Jump to content

The AC 37 has started, news and rumours


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

But, but @Stingray~ and @Gissie said who cares where the money comes from.

Since when did I become responsible for what they say?

However this isn't about the money. TNZ already took Emirates money so that damage is done (and world opinion would not care about Dunphy money, but looks more at which countries provide it). But actually holding the event in ME would be a bigger issue for reputation. Look at the furore over the football world cup being held there. Far more than there was about Arsenal calling it's stadium after Emirates as a sponsor 

Everyone knows that you take sponsorship money from where you can get it. But holding a flagship event there is a bigger issue

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

On Hamish Ross and the Discrimination Issue: This will be long, pedantic, and legal.  I apologize for the length; read at your own risk. Hamish Ross has recently claimed on multiple occasion

I’m not calling this out for the sake of ostracizing you, nor to play PC police on a forum that is notorious for the opposite of that. I could just hit ignore, delete or whatever. I’m calling this out

Hilarious to watch Kiwis who've been around since AC35 twist themselves into intellectual pretzels to give ETNZ a pass on what they screamed bloody murder about when Oracle did it. Even Oracle di

Posted Images

53 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

I would say that the general impression is that you are the redneck country cousins of the Australians, and thus inherit all the prejudices about them

Not even close.......but then again we think you're all chavs.......

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

Since when did I become responsible for what they say?

However this isn't about the money. TNZ already took Emirates money so that damage is done (and world opinion would not care about Dunphy money, but looks more at which countries provide it). But actually holding the event in ME would be a bigger issue for reputation. Look at the furore over the football world cup being held there. Far more than there was about Arsenal calling it's stadium after Emirates as a sponsor 

Everyone knows that you take sponsorship money from where you can get it. But holding a flagship event there is a bigger issue

The Ocean Race went to Abu Dhabi, and even had a team named after Abu Dhabi. The ESS and the ACWS both went to Muscat, Oman, Oman even had a representative team in the ESS! 

The LV Trophy held an event in Dubai.

F1 has built a brand new racetrack in Jeddah, Emirates sponsors many sports and sports teams.

SA is an ally of the US, so the last thing the Saudi's want is an international incident on home soil.

 

 

 

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

The Ocean Race went to Abu Dhabi, and even had a team named after Abu Dhabi. The ESS and the ACWS both went to Muscat, Oman, Oman even had a representative team in the ESS! 

The LV Trophy held an event in Dubai.

F1 has built a brand new racetrack in Jeddah, Emirates sponsors many sports and sports teams.

SA is an ally of the US, so the the Saudi's want is an international incident on home soil.

 

 

 

I have already said that the US safety issue is overplayed

But there is controversy over the F1 event going to Saudi.

The Ocean race, ESS & ACWS  etc have absolutely no media presence at all so they can do what they like. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

I have already said that the US safety issue is overplayed

But there is controversy over the F1 event going to Saudi.

The Ocean race, ESS & ACWS  etc have absolutely no media presence at all so they can do what they like. 

That "Controversy" will blow over once the event gets underway.

By the way, SA is probably far safer for Americans than the US is right now. 

Controversy or no controversy, F1 is going to SA, and it will be a huge success, as will the AC if it goes there. because its where the money is.

 

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

That "Controversy" will blow over once the event gets underway.

By the way, SA is probably far safer for Americans than the US is right now. 

Controversy or no controversy, F1 is going to SA, and it will be a huge success, as will the AC if it goes there. because its where the money is.

 

So you don't care if it damages the reputation of NZ. That's fine

Link to post
Share on other sites

the Spanish press has reported that ETNZ has asked for a formal meeting with the Spanish authorities. They really seem desperate to find a suitable venue willing to deliver cash. Personally, I would love it to be again in Valencia, but I am very doubtful that the current government is willing to invert a penny into this. 

https://www.expansion.com/nauta360/copa-america-vela/2021/09/20/6148eee9e5fdea865d8b45b2.html

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

So you don't care if it damages the reputation of NZ. That's fine

It's not like it's going to be endorsed by the NZ Govt......It's a niche sporting event.....If anything it could shine a light on the hand choppers......encourage reform......

