Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I want to make this very clear: I have nothing against the Luna Rossa Sailing Team. They are fine people, yes that includes Spithill although I don't like him but their COR36 Organization namely Francesco Longaresi-Cattani, Alessandra Pandarese & Marco Mercuriali are "Spoiled Brats" during the entire AC36 Cycle and I will not change my Position on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 18.4k
  • 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

They towed out around 11am and the breeze was light and puffy to start with. Foiled down the Channel and headed out to the Bays. The breeze started to build around midday and they got some long runs i

Yes, quite light but I didn't see all the afternoon's sailing, can only comment on later in the day, when Britannia 2 was running a #1 jib and foiling around no problem. They look quite quick at times

Posted Images

36 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

Wrong, COR36/LRPP acted in their self-interest and not in the interest of all the Challengers. ITUK & AM were never consulted in regards to the Wind Limits and ETNZ made that very clear in this Press Statement:
https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/427_CLARIFICATION-OF-NEXT-STEPS-FOR-THE-WIND-LIMITS-MATCH-CONDITIONS-DISPUTE-WITH-THE-CHALLENGERS.html
 

By way of background, the America's Cup Deed of Gift requires racing rules and conditions to be agreed by mutual consent between the Defender and Challenger but with the modern day America's Cup involving multi challengers this is  modified by the Protocol under which all teams enter.  Under the AC 36 Protocol, the Challenger of Record has the responsibility to represent all Challengers and that responsibility involves consulting with other Challengers before taking a position with the Defender on issues such as race conditions. 

The Defender does not deal with the other Challengers direct on such issues but works on the basis that the Challenger of Record is presenting the collective position of the Challengers when undertaking such negotiations, not just the view of its own sailing team, Luna Rossa. In fact, in the various negotiations Emirates Team New Zealand has had with the Challenger of Record there have been many practical examples where the COR has made specific reference to the views of the other Challengers when taking a particular stance.

Emirates Team New Zealand was therefore very surprised to learn that the current stance of the Challenger of Record in relation to wind limits does not reflect the collective position of all Challengers. The Defender's position on the Wind Limits is what is needed to ensure a quality event in Auckland for the benefit of the New Zealand public, international visitors and the world audience.

Enough said Mister Blitzkrieg!

And this is just one example! LRPP wanted "Wind Limits" changed for their own benefit without consulting the two other Challengers ITUK and AM!

This is bullshit propaganda by ETNZ. Ineos/ BA acknowledge they were consulted.  The 3 Challengers could not agree on what they wanted and ultimately the decision is made solely between COR/D.  Nothing shady here at all. Once you have ALL the facts (and not just an ETNZ hit piece) you will see the truth 9f the matter. 

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/124211668/americas-cup-british-hit-by-new-wind-limit-and-sir-ben-ainslie-isnt-happy

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, strider470 said:

The beginning of the Ineos era is not quite promising, is it? Let's hope they will be as fair as you say, and I will have nothing to worry about

They will certainly act more fair compared to COR36!

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

They will certainly act more fair compared to COR36!

Think as you wish. If this is enough to make you feel better, it's ok.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Blitzkrieg9 said:

This is bullshit propaganda by ETNZ. Ineos/ BA acknowledge they were consulted.  The 3 Challengers could not agree on what they wanted and ultimately the decision is made solely between COR/D.  Nothing shady here at all. Once you have ALL the facts (and not just an ETNZ hit piece) you will see the truth 9f the matter. 

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/124211668/americas-cup-british-hit-by-new-wind-limit-and-sir-ben-ainslie-isnt-happy

Hilarious from you! This was just before the Prada Cup Final. When the Wind Limits were first negotiated during the Period for the "Match Conditions" in December 2019 the other two Challengers were not included in those talks as ETNZ correctly pointed out in their January 9 2020 Press Release. Don't change the subject here!

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

Hilarious from you! This was just before the Prada Cup Final. When the Wind Limits were first negotiated during the Period for the "Match Conditions" in December 2019 the other two Challengers were not included in those talks as ETNZ correctly pointed out in their January 9 2020 Press Release. Don't change the subject here!

WTF are you talking about?  The wind limits were only negotiated once. No concensus could be reached so it went into arbitration. Its all part of the same issue. If BA was consulted then BA was consulted. I'm sorry that ETNZ is publishing lies, but I will accept a direct statement from BA saying he was consulted over a statement from ETNZ saying that BA was not consulted.  Surely you must be trolling at this point. 

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Blitzkrieg9 said:

WTF are you talking about?  The wind limits were only negotiated once. No concensus could be reached so it went into arbitration. Its all part of the same issue. If BA was consulted then BA was consulted. I'm sorry that ETNZ is publishing lies, but I will accept a direct statement from BA saying he was consulted over a statement from ETNZ saying that BA was not consulted.  Surely you must be trolling at this point. 

