretty comprehensive and would have taken the AC away from what it is. This time round all competing teams said they wanted the class to return and they are only asking them to commit to the class of boat.

I agree that it is strange to make it a condition and that it's in breach of the DoG... but for it to make you want ETNZ fold... an overreaction maybe?

I suspect the teams will be happy to have the AC75s and despite generally disliking them, I acknowledge continuity is a good thing.

 But barring entry to the AC based on acceptance of terms that you have precisely ZERO right to impose is incredibly Bertarelli-esque and I won't support it.

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

I think it was Paul Elvstrom that said something like if you loose respect to win, then you've won nothing.

Innovating is an interesting spin.

Probably in  retrospect,  EB and LE should be recognised as innovators and people should stop blaming and cursing for what they did :D

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

Considering that AC37 is going to be a DoG event, that clause does seem weird, as LR, NYYC, can't enter AC37.....

It's not weird. They need to put something official in AC37 protocol to convince possible AC38 teams that they can invest in a campaign for which they can't challenge yet and no term can be signed. This AC378 bundle is not legal, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When some another team in a possible future will propose a 1 - 1 Match excluding xTNZ from a Cup cycle, I will come back to read some messages here. Just for comparison.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, strider470 said:

When some another team in a possible future will propose a 1 - 1 Match excluding xTNZ from a Cup cycle, I will come back to read some messages here. Just for comparison.

That's already happened when Oracle and Alinghi had their DoG match.

Link to post
Share on other sites

JR: Hey Grant I want to be COR

GD: OK Jim, Akld, in 4 years, same boat.

JR: What about a one on one Grant?

GD: Make me a good offer

JR: $100M

GD: Done!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

That's already happened when Oracle and Alinghi had their DoG match.

At the time i remember well, that was seen as the good against the evil EB wanting to jeopardise the cup. Now it's hard to see anything but selfishness and greed looking at both of them. Machiavelli was an amateur.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, strider470 said:

Now it's hard to see anything but selfishness and greed looking at both of them.

More like necessity for ETNZ. They need a significant input of cash. This provides it.

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

More like necessity for ETNZ. They need a significant input of cash. This provides it.

Io sto con  Paul Elvstrøm

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Barnyb said:

JR: Hey Grant I want to be COR

GD: OK Jim, Akld, in 4 years, same boat.

JR: What about a one on one Grant?

GD: Make me a good offer

JR: $100M

GD: Done!

 

More like:

GD: Make me a good offer

JR: How about $80M ?

GD: Make it $100M

JR: Done!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, marlowe said:

What's the difference in Grant allowing Ratty to buy the Cup in this way and Coutts, Butterworth, et al taking Ernie's cash and bringing him the Cup?

One is just being a professional sailor like several other kiwi pro sailor & ex-'TNZ' sailors had done before.

The Great Charlie Barr was Scottish and sailed for both British Challengers & US Defenders, this is a part of the patina of the history of the AC.

 

The other is actively shitting on the 170 year history of the AC & the wording of the DoG.

6 hours ago, jaysper said:

I'm not particularly worried about whoring out the team to the Isle of Wight.

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

This is where you are wrong.

This is the most disgraceful bit of the whole thing.

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

170 years of the British trying to win it back is the main burnishing of the history of the AC & the reason that the AC remains the most sought after trophy in sailing if not in sport outright.

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

The entire founding principal of the DoG is at stake:

'You want to take it to your home waters? Come win it off me!'

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

 

As a pre-event/exhibition race/ACWS I am 100% for it and probably among the most excited about the prospect of seeing these things truly stretch their legs around a decent length course.

But it MUST NOT be the AC Match unless the brits actually won the AC somewhere else first.

10 hours ago, marlowe said:

However all current teams appear happy with the AC75 and agree there needs to be stability with the class.

If the teams are ok with the AC75 there is no need to put a DoG breach into the Protocol.

You can just nudge nudge, wink wink it like happened for J, 12m & IACC across multiple events.