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

Not so sure if DunFay knows his stem from his stern or if he is a card carrying member of the club.

I'm only going off what was reported by ETNZ. Cunty clearly doesn't know sharp end from blunt end and ...

"Furthermore, Emirates Team New Zealand now release details of an email (dated 26/8/21) to the Commodore of the NYYC from Dr. Hamish Ross with Mr Dunphy (both members of the RNZYS) ... "

I'm guessing bringing the club into disrepute is good enough reason for a lifetime dismissal.

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

Acting against the interests of the club as well......prick should be booted tout suite.

So many ways to boot these mutherfuckers. I'd love to be in the room on the night the future of their membership is debated. Any SA representatives in here? I bet there are.

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

It's not like it's going to be endorsed by the NZ Govt......It's a niche sporting event.....If anything it could shine a light on the hand choppers......encourage reform......

The same argument as used by F1 and FIFA. It may even be true. But that doesn't mean that it didn't tarnish their reputations. Of course they are both known for following the money already. And they do go to different countries

But the AC going there will raise the question of why it isn't in the "home" country (which F1 and FIFA don't have). 

Don't get me wrong, the AC isn't big enough for it to make much damage, but I think it will tarnish the AC, TNZ and NZ itself, especially at a time when NZ is perceived as cosying up to China with its human rights abuses and aggression in South China Sea etc more than many in the West are comfortable with.

That may or not be accurate or fair, but perception and reputation don't take much notice of either.

Anyway, end of conversation as far as I am concerned, but I still hope it doesn't go there 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

The same argument as used by F1 and FIFA. It may even be true. But that doesn't mean that it didn't tarnish their reputations. Of course they are both known for following the money already. And they do go to different countries

I get what you're saying, and I mostly agree...it's not ideal heading off to play yachting within a medieval nation.....but hey, we take cash from dudes that built a city with slave labour.....so we have form.......It could be worse, we could play AC in North Korea, or heaven forbid Australia.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enigmatically2 said:

So you don't care if it damages the reputation of NZ. That's fine

Why would it?

A pro team, run as a business, sells its self to the highest bidder and has no great loyalty to any country.

Why should their behaviour be the responsibility of NZ?

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

the Spanish press has reported that ETNZ has asked for a formal meeting with the Spanish authorities. They really seem desperate to find a suitable venue willing to deliver cash. Personally, I would love it to be again in Valencia, but I am very doubtful that the current government is willing to invert a penny into this. 

https://www.expansion.com/nauta360/copa-america-vela/2021/09/20/6148eee9e5fdea865d8b45b2.html

 

 

Agree, I don’t get why GD’s wasting his and everybody else’s time on initiatives that are clearly going nowhere - still asking for 50M€ venue fee, RSVP in two weeks

This soap opera has no apparent deus ex machina:

- if Jeddah/ME, no wind and a trip to the NYSC

- if AKL, “my” forecast of a bare bones defence. But to make things worse, GD’s got to be rapidly turning radioactive for the Kiwi general public and minor prospective sponsors

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

all we want  now is for INEOS to make an offer to front the money to ensure its held in NZ...

 

that would be worth watching to see GD squirm out of that one.

Yes, but not more than 20MNZ$, please

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

all we want  now is for INEOS to make an offer to front the money to ensure its held in NZ...

 

that would be worth watching to see GD squirm out of that one.

Better would be to say Ineos would take on all responsibility for holding it in AKL: organising, paying, sorting broadcast rights etc. Would allow GD to concentrate just on team

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

And this would be good for Ineos because?

Because the money TNZ are trying to get from foreign bidders covers both the event costs and a big wodge to fund the TNZ campaign. If Ineos take over running the event, TNZ don't get that wodge

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

And this would be good for Ineos because?

It was more the deliberate fuckery that would,in the context of the current incompetence would have been amusing. 
 

oh an if by holding in NZ it meant that GD didn’t get the not get overflowing millions from Saudi to top up his war chest then it wouldn’t do the challengers any harm. 
 

seriously it would screw the COR relationship pretty hard if they did force his hand so it’s as unlikely to happen as TE naming his sources, Magnus being able to write a blog with an element of truth and 4 being able to admit something negative about GD 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

Because the money TNZ are trying to get from foreign bidders covers both the event costs and a big wodge to fund the TNZ campaign. If Ineos take over running the event, TNZ don't get that wodge

Alright. You've also indicated then why this won't happen. Time to start studying.