No, they weren't. They were first negotiated during the "Negotiation Period" in 2019 and then they got amended for the Prada Cup Final. BA was only consulted before the Prada Cup Final but wasn't consulted back in 2019.

https://docs.google.com/a/acofficials.org/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YWNvZmZpY2lhbHMub3JnfGFjMzYtb2ZmaWNpYWwtbm90aWNlYm9hcmR8Z3g6MTY2YTBjYTcyYzk5MWRhOQ

Wind Limit for the Prada Cup Final & America's Cup Match:

6.5 - 23 Knots (Date of Document 6th February 2020)

(INEOS TEAM UK & NYYC/AMERICAN MAGIC not consulted)

https://docs.google.com/a/acofficials.org/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YWNvZmZpY2lhbHMub3JnfGFjMzYtb2ZmaWNpYWwtbm90aWNlYm9hcmR8Z3g6MmE4YmRhYjk5MmI3NWY2OQ

Wind Limit for the Prada Cup Final & America's Cup Match:

6.5 - 21 Knots (Date of Document 10th February 2021)

(INEOS TEAM UK consulted as Prada Cup Finalist)

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

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.

Quite a jobs program. 

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

No, they weren't. They were first negotiated during the "Negotiation Period" in 2019 and then they got amended for the Prada Cup Final. BA was only consulted before the Prada Cup Final but wasn't consulted back in 2019.

https://docs.google.com/a/acofficials.org/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YWNvZmZpY2lhbHMub3JnfGFjMzYtb2ZmaWNpYWwtbm90aWNlYm9hcmR8Z3g6MTY2YTBjYTcyYzk5MWRhOQ

Wind Limit for the Prada Cup Final & America's Cup Match:

6.5 - 23 Knots (Date of Document 6th February 2020)

(INEOS TEAM UK & NYYC/AMERICAN MAGIC not consulted)

https://docs.google.com/a/acofficials.org/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YWNvZmZpY2lhbHMub3JnfGFjMzYtb2ZmaWNpYWwtbm90aWNlYm9hcmR8Z3g6MmE4YmRhYjk5MmI3NWY2OQ

Wind Limit for the Prada Cup Final & America's Cup Match:

6.5 - 21 Knots (Date of Document 10th February 2021)

(INEOS TEAM UK consulted as Prada Cup Finalist)

Gotcha. I stand corrected. 

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

Quite a jobs program. 

The total numbers drop as 45  of the 150 are boatbuilders not permanent employees.

AC Minister Stuart Nash if my hearing was correct initially talked of a $12m injection that got pedalled back to $5m which is sourced from funds already budgeted for but not spent from the AC36.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with some posts since Thursday by Rennie, Strider, Hoom, Jaysper and others on several items, but especially on this point: 

Making pre-agreements about not an ACWS exhibition but an actual AC Match in the UK (or anywhere) between two Clubs, with a preagreement also about the following AC Match, is Deed illegal. The precedent would be for agreement to be reached over future Cups between two Clubs ‘forever’  - clearly an absurd idea. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If $B Matteo is forcing GD to strongarm NZ for money, to save from his own poecketbook, well then GD needs to find a much better $B. :) 
 

We wouldn’t be facing all the crap to come had any other team won AC36. The current ETNZ funding model has failed, this game should (and mostly is) still be funded by real $B’s. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stingray~ said:

We wouldn’t be facing all the crap to come had any other team won AC36. The ETNZ funding model has failed. 

Isn't the only measure of success or failure in the AC is "Who holds the Cup?"  On that measure the ETNZ funding model has been an unequivocal success.  It has also enabled the development of a new class of boat that if I recall correctly was written off by posters such as yourself.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Isn't the only measure of success or failure in the AC is "Who holds the Cup?"  On that measure the ETNZ funding model has been an unequivocal success.  It has also enabled the development of a new class of boat that if I recall correctly was written off by posters such as yourself.

Bullshit, on both counts.

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

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

An excellent example of, "be careful what you wish for".

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

We wouldn’t be facing all the crap to come had any other team won AC36. The ETNZ funding model has failed. 

Like your little buddy & cohort Tom Ehman who is trying to deligitimize the new CoR. Ehman is such a hypocrite!

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

We wouldn’t be facing all the crap to come had any other team won AC36.

True. Equally, we'd be watching Sail GP by another name, if any other team had won AC35.

What's you point exactly?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

True. Equally, we'd be watching Sail GP by another name, if any other team had won AC35.

What's you point exactly?

I think Stinger is trying to imply that we would be better off with Orifice than ETNZ and who the fuck knows, he could be right.

But what we do know right now is that the longer ETNZ and Orifice held onto the cup, the worse their behaviour became.

