INEOS Team GB

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,641
2,452
PNW
He noted Team New Zealand's US$50m 2017 budget
There are a lot of ways to measure ‘budget.’ For just one example does that figure include flight-expenses that may have been on Emirates Airlines? 
 

We saw a govt-demanded document for the 2013 campaign that listed around NZD $180 spent despite comments from GD claiming far less. So.. I’d take this figure with a grain of salt even if this next one could be cheaper to run given they’ve been outright ‘given’ a palatial base and are home-water defenders.

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,840
2,285
New Zealand
There are a lot of ways to measure ‘budget.’ For just one example does that figure include flight-expenses that may have been on Emirates Airlines? 
 

We saw a govt-demanded document for the 2013 campaign that listed around NZD $180 spent despite comments from GD claiming far less. So.. I’d take this figure with a grain of salt even if this next one could be cheaper to run given they’ve been outright ‘given’ a palatial base and are home-water defenders.
While we obviously don't know, and probably will never know exact amounts teams spend on their campaigns, its an age old debate, especially in the Americas Cup. Technology is expensive, people are expensive. I wonder if Ben Ainslie maybe should've led by example and purchased a design package from the Kiwi's if the costs concern him so much?

Note also: That "Palatial base" was a result of negotiations which satisfied the parties concerned and enabled the event to go ahead as planned after pushback from certain groups.

The VEC wasn't ETNZ's original preference. they wanted their own purpose built base, but instead adapted the Events Centre as the Skycity Convention Centre was (at that time) on track for completion. That lease spans two cup cycles, after which they are again, waterfront nomads.

 

NeedAClew

Super Anarchist
5,966
1,650
USA
Indeed lots of ways to measure "budget" but $300K grinders (e.g., Spooner) start to add up. 

Wonder if the elite sailors would push for more affordable Cups if they included salary caps?  Blame most always (except GD quote) seems to fall on the bizarre musical chairs of different boats instead of a nice stable class FRAMEWORK but how about sharing the austerity?  

 

barfy

Super Anarchist
4,752
1,217
seems to fall on the bizarre musical chairs of different boats instead of a nice stable class FRAMEWORK but how about sharing
Booo. Back to the fail gp retired AC boats thread with you. This is the design class thread.  :D

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,641
2,452
PNW
Indeed lots of ways to measure "budget" but $300K grinders (e.g., Spooner) start to add up. 
Yes, GD makes a good point about salaries being 60% of budget and yes, teams will spend whatever budget they have, but with going to a ten-sailor crew (plus presumably a few alternates) the AC75 is definitely more demanding in that sense.

^^ Yes, they basically were ‘given’ the Events Center building, plus an all-expenses paid renovation. Am not slamming that, just pointing it out as something ETNZ has for free, unlike anyone else.

 

NeedAClew

Super Anarchist
5,966
1,650
USA
Indeed lots of ways to measure "budget" but $300K grinders (e.g., Spooner) start to add up. 

Wonder if the elite sailors would push for more affordable Cups if they included salary caps?  Blame most always (except GD quote) seems to fall on the bizarre musical chairs of different boats instead of a nice stable class FRAMEWORK but how about sharing the austerity?  
Sorry I missed my sarcasm font. : )

Booo. Back to the fail gp retired AC boats thread with you. This is the design class thread.  :D
Yeah and why should design and build budgets be the bad girls? :)

Share the affordability and see if that makes a "better" Cup LOLOL 

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,840
2,285
New Zealand
Yes, GD makes a good point about salaries being 60% of budget and yes, teams will spend whatever budget they have, but with going to a ten-sailor crew (plus presumably a few alternates) the AC75 is definitely more demanding in that sense.

^^ Yes, they basically were ‘given’ the Events Center building, plus an all-expenses paid renovation. Am not slamming that, just pointing it out as something ETNZ has for free, unlike anyone else.
This explains the agreement.

And this is what happens when investors/ stakeholders, including councils and Government gain healthy return on their investment, and not a huge financial black hole like those that Ellison and Coutts left after their AC tenure.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/102672658/team-nz-remain-waterfront-nomads-under-new-americas-cup-base-plan

 

NeedAClew

Super Anarchist
5,966
1,650
USA
Is it actually known based on some kind of numbers that Cup "success" is greater with more challengers?  What numbers?

I can understand how there can be more events, longer regattas, etc. But how does that translate into NET $$$$ impact and for who?  How does that translate into popularity of the Cup? Sailing? Sponsor ROI?  

New technologies make whatever sailing there is easier to see and to know more about in great detail. I mean, I know you talk about the great Cups with all those challengers...but those were obscure to me since basically I read about it in the newspaper and magazines. I learned a lot more about Cuo history off the web than I ever knew as it happened.