51WtmvrCUzL._SX394_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

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

What are events cost?  This is a regatta, you have that associated overhead. 
What else is there for cost?

Is this a serious question?

It's not just a regatta- they have a little more to cover than a few rounds of drinks for the RC staff, and setting up a drink tent. 

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

well last time around there was the 3 mill that helped design the boat ( allegedly) and another 3 mil that went to the super clever scammers ( allegedly)

 

so what ever figure someone comes up with take off 6 million...

don't forget :

1) ETNZ administrative costs

2) GD commission for arranging the financing that paid for the event

2) ETNZ profit margin

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://rule69.blog/2021/09/22/game-over/

Magnus Wheatley is RIGHT SPOT ON: RNZYS Commodore Aaron Young should force Mark Dunphy & Hamish Ross, who are both Members of the Squadron, to rescind their Membership effective immediatedly.

The Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron doesn't need "ROGUE MEMBERS" in their Club - Period!

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

Is this a serious question?

It's not just a regatta- they have a little more to cover than a few rounds of drinks for the RC staff, and setting up a drink tent. 

Mark/Committee Boats

RC and PC

Dockage and compounds are not part of race management.

That's what it takes to run the regatta.  Course management of spectators is either hiring local LEO or some other organization.

Media rights and that organization is not an expense it is revenue.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, enigmatically2 said:

Better would be to say Ineos would take on all responsibility for holding it in AKL: organising, paying, sorting broadcast rights etc. Would allow GD to concentrate just on team

Isn't that what the Kiwi government offered, except with the team doing the running and creative accounting?

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, sailman said:

Mark/Committee Boats

RC and PC

Dockage and compounds are not part of race management.

That's what it takes to run the regatta.  Course management of spectators is either hiring local LEO or some other organization.

Media rights and that organization is not an expense it is revenue.

 

Sounds like you should call up ETNZ and let them you've figured out how to run the America's Cup regatta. Do report back and let is know their response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a Radio Interview with Mike Hosking (this Morning NZ Time) TNZ CEO Grant Dalton said that they are moving as fast as they can to name a Venue for AC37 but mentions that after Alinghi won in 2003 (Final Race was on the 2nd of March 2003) the new Venue Valencia for AC32 wasn't named until November 27th 2003 so it may take some time! Dalton said quote "We are just 6 months into this Host Bidding Process, 3 months of it with exclusiv NZ Hosting Period, so it will take some time". 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, atwinda said:

Sounds like you should call up ETNZ and let them you've figured out how to run the America's Cup regatta. Do report back and let is know their response.

ETNZ taking on all the extraneous stuff is just padding their bottom line.   Push all the hype to the side, this is a regatta.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some History on America's Cup Hosting Processes when it's a Multi-Challenger Event:

Final Race AC31: 2nd of March 2003
Venue named for AC32: November 27th 2003

Final Race AC33 (DoG Match): February 14th 2010
Joint Press Conference between GGYC & Club Nautico di Roma: May 6th 2010
AC34 Protocol Announcement: September 13th 2010 [AC34 Protocol stipulated that AC34 Venue to be announced before or on December 31st 2010]
Venue named for AC34: December 31st 2010

Final Race AC34: September 25th 2013
AC35 Protocol Announcement: 3rd June 2014
AC35 Venue Announcement: 2nd December 2014

Final Race AC35: 26th June 2017
AC36 Protocol Announcement: September 26th 2017
AC36 Venue Announcement & Dates: 30 August 2018

OTUSA took over a year to announce the Venue for AC35 so give Grant Dalton, COO Kevin Shoebridge & Legal Advisor Russell Green some slack please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dalton has repeatedly said "It's a business."