Although full credit to Ratcliffe, he seems to be quite the quick study and is getting some quick punches in before winning it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, strider470 said:

The beginning of the Ineos era is not quite promising, is it? Let's hope they will be as fair as you say, and I will have nothing to worry about

There is no INEOS era, nothing concrete has been announced, just  bluster from a team Prada employee ( BB)

that’s not especially fair behaviour is it? 

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

There is no INEOS era, nothing concrete has been announced, just  bluster from a team Prada employee ( BB)

that’s not especially fair behaviour is it? 

I admit BB is not the prototype of good behaviour and I don't particularly like him.

But I also read a Matteo de Nora interview to an Italian newspaper, and he doesn't exclude that 1 - 1 Match

Just worried as would any ETNZ supporter be of jumping an edition of the Cup.

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

I admit BB is not the prototype of good behaviour and I don't particularly like him.

But I also read a Matteo de Nora interview to an Italian newspaper, and he doesn't exclude that 1 - 1 Match

Just worried as would any ETNZ supporter be of jumping an edition of the Cup.

Well Dalton has already stated Wight Island is a possibility.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Emirates Team New Zealand Team Principal Matteo de Nora to "Fare Vela"

"Luna Rossa was the least dangerous opponent for the America's Cup Match"

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/124622473/americas-cup-luna-rossa-were-least-dangerous-opponent-for-team-nz

De Nora also says quote:

Asked about the future of the Cup under Team New Zealand’s plans, de Norra confirmed a one-off deed of gift challenge against Ainslie’s Team UK was an option.

The British have been confirmed as the new challenger of record.

“There is some truth, it is one of the possibilities. It would not go against the tradition of the Cup, on the contrary it would bring it back to its origins,” he said, referring to the original match for sport’s oldest trophy held in 1851.

 

So, it's not just INEOS spinning the handles on a Deed 1 - 1 Challenge but de Nora of ETNZ too!

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

Well Dalton has already stated Wight Island is a possibility.

Make that too with Matteo de Nora confirming it to Fare Vela!

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

Well Dalton has already stated Wight Island is a possibility.

I think a fleet race there would be amazing! With all the challengers

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

I think a fleet race there would be amazing! With all the challengers

Look I would have loved to see all the existing teams race their boat 2s and ideally the boat 1s being used by new challengers in a "race around the world" with regattas held in the nations of all the challengers + defender.

THAT would have been amazing and who the fuck knows, but fuck me dead ETNZ really knows how to piss a shit tonne of good will against a wall doesn't it?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

Emirates Team New Zealand Team Principal Matteo de Nora to "Fare Vela"

"Luna Rossa was the least dangerous opponent for the America's Cup Match"

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/124622473/americas-cup-luna-rossa-were-least-dangerous-opponent-for-team-nz

De Nora also says quote:

Asked about the future of the Cup under Team New Zealand’s plans, de Norra confirmed a one-off deed of gift challenge against Ainslie’s Team UK was an option.

The British have been confirmed as the new challenger of record.

“There is some truth, it is one of the possibilities. It would not go against the tradition of the Cup, on the contrary it would bring it back to its origins,” he said, referring to the original match for sport’s oldest trophy held in 1851.

 

So, it's not just INEOS spinning the handles on a Deed 1 - 1 Challenge but de Nora of ETNZ too!

I got the same thing from it.

As soon as I read this though, "Luna Rossa was the least dangerous opponent for the America's Cup Match", the article lost all interest for me and I now know what I need to about the guy.

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

A reenactment of the original race.

I can already hear the Queen asking for some meat after eating a pasta, and the waiter answering: "Your Majesty, There Is No Second”

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Advocate said:

I got the same thing from it.

As soon as I read this though, "Luna Rossa was the least dangerous opponent for the America's Cup Match", the article lost all interest for me and I now know what I need to about the guy.

And he is not even Swiss! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, strider470 said:

I can already hear the Queen asking for some meat after eating a pasta, and the waiter answering: "Your Majesty, There Is No Second”

You are so hilarious!

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

I can already hear the Queen asking for some meat after eating a pasta, and the waiter answering: "Your Majesty, There Is No Second”

LOL! fottuto pazzo! :D

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

Look I would have loved to see all the existing teams race their boat 2s and ideally the boat 1s being used by new challengers in a "race around the world" with regattas held in the nations of all the challengers + defender.

THAT would have been amazing and who the fuck knows, but fuck me dead ETNZ really knows how to piss a shit tonne of good will against a wall doesn't it?

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Whatever the reasoning, the fact from fiction, the optics that ETNZ might exploit a home defence in the normal sense v a dog n pony show paid for by the Challenger, doesn't feel right. It seems mercenary but possibly necessary. If so, then it needs context and communication. Does anybody seriously think that the NZ taxpayer can somehow meet the financial requirements needed to keep ETNZ fed and watered until the next defence? And even if they chose to do so for noble reasons, it's going to smell.