You should however make sure you get the class on the books as an International Class & make sure the design/rule IP is properly lodged with ACPI so that there is no cuntyness about the IP like Coutts tried over the graphics (& I think the AC55 rule) when someone eventually wins off TNZ.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jaysper said:

Me? Understand? Are you suggesting I am attractive enough to sell my body? NICE!

I'm not particularly worried about whoring out the team to the Isle of Wight. Besides, I think it is a negotiation ploy with the Government.

I am however seriously fucked off about trying to entrench the AC75s for 2 cup cycles.

If you remember correctly, a LOT of Kiwis were apoplectic at Oracle when they tried something similar in Bermuda. But this is worse because ETNZ are suggesting that they will reject you entry if you don't sign up for it.

So, if ETNZ push ahead with that then I am happy for them to fold.

A lot were apoplectic because of the antics that preceded the Framework. Oracle had already been done for breach of contract which endangered ETNZs campaign at that time. The agreement itself was merely the straw that broke the camels back so to speak. ETNZ can not reject any entry as long as it meets the criteria in the protocol and DoG. Like we’ve all said the whole time, the sky isn’t falling. There is NO WAY they can force anything on anyone past the validity of the AC37 protocol. ETNZ knows it, INEOS Team UK knows it, and the prospective teams know it. That is the reason it’s written into the protocol in the first place. Teams can and will agree to it but it is non binding. What Oracle did was try to work out an agreement independent of the previously agreed to America’s Cup protocol. That’s the difference.

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

Yeah, I remember that.

It was even in one of the old timey movies about Australia II so presumably it was a thing right up until 1983.

IIRC America even tried to ban Oz II because they claimed it was tank tested in the Netherlands.

That I remember. But somehow I did not link it to a nat. rule for the designers. Wow, cool thing, I want that back :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

A lot were apoplectic because of the antics that preceded the Framework. Oracle had already been done for breach of contract which endangered ETNZs campaign at that time. The agreement itself was merely the straw that broke the camels back so to speak. ETNZ can not reject any entry as long as it meets the criteria in the protocol and DoG. Like we’ve all said the whole time, the sky isn’t falling. There is NO WAY they can force anything on anyone past the validity of the AC37 protocol. ETNZ knows it, INEOS Team UK knows it, and the prospective teams know it. That is the reason it’s written into the protocol in the first place. Teams can and will agree to it but it is non binding. What Oracle did was try to work out an agreement independent of the previously agreed to America’s Cup protocol. That’s the difference.

There is no protocol when a challenge is received. You talk a lot but I think you know shit from clay.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Horn Rock said:

I wonder if they'll allow Ben a new set of foils......probably will.......

Didn't  they already said something about a 1 boat campaign? wasn't it referred to AC37?

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Thewas said:
8 hours ago, Horn Rock said:

I wonder if they'll allow Ben a new set of foils......probably will.......

Didn't  they already said something about a 1 boat campaign? wasn't it referred to AC37?

Hair foils for highlights?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the story.

The Americas Cup is a contest between bona fide yacht clubs representing different nations, sailed in the waters of the defender

If ETNZ is to be regarded as representing our nation:

- The next Cup will be sailed in the open sea in the defending country (in this case NZ)

- It will be sailed in vessels that won't fall apart in +/- 10 knots over prescribed limits - AC75's qualify (just)

- Charlie Barr excepted, we as fanboys/girls (NZ'ers, Italians. Poms Italians or anyone else) will expect that the team reflects us as a nation - and have a genuine belief that our team represents our country.

If ETNZ can't guarantee this, they should peddle their wares to the highest-paying billionare and stop fucking around.

The Government and Auckland City should wish them all the best and say sayonara.

Take your money... but stop calling yourselves "Team New Zealand".

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Rhumline said:

Here's the story.