Well.. since businesses by nature try to maximize profits, then for what reason besides profit should we ascribe GD's persistent rejection of Auckland as a venue? MD's approach was a big threat to that goal and GD went ballistic. "Everyone is trying to get me, ghosts like Bertarelli and LE, now MD, everyone!' Lmao

As Sir James Farmer pointed out recently, there actually is a difference between what ETNZ needs versus what they may want. If the $80M was the need, then why not hold it in Auckland? Again?

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

Dalton has repeatedly said "It's a business."

Well.. since businesses by nature try to maximize profits, then for what reason besides profit should we ascribe GD's persistent rejection of Auckland as a venue? MD's approach was a big threat to that goal and GD went ballistic. "Everyone is trying to get me, ghosts like Bertarelli and LE, now MD, everyone!' Lmao

As Sir James Farmer pointed out recently, there actually is a difference between what ETNZ needs versus what they may want. If the $80M was the need, then why not hold it in Auckland? Again?

GD knows better than anyone what it takes to win and successfully defend the AC. He went “Ballistic” because rogue members of the RNZYS (Dunphy and Dr Hamish Ross) were attempting to undermine the venue process and disqualify the CoR so that a new protocol could be negotiated that would suit their own agenda.

 

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

Mark/Committee Boats

RC and PC

Dockage and compounds are not part of race management.

That's what it takes to run the regatta.  Course management of spectators is either hiring local LEO or some other organization.

Media rights and that organization is not an expense it is revenue.

 

If they only do that at one venue for challenger selection and the Cup, that would be a lot cheaper than a circus of pre -events, the AC40 circuses for women and utes and what have you. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, enigmatically2 said:

I thought they offered much more than the event needs, so quite a lot for TNZ campaign, just not enough

If you, as is perfectly natural to, 'follow the money' when it comes to what GD says is 'a business' then yes, 'just not enough' for his preference.. GD has been actively resisting any and all Auckland offers from the get-go, he probably thinks (as the holder of the Chalice) there are vastly greater riches to be made elsewhere out of it. 

I think it remains possible that despite GD's email evidence (which was part of the attempt to keep the Cup Defense in Auckland, obviously) and so his ability to do a Monty Python "See, He's a Witch!!!" routine, they still have no f'ing venue. Is it smart to be so actively attacking the locals, the ones offering to chip in, burning bridges, if Auckland with its already-built infrastructure ends up the best option left?

Besides all that, this thing could end up in court if he tries to take it offshore (local or maybe even in NYSC, since even 'standing' could take a time to sort) and regardless the case merits it would put a massive time-delay/fiasco into the whole show. Including into the supposed venue negotiation possibilities.

With guys like Farmer involved, it just looks like GD may not be quite as impregnable as what he comes across as. While GD says he is done dealing with KiwiHomeDefence, this may not be over. 

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

If you, as is perfectly natural to, 'follow the money' when it comes to what GD says is 'a business' then yes, 'just not enough' for his preference.. GD has been actively resisting any and all Auckland offers from the get-go, he probably thinks (as the holder of the Chalice) there are vastly greater riches to be made elsewhere out of it. 

I think it remains possible that despite GD's email evidence (which was part of the attempt to keep the Cup Defense in Auckland, obviously) and so his ability to do a Monty Python "See, He's a Witch!!!" routine, they still have no f'ing venue. Is it smart to be so actively attacking the locals, the ones offering to chip in, if Auckland with its already-built infrastructure ends up the best option left?

Besides all that, this thing could end up in court if he tries to take it offshore (local or maybe even in NYSC) and regardless the merits it would put a massive time-delay/fiasco into the whole show. Including into the supposed venue possibilities.

Hahahaha deflect deflect deflect lol

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

If you, as is perfectly natural to, 'follow the money' when it comes to what GD says is 'a business' then yes, 'just not enough' for his preference.. GD has been actively resisting any and all Auckland offers from the get-go, he probably thinks (as the holder of the Chalice) there are vastly greater riches to be made elsewhere out of it. 

I think it remains possible that despite GD's email evidence (which was part of the attempt to keep the Cup Defense in Auckland, obviously) and so his ability to do a Monty Python "See, He's a Witch!!!" routine, they still have no f'ing venue. Is it smart to be so actively attacking the locals, the ones offering to chip in, if Auckland with its already-built infrastructure ends up the best option left?