In truth, Dalton must protect ETNZ as an entity. And that's as it should be for any CEO. It's how he chooses to do so that will matter.

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

I can already hear the Queen asking for some meat after eating a pasta, and the waiter answering: "Your Majesty, There Is No Second”

And I can hear Dalton being asked by the waiter, 'vegetables, Sir?' and he answering, 'they'll have the same'.

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

I got the same thing from it.

As soon as I read this though, "Luna Rossa was the least dangerous opponent for the America's Cup Match", the article lost all interest for me and I now know what I need to about the guy.

De Nora throwing shade at Prada, don’t hold back eh..

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Paddywackery said:

And I can hear Dalton being asked by the waiter, 'vegetables, Sir?' and he answering, 'they'll have the same'.

+1

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, strider470 said:
10 hours ago, Rennmaus said:

A reenactment of the original race.

I can already hear the Queen asking for some meat after eating a pasta, and the waiter answering: "Your Majesty, There Is No Second”

+1

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

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

Cheeky Bugger!  Luna Rossa Prada Pirelli wouldn't fit on a medal anyway!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Paddywackery said:

And I can hear Dalton being asked by the waiter, 'vegetables, Sir?' and he answering, 'they'll have the same'.

Ahahahaha, a classic!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JALhazmat said:

De Nora throwing shade at Prada, don’t hold back eh..

What the f*ck is De Nora's problem?  I get the distinct impression that he doesn't like his father's side of the family.

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

As soon as I read this though, "Luna Rossa was the least dangerous opponent for the America's Cup Match", the article lost all interest for me and I now know what I need to about the guy.

 

2 hours ago, Ripclaw said:

What the f*ck is De Nora's problem?  I get the distinct impression that he doesn't like his father's side of the family.

Spot on, both of you. The money in the family comes from Matteo’s paternal uncle Oronzio, who was very successful selling electrolysis units for caustic soda and sodium hypochloride - bought a couple for one of my projects. Today, his grandchildren head a very nice mini-multinational

But Matteo doesn’t belong to that branch: in his forties he was given some money to stay out of the way and dabbled in finance. After a car racing accident he decided even that was too much, and started cruising the world.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Paddywackery said:

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Whatever the reasoning, the fact from fiction, the optics that ETNZ might exploit a home defence in the normal sense v a dog n pony show paid for by the Challenger, doesn't feel right. It seems mercenary but possibly necessary. If so, then it needs context and communication. Does anybody seriously think that the NZ taxpayer can somehow meet the financial requirements needed to keep ETNZ fed and watered until the next defence? And even if they chose to do so for noble reasons, it's going to smell.

In truth, Dalton must protect ETNZ as an entity. And that's as it should be for any CEO. It's how he chooses to do so that will matter.

Trying to keep 100 people on payroll continuously is quite a "protection." Key designers and simulation people, maybe; maybe some on "callback retainer" but since a lot of the sailors are getting paid by Russell's Regattas they might not be as costly as one thinks.  Also with Nationality rules, where they gonna go?  

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

Trying to keep 100 people on payroll continuously is quite a "protection." Key designers and simulation people, maybe; maybe some on "callback retainer" but since a lot of the sailors are getting paid by Russell's Regattas they might not be as costly as one thinks.  Also with Nationality rules, where they gonna go?  

With nationality rules, not far but then, I wonder if any of them want to stray from the collective that has been very successful. 

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

With nationality rules, not far but then, I wonder if any of them want to stray from the collective that has been very successful. 

It's a pity for the many excellent NZ sailors that are not in ETNZ

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

THAT would have been amazing and who the fuck knows, but fuck me dead ETNZ really knows how to piss a shit tonne of good will against a wall doesn't it?

What are you angry about?  The machinations that we see going on at the moment are no different to any other cycles.  Are you one of the fickle fans that ebbs and flows much like the tide?

 Dalton is doing what Dalton does well.  Raising money to keep the most successful team in the history of the America's Cup alive and winning.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

What are you angry about?  The machinations that we see going on at the moment are no different to any other cycles.  Are you one of the fickle fans that ebbs and flows much like the tide?

 Dalton is doing what Dalton does well.  Raising money to keep the most successful team in the history of the America's Cup alive and winning.

Dude. They have already started that entry to the cup will be subject to acceptance of the AC75 being used for the subsequent cup.

This is worse than the shit that pretty much all the kiwis decried Lazza and Wussell pulling in Bermuda.

Am I expected to be cool about it because it's ETNZ doing it this time?

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

Dalton is doing what Dalton does well.

oh yeah? Then why all the money problems all over again? 
 