The Americas Cup is a contest between bona fide yacht clubs representing different nations, sailed in the waters of the defender

If ETNZ is to be regarded as representing our nation:

- The next Cup will be sailed in the open sea in the defending country (in this case NZ)

- It will be sailed in vessels that won't fall apart in +/- 10 knots over prescribed limits - AC75's qualify (just)

- Charlie Barr excepted, we as fanboys/girls (NZ'ers, Italians. Poms Italians or anyone else) will expect that the team reflects us as a nation - and have a genuine belief that our team represents our country.

If ETNZ can't guarantee this, they should peddle their wares to the highest-paying billionare and stop fucking around.

The Government and Auckland City should wish them all the best and say sayonara.

Take your money... but stop calling yourselves "Team New Zealand".

 

I still have like left today, but thought this deserves a traditional +1 as well.

 

Bravo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

More accurately:

Paul Elvstrøm

 "You haven't won the race, if in winning the race you have lost the respect of your competitors."

"The Cup says otherwise."

ANONYMOUS

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We won. Next cup is harder to defend according to history.

Who will be the naming rights sponsor this time?

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

We won. Next cup is harder to defend according to history.

Who will be the naming rights sponsor this time?

I would suggest Ineos to remain in the family ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Salty Seacock said:

We won. Next cup is harder to defend according to history.

Who will be the naming rights sponsor this time?

INEOS or EMIRATES (if Emirates choose to continue)
I doubt it will be PRADA!

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

INEOS or EMIRATES (if Emirates choose to continue)
I doubt it will be PRADA!

Not Prada for sure. Bertelli said they did it out of necessity for this edition

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, strider470 said:

Not Prada for sure. Bertelli said they did it out of necessity for this edition

Yep, I think without Patrizios help there wouldn't even be an AC36!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, strider470 said:

Not Prada for sure. Bertelli said they did it out of necessity for this edition

Yep and they got thanked generously didn't they?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

INEOS or EMIRATES (if Emirates choose to continue)
I doubt it will be PRADA!

I would think JR is going to get a pain in his arse paying all the bills.

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

"The Cup says otherwise."

ANONYMOUS

Your losing site of the sailors - who displayed great sportsmanship and mutual respect.  Of course the non-sailors/non-competitors behavior is not perfect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Sponsorship:

On the flip side of things with PRADA being "Naming Rights Partner for AC36", the PRADA CUP and Patrizio having his own Team "Luna Rossa Prada Pirelli" in CSS it did create a huge "Conflict of Interest" during this entire AC36 Cycle hence all the Legal Wranglings and Arb. Panel Rulings over the course of the last 3 years but especially over the last 3 to 6 months.

This is what Ben Ainslie & INEOS were very fearful of when the AC36 Protocol was published and Louis Vuitton got dumped for PRADA!

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

Regarding Sponsorship:

On the flip side of things with PRADA being "Naming Rights Partner for AC36", the PRADA CUP and Patrizio having his own Team "Luna Rossa Prada Pirelli" in CSS it did create a huge "Conflict of Interest" during this entire AC36 Cycle hence all the Legal Wranglings and Arb. Panel Rulings over the course of the last 3 years but especially over the last 3 to 6 months.

This is what Ben Ainslie & INEOS were very fearful of when the AC36 Protocol was published and Louis Vuitton got dumped for PRADA!

Is the Prada Cup still a thing? Or will there be a new (insert luxury goods brand here) Cup? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having an "Independent Single Event Authority" like ETNZ & INEOS promised to do in their COR Announcement Press Release for AC37 much like 2007 is probably the best for all Parties involved IMO!

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Paddywackery said:

And a nice touch to give every member of ETNZ a medal. 

They just had to scrap the Luna Rossa name and put a sticker with ETNZ instead :D :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 45Roller said:

Is the Prada Cup still a thing? Or will there be a new (insert luxury goods brand here) Cup? 

I wouldn't be surprised if ETNZ & INEOS bring back Louis Vuitton!

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

I don’t think we need to be feeling sorry for billionaires do we? 

No, but if your company spends millions of dollars to sponsor an event because nobody else will, and then you get shat on by the organization running the event... how likely are you to sponsor again?  

Link to post
Share on other sites