Besides all that, this thing could end up in court if he tries to take it offshore (local or maybe even in NYSC) and regardless the merits it would put a massive time-delay/fiasco into the whole show. Including into the supposed venue possibilities.

The precedent has already been set in 2007 (and by extension, 2010), as well as 2017, for “offshoring” the event. That horse has probably left the barn.

How is it supposed to “end up in court” now?

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

How is it supposed to “end up in court” now?

Good question and I do not know but there were rumors a while back that court in Auckland was a possible precursor to any action in NY. Maybe the business community in Auckland would be happy to apply that pressure? It seems to be a 'carrot and stick' approach they are taking toward GD. Will be interesting to see if in the next statement from MD he says he is done too. He may not be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, enigmatically2 said:

I have no idea. But isn't TNZ a company with shareholders. So can declare a dividend? In the UK we can see basic accounts info. Can you do that in NZ?

Not for a private company i.e. one with a private shareholding.  You can check out all the public documents here:
https://app.companiesoffice.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/582931?backurl=H4sIAAAAAAAAAC3LMQ7CMBQD0Ntk6dATfCEmlg5IcAErsaBS8xPyf0Dl9EQVm209zxUP2hxLrtB1JCNafJ5ySRRzaEJLwfdKofrqg4SXOJEn5Wf6EtswAekNjUxXKDfx1hkOvt%2FH0%2BS8LP9%2Bc3i3Syu9HvMPBhnbwoAAAAA%3D

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

If you, as is perfectly natural to, 'follow the money' when it comes to what GD says is 'a business' then yes, 'just not enough' for his preference.. GD has been actively resisting any and all Auckland offers from the get-go, he probably thinks (as the holder of the Chalice) there are vastly greater riches to be made elsewhere out of it. 

You make the assumption that Dalts is driven firstly by maximising the profit from the "business" when in fact the primary objective of the business is to win.  Arguably ETNZ have never had what they wanted in terms of funding and subsequently have had to run an innovative but financially constrained approach.

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

Has anyone read this (subscription) article? 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.32bb638d00e137f2bea80aefb81c48c1.jpeg

A former director of Team New Zealand has raised questions about the governance of the syndicate, claiming chief executive Grant Dalton "is accountable to no one but himself".

Dr Jim Farmer, a leading Queen's Counsel, believes Team New Zealand's structure is outside the norms of good corporate governance. He has described Dalton as a "control freak".

Greg Horton, a senior corporate lawyer who sits on Team New Zealand's board said he was happy with its governance and processes and fired back at Farmer.
"Grant knows how to win, and takes no prisoners. He makes no apology for that, nor does the board. Winning counts," Horton said.

"Mr Farmer may have the view that Grant is unchecked and unconstrained by the Board, but that is simply not correct. Whether that was the case during Mr Farmer's tenure as a director, I cannot comment."
Dalton is both chief executive of the syndicate as well as acting chairman, a position he has held since Warehouse founder Sir Stephen Tindall resigned from the board in June.
Dalton is also one of only two trustees on the charitable trust that owns Team New Zealand. The other is Horton, a senior corporate lawyer who is battling motor neuron disease.

Further, he notes that the structure of the Trust and Team NZ have not changed since Mr Farmer's involvement, no moneys flow through the Trust, and there are more directors of Team NZ now than in Mr Farmer's day (or indeed on Greymouth Petroleum now)."


In the days leading up to Team New Zealand's announcement that it was postponing the announcement of the venue for the next America's Cup on September 17, the syndicate has been fending off advances from wealthy businessman Mark Dunphy.
Dalton responded by saying unless the team knew where the money was coming from it could not accept it "from a straight governance point of view".
In a post on his blog, Farmer, who spent almost a decade on the board of Team New Zealand from 2003 to 2014, said he was not sure the syndicate was in a position to raise questions about corporate governance.


"In conventional company law and governance terms, the CEO is accountable to the board, the board is accountable to the shareholders, '' Farmer wrote.
He told the Herald that these controls did not appear to be in place for Team New Zealand. "Basically, he [Dalton] is accountable to no one but himself."
Farmer said Dalton's position gave him powers such as to call board meetings, which in his experience, he did not seem to like to do.
"In my time, when I was on the board of Team New Zealand, he [Dalton] always had to be pushed to call board meetings. He didn't really like board meetings, as a concept."