He should call a real $B like LE, EB, TT, or hopefully a fresh face to add into the AC picture. 
 

 

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

Dude. They have already started that entry to the cup will be subject to acceptance of the AC75 being used for the subsequent cup.

What's wrong with that?  The AC75 is nowhere near the end of its development cycle.  Over $500m has been the combined investment by all the teams that have participated so far.  Are you suggesting that that gets thrown away?

"Oh dear let's all start again with a blank sheet of paper!"

14 minutes ago, jaysper said:

This is worse than the shit that pretty much all the kiwis decried Lazza and Wussell pulling in Bermuda.

You win the AC and you set the rules.  Always been like that.  I wasn't one of those that decried what happened in Bermuda.  As for you speaking for ALL Kiwi's - I think you'll find that most wouldn't agree with you.

16 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Am I expected to be cool about it because it's ETNZ doing it this time?

So basically what you are saying is you are one of the few Kiwi's that bitched about it last time and you are still bitching about it now.  FFS it is the America's Cup.  If you don't like this part of the program then go watch Sail GP.  Hell if it wasn't for these machinations the number of posts on AC Anarchy would have been limited to you and Stingray bitching about the colour of the boats!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

So basically what you are saying is you are one of the few Kiwi's that bitched about it last time and you are still bitching about it now.  FFS it is the America's Cup.  If you don't like this part of the program then go watch Sail GP.  Hell if it wasn't for these machinations the number of posts on AC Anarchy would have been limited to you and Stingray bitching about the colour of the boats!

Sorry spanky, there were more than a few kiwis bitching about it last time.

Whats more, this is against the DoG. Go have a read.

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

Sorry spanky, there were more than a few kiwis bitching about it last time.

Whats more, this is against the DoG. Go have a read.

Whatever Jaysper you are moaning about something just like you did all the way through this cycle.

As for the DoG it is YOUR interpretation of it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kate short for Bob said:

Whatever Jaysper you are moaning about something just like you did all the way through this cycle.

As for the DoG it is YOUR interpretation of it.  

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaawn.

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

Whatever Jaysper you are moaning about something just like you did all the way through this cycle.

As for the DoG it is YOUR interpretation of it.  

Yeah, but it happens to be correct. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Whatever Jaysper you are moaning about something just like you did all the way through this cycle.

As for the DoG it is YOUR interpretation of it.  

No, it is unfortunately not (Edit: haha, or as porthos wrote: it is, and it is correct). The DoG:
"And when a challenge from a Club fulfilling all the conditions required by this instrument has been received, no other challenge can be considered until the pending event has been decided."

Almost nobody wants the AC75s discarded. It's the way how defender and challenger try to make the class last longer than for the immediate Cup that's appalling. Larry et al. just made an agreement that was not part of a challenge, a better letter of intent. If rumors are true, ETNZ wants to put provisions (the class) for AC38 into the AC37 protocol. And that after they promised the world to bring the Cup nearer to the Deed or so. I think, this hurts the most.

Again, the AC75s could be the class for the next 100 years, but only if the respective challenger and defender decide so for their immediate Cup edition.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall after the 2008 election, POTUS was meeting with a group of representatives from the opposing party about a potential bill .....and after a lot of to and fro....the congressmen told POTUS that they could not accept the legislation and it would have to be changed.  Obama paused thought about it and then with a smile said "I think we are forgetting who won "

Let us not forget who won the AC. New Zealand won. Convincingly! 

They have to negotiate details with Ineos/RYS but if NZ wants AC 75s, then they got AC75s and I reckon they find a way to have a strong likelihood that AC75s are in AC 38  .

If Oracle had won AC 35, then no question AC36 would have been in the foiling cats (AC55s) But Oracle didnt win.......

Its lovely to read the DoG and have arcane discussions on SA but NZ won and they have told us AC 37 will be in AC75s and they are striving to host AC  38 in the 75 as well.

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

Yeah, but it happens to be correct. 

Ssssshhhhhhhh! Don't upset him Porthos, it might counteract the effect of his meds! :lol:

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

Whether it is "correct" or not it doesn't matter as it hasn't happened yet.  Classic AC smoke and mirrors - throw a few red herrings around the wharf and keep the seagulls yapping!

Well, shit. If that were the standard -- that something we say had to actually "matter" -- this would be one empty place. You are, of course, correct. We would all be well advised to wait to see what happens. We kind of suck at that, I included. But it's a lot more fun this way.

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

No, it is unfortunately not. The DoG:
"And when a challenge from a Club fulfilling all the conditions required by this instrument has been received, no other challenge can be considered until the pending event has been decided."