 

NeedAClew

Super Anarchist
5,966
1,650
USA
I am asking about what the financial basis is behind the claims that more challengers are better, and if so,  better for whom. Everybody? Somebody? 

Sustainability sounds much nicer than financially viable, or profitable, doesn't it. ;)

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,641
2,452
PNW
Is it actually known based on some kind of numbers that Cup "success" is greater with more challengers?  What numbers?
In the now-gone ETNZ thread we covered in great detail the shitfight in Auckland, including the Economic Impact Statement used as argument for making the case for hundreds of millions of $’s contributions by Auckland and by the NZ govt. The ‘benefit’ numbers in the EIS was hugely skewed by the number of Challengers.

That said, ‘success’ need not be purely in $’s. The country of NZ will likely be riveted by the event, regardless how much they ended up paying for the party.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,840
2,285
New Zealand
Is it actually known based on some kind of numbers that Cup "success" is greater with more challengers?  What numbers?

I can understand how there can be more events, longer regattas, etc. But how does that translate into NET $$$$ impact and for who?  How does that translate into popularity of the Cup? Sailing? Sponsor ROI?  

New technologies make whatever sailing there is easier to see and to know more about in great detail. I mean, I know you talk about the great Cups with all those challengers...but those were obscure to me since basically I read about it in the newspaper and magazines. I learned a lot more about Cuo history off the web than I ever knew as it happened.
Depends on the perspective you're looking at it from I guess. Event-wise, AC32 in Valencia is up there with some of the best. Great venue, Lots of teams, beautiful weather for the most part, and great racing, but its no secret, once the circus left town, Valencia took a major financial hit from the event and could possibly be considered a huge failure from a financial perspective.

the two Auckland series, the opposite can be said, still lots of challengers, great venue, great racing and two memorable cycles, but those two events leave a long lasting legacy, not only with the sport, but with the Viaduct and Waterfront areas, which is still evident and growing now.

It all depends on your perspective. I loved AC32 in Valencia, but I'm betting those that paid for it probably wish it never happened.

Same can be said from San Francisco. They were happy to let Larry and Russell take their shiny cup somewhere else.

Bermuda...well, who knows. Great racing, but will it leave a good and long lasting legacy? Guess time will tell.

 

smackdaddy

Super Anarchist
6,012
560
SmackDab, Middle
In the now-gone ETNZ thread we covered in great detail the shitfight in Auckland, including the Economic Impact Statement used as argument for making the case for hundreds of millions of $’s contributions by Auckland and by the NZ govt. The ‘benefit’ numbers in the EIS was hugely skewed by the number of Challengers.

That said, ‘success’ need not be purely in $’s. The country of NZ will likely be riveted by the event, regardless how much they ended up paying for the party.
Yeah - even a cursory look at the numbers shows it's a disaster compared to what was initially projected/promised in those various studies. NZ is definitely losing a crapton of money (and prestige) on this cycle. And it's also interesting to see that the Kiwi sailors themselves are getting paid pennies on that sinking dollar compared to the other teams. I'm sure GD and the other teams are giving up their salaries too?

The article also still mentions 4 challengers - as does the AC website. So there are shenanigans still afoot to try to convince someone, somewhere that it's not as bad as it seems. Honest articles like this don't help that look.

 

MR.CLEAN

Moderator
45,426
3,919
Not here
Yeah - even a cursory look at the numbers shows it's a disaster
You need to update your LinkedIn profile.  Must be nice to be able to add all these in to your principal employment of being retired and pretending you know how to sail.

-yacht designer

-forensic accountant

-market researcher

-expert race analyst

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,641
2,452
PNW
Same can be said from San Francisco. They were happy to let Larry and Russell take their shiny cup somewhere else.
The only thing SF did for AC34 was spend around $60M sooner than planned for the new cruise ship terminal upgrade, and allow them to use it. Piers 80 and 32 for base space were cheap rents too. By AC35, the cruise ships were using it.
 

The Auckland numbers are an order of magnitude higher, and ETNZ even threatened to Defend in Italy if they couldn’t get that taxpayer support, it was a very serious shitfight.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

phill_nz

Super Anarchist
2,733
855
internet atm
Yeah - even a cursory look at the numbers shows it's a disaster compared to what was initially projected/promised in those various studies.


NZ is definitely losing a crapton of money (and prestige) on this cycle.
need some figures and references to where and how .. or ... thats just trolling

the Kiwi sailors themselves are getting paid pennies on that sinking dollar
the kiwis are racing for the team they want to .. and where are your figures for a sinking dollar .. if none then ... thats just trolling

there are shenanigans still afoot to try to convince someone, somewhere that it's not as bad as it seems.
the only one trying to convince people its bad is you .. thats just trolling

 
Top