Typically a chair was an important role separate to the chief executive, providing day-to-day checks.
"If you've got the same person being the chair and the CEO, well, you don't get that. They're consulting with themselves."
Dalton's role as one of only two trustees gave added control, as it was trustees who could vote out directors, but even if the other trustee disagreed with him,
"The fact is, you've got Grant as one of two trustees. If the other trustee thought that the board wasn't doing things properly, or the CEO wasn't doing properly, or say just Grant wasn't doing things properly, what can he do about it? Because he's got no majority position as one of two trustees, holding the shares," Farmer said.
"In the structure, there's no room for governance, at all."


In Farmer's view, this could be of concern to a Government or any other entity if it was to put money towards the next America's Cup event.
"If you're investing the money, not as a shareholder, not as a lender, but you're putting money into this entity for a particular purpose, you want to make sure it's actually spent on that purpose, in accordance with whatever guidelines that may be put down."
Dunphy alluded to similar concerns in letters to Team New Zealand and the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron earlier this month.


"It would have been preferable for independent parties to have been appointed as trustees when Sir Stephen Tindall retired as trustee of the Team New Zealand Charitable Trust," Dunphy wrote on September 16.
"Good governance principles require a clear separation between the governance of the Charitable Trust and the governance of Team New Zealand Limited. One expects this issue will be resolved through this process."


A governance adviser approached to discuss Team New Zealand's corporate structure said he did not believe it would provide the checks and accountabilities needed.
"It's hard to see how you could provide effective oversight and accountability. You've got a chief executive reporting to a board, that he leads, which in turn is accountable to a trust that he is trustee of," Richard Westlake, the managing director of Westlake Governance, told the Herald.
"The risk is you're not going to get the type of challenging and the testing of the thinking and decision-making that you need from a board."


This week Team New Zealand released the correspondence it has shared with Dunphy since the oilman made public his interest in supporting an Auckland campaign.
While the letters and emails quickly become tense (Dunphy having publicly stated Dalton needed to step down] an early email sees Dalton provide a polite account of the team's dynamics, revealing Team New Zealand's board discussed when Tindall resigned whether new board members were needed.
"The conclusion was that we act as a very cohesive unit, we all totally understand the Cup and we do not need anyone else, it worked and works just fine - 3 [Louis Vuitton Cup] wins and 2 [America's Cup] wins would indicate we are doing something right!"
In a statement, Team New Zealand director Greg Horton, who has been on the board for most of the period since 2014, defended the current governance.
"While I have the greatest respect for Jim Farmer QC as a fellow legal professional, he knows nothing about the governance arrangements at Team New Zealand, either currently or during the last two successful America's Cup campaigns."

During the 2017 Bermuda campaign and the successful defence of the America's Cup in March the campaigns were led by Tindall "with formal board meetings and very regular interactions between directors and management," Horton said.
"As we work towards another successful campaign, which is and will always be our focus, as directors we are all intimately involved on a daily basis. And I mean literally on a daily basis.
"As a director, I am satisfied with our governance and governance processes – both now and during the last two campaigns."

"Mr Farmer may wish to describe Grant as a control freak, and he may well be in some people's eyes, but I would point out that under his strong leadership and unwavering tenacity we have won the last two Americas Cups. Grant knows how to win, and takes no prisoners. He makes no apology for that, nor does the Board. Winning counts," Horton said.
Horton said Dunphy - like Dalton - was both chairman and chief executive of Greymouth Petroleum. "We make no apology for that, as presumably Mr Dunphy does not in his own private company."


Horton also described Dunphy as a "close associate" of Farmer. Team New Zealand had earlier said Farmer "represented" Dunphy, something Farmer denied.
While he represented Greymouth Petroleum in a case against Energy Minister Megan Woods in 2020, and acknowledged he speaks to the entrepreneur frequently, he was not representing him now.
"He doesn't want me to act for him so he doesn't have to pay me," Farmer said.
"I'm doing this solely as a yachtie, because I have my own racing yacht. As a member of the squadron, and as a former Team New Zealand director," Farmer said.