Almost nobody wants the AC75s discarded. It's the way how defender and challenger try to make the class last longer than for the immediate Cup that's appalling. Larry et al. just made an agreement that was not part of a challenge, a better letter of intent. If rumors are true, ETNZ wants to put provisions (the class) for AC38 into the AC37 protocol. And that after they promised the world to bring the Cup nearer to the Deed or so. I think, this hurts the most.

Again, the AC75s could be the class for the next 100 years, but only if the respective challenger and defender decide so for their immediate Cup edition.

So what?  It is what it is.  You have the Cup you have a huge influence on how it is challenged for.  It is all part of the AC game.  It will never change and I hope it doesn't.  The intrigue and machinations that go on are all part of the fun.  The design element is part of the fun.  Pushing the edge is all part of the fun.  Otherwise it would be just another one design annual regatta.

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

and they are striving to host AC  38 in the 75 as well.

They can strive all they want to have AC38 in the 75s, but the only way they can guarantee that is to win the cup.

All other attempts are both invalid and unethical.

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

Let us not forget who won the AC. New Zealand won. Convincingly! 

They have to negotiate details with Ineos/RYS but if NZ wants AC 75s, then they got AC75s and I reckon they find a way to have a strong likelihood that AC75s are in AC 38  .

 

Exactly.  The AC has always been like that.  Invariably it takes innovation and some smart manoeuvring from a Challenger to get their hands on the Cup.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kate short for Bob said:

So what?  It is what it is.  You have the Cup you have a huge influence on how it is challenged for.  It is all part of the AC game.  It will never change and I hope it doesn't.  The intrigue and machinations that go on are all part of the fun.  The design element is part of the fun.  Pushing the edge is all part of the fun.  Otherwise it would be just another one design annual regatta.

While this is a rather generic statement, it is not contested, and I agree. The DoG in all its weirdness prevents the AC from becoming JAR.

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

They can strive all they want to have AC38 in the 75s, but the only way they can guarantee that is to win the cup.

 

Correct.

3 minutes ago, jaysper said:

All other attempts are both invalid and unethical.

Only invalid if they don't succeed.

Since when has morality or ethics played a part in the AC?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Correct.

Only invalid if they don't succeed.

Since when has morality or ethics played a part in the AC?

You agree with me that the only way to ensure AC75s are in AC38 is to win the cup but then suggest other methods are only invalid if they don't succeed?

Good god, how do you cope with the cognitive dissonance?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Correct.

Only invalid if they don't succeed.

Since when has morality or ethics played a part in the AC?

Setting aside morals and ethics, if they attempt to dictate the terms of AC38 before AC37 is over, they open themselves up to being sued, and it wouldn't be a close call for the court if someone did. Now, maybe nobody would object and maybe ETNZ has figured that out. The exact requirements of the Deed don't really matter if everybody goes along with whatever the trustee comes up with. But this is the AC, so anything can happen.

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

oh yeah? Then why all the money problems all over again? 
 

He should call a real $B like LE, EB, TT, or hopefully a fresh face to add into the AC picture. 
 

 

Indeed. I don’t get it, the proper/obvious sequence should have been:

- issue Prot guidelines that facilitate participation

- immediately study Rule changes for a cheaper/simpler design

- wait until at least 6 Challengers come up, and only then negotiate supplementary funding with the Government. No need to blackmail now, with so much undefined

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

No, it is unfortunately not. The DoG:
"And when a challenge from a Club fulfilling all the conditions required by this instrument has been received, no other challenge can be considered until the pending event has been decided."

Almost nobody wants the AC75s discarded. It's the way how defender and challenger try to make the class last longer than for the immediate Cup that's appalling. Larry et al. just made an agreement that was not part of a challenge, a better letter of intent. If rumors are true, ETNZ wants to put provisions (the class) for AC38 into the AC37 protocol. And that after they promised the world to bring the Cup nearer to the Deed or so. I think, this hurts the most.

Again, the AC75s could be the class for the next 100 years, but only if the respective challenger and defender decide so for their immediate Cup edition.

I AM NOT A LAWYER.  THIS IS ENTIRELY SPECULATION ON MY PART.

Entry Agreement for AC 37:

"Para 14.2 (iii) paragraph B.

The Defender and Challengers agree that the matches in the 38th Americas Cup shall be held in the AC 75 class.  Each Challenger and the Defender relies upon this paragraph in this agreement to invest in excess of $50 million in developing an AC75 design.  If a party to this agreement is accepted as a challenger for the 38th Americas Cup , they shall consent to the AC 75 as the class of yacht to be used in any challenger series and the match. If a party to this agreement is the Future Defender in the 38th Americas Cup (Future Defender) , they shall consent to the AC75 as the class of yacht to be used in any challenger series and the match. The Future Defender shall give preference to a receiving a challenge from a party to this agreement or a yacht club that has committed to using the AC 75 . If a party to this agreement consents to any other yacht for 38th, they agree that they shall reimburse all of the participants in the 37th Americas Cup the development costs of $50 million per team. The parties agree that this represents true and accurate damages incurred for a breach of this agreement.

Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as considering a challenge. The parties have not agreed who shall be the challenger and defender for AC 38."

In short, I am asking the legal wizards on this site whether they could construe a binding commitment to use the AC75 in AC 38, without it constituting a challenge or "considering " a challenge

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

You agree with me that the only way to ensure AC75s are in AC38 is to win the cup but then suggest other methods are only invalid if they don't succeed?

Good god, how do you cope with the cognitive dissonance?

If they SUCCEED how were they invalid?  I suggest the dissonance lies in your court not mine.

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

- wait until at least 6 Challengers come up, and only then negotiate supplementary funding with the Government. No need to blackmail now, with so much undefined

ETNZ have been planning the next Cup well before the finish of this Cup.  You need to if you want to stay in front.  Do you think that they sailed in Bermuda without having done some preliminary work on what would happen if they won?

I would even say that ETNZ didn't show anywhere near all their cards on the racecourse either in this just finished Cup.  Save them for next time.

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

Setting aside morals and ethics, if they attempt to dictate the terms of AC38 before AC37 is over, they open themselves up to being sued, and it wouldn't be a close call for the court if someone did. Now, maybe nobody would object and maybe ETNZ has figured that out. The exact requirements of the Deed don't really matter if everybody goes along with whatever the trustee comes up with. But this is the AC, so anything can happen.

So Porthos, can you construct any kind of binding agreement that would allow the participants to know that AC38 will be in the AC75 .  Is there no wording of a side agreement that would not constitute a breach of the "considering " a challenge and would not be a breach of DoG.

If we all agree to use AC 75s, does this truly amount to a challenge " considered" .  Possibly with your inestimable skills of distinguishing you could distinguish between agreeing a term between potential challengers and defenders and actually considering a challenge . With no defender and no challenger, surely a challenge cannot be considered but a term can be agreed.

 

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

If they SUCCEED how were they invalid?  I suggest the dissonance lies in your court not mine.

Ah I see comprehension is not a strong suit either. This is analogous to suggesting that murder is not illegal if you don't get caught. Fucking genius!

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

Ah I see comprehension is not a strong suit either. This is analogous to suggesting that murder is not illegal if you don't get caught. Fucking genius!

LOL - your analogy is way off.  Do you think that ETNZ's actions are not subject to intense scrutiny continually by better legal brains than you?  If they succeed then they can't be invalid otherwise they wouldn't have succeeded.

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

I AM NOT A LAWYER.  THIS IS ENTIRELY SPECULATION ON MY PART.

Entry Agreement for AC 37:

"Para 14.2 (iii) paragraph B.

The Defender and Challengers agree that the matches in the 38th Americas Cup shall be held in the AC 75 class.  Each Challenger and the Defender relies upon this paragraph in this agreement to invest in excess of $50 million in developing an AC75 design.  If a party to this agreement is accepted as a challenger for the 38th Americas Cup , they shall consent to the AC 75 as the class of yacht to be used in any challenger series and the match. If a party to this agreement is the Future Defender in the 38th Americas Cup (Future Defender) , they shall consent to the AC75 as the class of yacht to be used in any challenger series and the match. The Future Defender shall give preference to a receiving a challenge from a party to this agreement or a yacht club that has committed to using the AC 75 . If a party to this agreement consents to any other yacht for 38th, they agree that they shall reimburse all of the participants in the 37th Americas Cup the development costs of $50 million per team. The parties agree that this represents true and accurate damages incurred for a breach of this agreement.

Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as considering a challenge. The parties have not agreed who shall be the challenger and defender for AC 38."

In short, I am asking the legal wizards on this site whether they could construe a binding commitment to use the AC75 in AC 38, without it constituting a challenge or "considering " a challenge

"Any organized Yacht Club of a foreign country,.........shall always be entitled to the right of sailing a match of this Cup"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

LOL - your analogy is way off.  Do you think that ETNZ's actions are not subject to intense scrutiny continually by better legal brains than you?  If they succeed then they can't be invalid otherwise they wouldn't have succeeded.

LOL! Oh well, I normally love a good debate, but when someone is either such a sycophant for their team, lacking in basic intelligence, or possibly in your case both thats when it stops being fun.

So have fun trying to debate this with the other people on this forum who are likewise vastly more intelligent than you and vastly more interested in dribble than I am.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tornado-Cat said:

"Any organized Yacht Club of a foreign country,.........shall always be entitled to the right of sailing a match of this Cup"

they say

the right of sailing

not

the right of challenging

Interesting

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

LOL - your analogy is way off.  Do you think that ETNZ's actions are not subject to intense scrutiny continually by better legal brains than you?  If they succeed then they can't be invalid otherwise they wouldn't have succeeded.