Dunphy's correspondence shows he consistently attempts to correspond with former Toyota New Zealand chairman Bob Field and Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron commodore Aaron Young.
In an interview with the Herald on September 17, Dunphy urged the RNZYS to take the lead on talks.
"We're all looking for the squadron to be a leader here. I don't just mean all of us in New Zealand, I think the international community, the international sailing community, is too. I don't doubt the New York Yacht Club as the original trustee of the cup is looking closely for a whole variety of reasons. They want to come down here, I understand, and compete."
In response, Dalton demanded that he alone be the named contact, adding Young had indicated he had no part in the negotiations. At one point, Field corrects Dunphy's description of him, pointing out that he is not, nor has he ever been, chairman of Team New Zealand.


Horton said the board of Team New Zealand had indicated the negotiations should be "between Grant and Mr Dunphy" adding that the letter had asked a series of simple questions, but had not received answers.
"Mr Dunphy's correspondence proposes considerably more government investment, which the government has said it will not do, so Mr Dunphy appears to be flogging the proverbial dead horse."


UPDATE: TNZ contacted the Herald after publication of this report to say Horton believed the reference to his motor neurone disease was "inappropriate". He advises he is "most disappointed" his health was brought into the debate. Horton further advised that he defacto acts as chairman, but due to his limited ability to speak through motor neurone disease he works principally by written word. He has not wished to be identified publicly as acting chair, due to those limitations, which is the reason why Dalton has been identified as such. Further, he notes that the structure of the Trust and Team NZ have not changed since Dr Farmer's involvement, no moneys flow through the Trust, and there are more directors of Team NZ now than when Farmer was a director.

Edited by AKL wino
clarity
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Besides all that, this thing could end up in court if he tries to take it offshore (local or maybe even in NYSC) and regardless the merits it would put a massive time-delay/fiasco into the whole show. Including into the supposed venue possibilities.

Did the Board Meeting not go very well Stingers?  Why would anyone waste millions in court to keep the event in Auckland?  Hell even the NYYC didn't want a bar of that!

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

Maybe the business community in Auckland would be happy to apply that pressure?

FFS @Stingray~ the Auckland Business Community is in survival mode.  Central Auckland has been fucked over by the Council/CRL and the wider business community is being slaughtered by Covid-19 lockdowns.  Auckland is burning a $1b or more a week at the moment!  5 weeks in Level 4 lockdown and only 150,000 essential workers (mainly food and transport companies) could go to work!!

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

Good question and I do not know but there were rumors a while back that court in Auckland was a possible precursor to any action in NY. Maybe the business community in Auckland would be happy to apply that pressure? It seems to be a 'carrot and stick' approach they are taking toward GD. Will be interesting to see if in the next statement from MD he says he is done too. He may not be.

The “Business community” in Auckland doesn’t give a crap about the America’s Cup. They’ve got enough to worry about just trying to  break even. If you think they’d be at all interested in a court battle over a sailing trophy, you’re severely deluded. Dunphy is done. Finished. His non proposal is done. IF and it’s a big IF, it’s held in Auckland, it’ll be because Dalton pulled it off. Dunphy will disappear and fade back into obscurity where he came from and Ross will probably lose his membership with the RNZYS.

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

It seems to be a 'carrot and stick' approach they are taking toward GD.

Who ARE they mysterious THEY?  So far we have only heard from Dunphy and latterly Ross although those two don't seem to be that connected.  I wouldn't be surprised in Dunphy is a lone wolf.  A clue could be his use of the term "Tamaki Makaurau" instead of Auckland.  Nearly everyone I know in Auckland find it grating and those outside of Auckland don't even know what if refers to.

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

"In conventional company law and governance terms, the CEO is accountable to the board, the board is accountable to the shareholders, '' Farmer wrote.
He told the Herald that these controls did not appear to be in place for Team New Zealand. "Basically, he [Dalton] is accountable to no one but himself."
Farmer said Dalton's position gave him powers such as to call board meetings, which in his experience, he did not seem to like to do.
"In my time, when I was on the board of Team New Zealand, he [Dalton] always had to be pushed to call board meetings. He didn't really like board meetings, as a concept."

Farmer is stirring the pot here for what reason I'm struggling to fathom.  What he describes as "conventional" isn't accurate nor is it accurate in Team New Zealand's case.

May be Farmer will be the next whose RNZYS membership will be put to the sword.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any way to keep this guy Stingray with his "Desperate Attempts to keep the Cup in Auckland" where there is no money off this Board?

It isn't funny anymore! There will be no Court Action because no one has the money to do it and doesn't want to do it.

Stingray is grasping at straws here all in self interest because he doesn't want to travel to the Middle East for whatever dumb reason.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AKL wino said:

"I'm doing this solely as a yachtie, because I have my own racing yacht. As a member of the squadron, and as a former Team New Zealand director," Farmer said.

Farmer was bumped from ETNZ when he was appointed to the International Committee to hold an inquiry into the death of Andrew Simpson.  He has made it quite clear that he prefers a return to non-foiling mono-hulls of a standard design e.g. the Volvo 70's.  Which you must admit is not what the AC has EVER been about.  

He has been blogging for a while now promoting going down a different path.  Farmer seems to have an axe to grind and it would be fair to say that ETNZ's performance has improved in his absence.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Forourselves said:

There was a discussion a while back in one of these threads that questioned the validity of RYSL. Interesting, now that that very topic has become a subject of “that Email” 

Who was the "other group" that got out manoeuvred in lodging a challenge to RNZYS?

If you join all the dots there is an old boys clique within the RNZYS behind Dunphy - Farmer, Ross, probably even Barker.  Every club has them.  Dalts would grate them even though he has money they would look down on him because of his street fighting touch of uncouth.   

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

Is there any way to keep this guy Stingray with his "Desperate Attempts to keep the Cup in Auckland" where there is no money off this Board?

It isn't funny anymore! There will be no Court Action because no one has the money to do it and doesn't want to do it.

Stingray is grasping at straws here all in self interest because he doesn't want to travel to the Middle East for whatever dumb reason.

Careful where you throw those stones A4idiot, the same ammo applies to you.

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

If you, as is perfectly natural to, 'follow the money' when it comes to what GD says is 'a business' then yes, 'just not enough' for his preference.. GD has been actively resisting any and all Auckland offers from the get-go, he probably thinks (as the holder of the Chalice) there are vastly greater riches to be made elsewhere out of it. 

I think it remains possible that despite GD's email evidence (which was part of the attempt to keep the Cup Defense in Auckland, obviously) and so his ability to do a Monty Python "See, He's a Witch!!!" routine, they still have no f'ing venue. Is it smart to be so actively attacking the locals, the ones offering to chip in, burning bridges, if Auckland with its already-built infrastructure ends up the best option left?

Besides all that, this thing could end up in court if he tries to take it offshore (local or maybe even in NYSC, since even 'standing' could take a time to sort) and regardless the case merits it would put a massive time-delay/fiasco into the whole show. Including into the supposed venue negotiation possibilities.

With guys like Farmer involved, it just looks like GD may not be quite as impregnable as what he comes across as. While GD says he is done dealing with KiwiHomeDefence, this may not be over. 

It's starting to look like GD took his spare change from his new boat and bought a flock of sparrows. Said sparrows will peck him and his Defense into true senior citizen status and an underfunded boat. As we know, it's the fastest boat...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some insight into where Farmer is coming from:

To finish. One concern that I do have about the next Event, wherever it is held, is the cost of the new proposed foiling monohull.  No one has ever built a 75 foot fully foiling monohull and the sketches that have been released of the proposed boat show what a breath-taking challenge it will be to design and build such a boat and to make it sail.  In my first piece on the America’s Cup, posted on 1 July 2013, I said:

“Grant Dalton has said that the next Event needs to meet budget constraints to attract a good number of challengers.  He must be right on that and choosing a monohull over the technologically complex multihulls will assist in that regard.”

The technological complexity (and associated costs) of the AC multihulls must surely look simple and modest compared with what is now proposed. 

Jim Farmer

4