That's what Ernie "We have the best lawyers" Bertarelli thought too. In the end, many of the SAAC posters were right, Ernie and his gang were wrong.

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

LOL! Oh well, I normally love a good debate, but when someone is either such a sycophant for their team, lacking in basic intelligence, or possibly in your case both thats when it stops being fun.

 

I'm not a sycophant to anyone nor I assure you do I lack in basic intelligence nor do I have the arrogance to question yours.

But if you think that ETNZ doesn't have a great team of lawyers on their payroll then at best you are naive.  You only have to look at the major legal fights during this last Cup to see that they have a pretty good legal team.

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

That's what Ernie "We have the best lawyers" Bertarelli thought too. In the end, many of the SAAC posters were right, Ernie and his gang were wrong.

When was the last time ETNZ lost a major legal stoush regarding the AC?

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

So Porthos, can you construct any kind of binding agreement that would allow the participants to know that AC38 will be in the AC75 .  Is there no wording of a side agreement that would not constitute a breach of the "considering " a challenge and would not be a breach of DoG.

If we all agree to use AC 75s, does this truly amount to a challenge " considered" .  Possibly with your inestimable skills of distinguishing you could distinguish between agreeing a term between potential challengers and defenders and actually considering a challenge . With no defender and no challenger, surely a challenge cannot be considered but a term can be agreed.

 

Your side agreement language in your previous post is how you could do it (this came up in some earlier thread). You have a large financial penalty that the breaching party has to pay. It's basically a side agreement between the two parties that the winner will choose the loser as the CoR and the parties will use the AC75 in AC38. If the winning party breaches that agreement, then the winner can go ahead and select someone else to be CoR for AC38 and can use any other Deed-compliant boat as the Deed permits,  but would have to pay, well, a boat-load of money to the losing party.  But all of that is Deed compliant.

They could even publish this agreement to let other teams know that they should go ahead and start planning for AC75's in AC38 while ETNZ and INEOS get busy with AC37. Problem with that is you would be asking teams to spent millions of dollars with no guarantee that AC38 will actually involve the AC75. Relationships change over time. ETNZ did not select LRPP as CoR again. If there is one thing I have learned in drafting contracts, plan for when the relationship falls apart because it will. So I'm not sure your promise of things that will happen would be enough to encourage teams to take that leap of faith.

The press release seems to suggest that AC37 will be a multi-challenger event, and that agreeing to use the AC75 in AC38 "will be a condition to entry."  If that is the case, there is a theoretical problem with the Deed, as there can be no defender and challenger in AC38 until AC37 is done, and no parties means no mutual consent, means you can't agree on AC75's now.  But here's the thing: if nobody objects, then it doesn't matter. If everyone wants to use AC75s for AC37 and AC38, the NYSC isn't going to do anything about it on its own. I supposed the NY AG could raise a stink but she certainly couldn't care less about the AC.  So if everyone is onboard, you can do pretty much whatever you want.   

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

Your side agreement language in your previous post is how you could do it (this came up in some earlier thread). You have a large financial penalty that the breaching party has to pay. It's basically a side agreement between the two parties that the winner will choose the loser as the CoR and the parties will use the AC75 in AC38. If the winning party breaches that agreement, then the winner can go ahead and select someone else to be CoR for AC38 and can use any other Deed-compliant boat as the Deed permits,  but would have to pay, well, a boat-load of money to the losing party.  But all of that is Deed compliant.

They could even publish this agreement to let other teams know that they should go ahead and start planning for AC75's in AC38 while ETNZ and INEOS get busy with AC37. Problem with that is you would be asking teams to spent millions of dollars with no guarantee that AC38 will actually involve the AC75. Relationships change over time. ETNZ did not select LRPP as CoR again. If there is one thing I have learned in drafting contracts, plan for when the relationship falls apart because it will. So I'm not sure your promise of things that will happen would be enough to encourage teams to take that leap of faith.

The press release seems to suggest that AC37 will be a multi-challenger event, and that agreeing to use the AC75 in AC38 "will be a condition to entry."  If that is the case, there is a theoretical problem with the Deed, as there can be no defender and challenger in AC38 until AC37 is done, and no parties means no mutual consent, means you can't agree on AC75's now.  But here's the thing: if nobody objects, then it doesn't matter. If everyone wants to use AC75s for AC37 and AC38, the NYSC isn't going to do anything about it on its own. I supposed the NY AG could raise a stink but she certainly couldn't care less about the AC.  So if everyone is onboard, you can do pretty much whatever you want.   

How about just like it has been done previously? This is not new ground.

Link to post
Share on other sites