Americas Cup
-
“We are aware of a RNZYS member, [America’s Cup lawyer] Mr Hamish Ross, who acts for the New York Yacht Club (NYYC) and recently delivered a wildcard challenge as well as their proposed protocol to the Commodore of the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron (RNZYS) on behalf of the New York Yacht Club,” Team New Zealand said in a statement. “Mr Ross appears to be leading the agenda of the NYYC who he represents by seeking to impose their agenda on the RNZYS and the 37th America’s Cup.” -
Sailing professor: Why Team NZ's future is at stake today
COMMENT: At stake, the very future of the current Team New Zealand line up.
Sailing professor Mark Orams: D-Day for Team New Zealand as compromise looms for future of America's Cup
Mark Orams
OPINION
The racing may be over for 2021 but the controversy that always accompanies the America's Cup never sleeps.
Tonight's meeting between Team New Zealand boss Grant Dalton and the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron, the official holders of the Auld Mug, is a huge moment in the history of the famous trophy.
I suspect it will be an emotionally charged meeting with Dalton trying to convince the members that the only way to fund Team NZ is to take the next defence of the cup offshore. Many in the audience will vehemently oppose this, determined that it should remain here.
At stake, I believe, will be the very future of the current Team New Zealand line up.
Peter Burling, Blair Tuke and the rest of this amazing team are the most successful in America's Cup history. As we saw during the defence of the cup in Auckland this year, Team New Zealand has the jump on the opposition in terms of talent and intellectual property.
But financial pressure means the team is in danger of losing its competitive advantage as happened 20-odd years ago, with disastrous results.
Back then, our best talent was raided by the opposition, the Kiwi team was left on its knees, the cup was lost to a skilled and well-organised opponent, and it took 15 long years to get it back.
My hope, and plea to all involved, is that we don't put ourselves in this position again.
My understanding is that the Emirates airline, which has been TNZ's principal backer, will not be continuing with their sponsorship.
But whether they stay or not, Dalton may still be in a position where he needs to take the next contest overseas, in order to secure the massive amounts of money needed to keep the team together.
Whether anyone likes it or not, cash is key at this level of professional sport.
Dalton has been through negotiations with the New Zealand Government and local council and it is obvious their financial offer is not enough. There are no New Zealand-based sponsors with deep enough pockets either.
So where does Dalton find the $200m needed?
Internationally, there are a select few high-net-worth individuals who admire and are envious of Team New Zealand's achievements. They want to replicate it – or perhaps even buy into it.
It is this scenario that he will be talking through with the membership of the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron tonight.
To cut to the chase, I believe the answer may lie in the proposal put forward by the British team Ineos, who are prepared to stump up with a huge amount of money in return for a special one-on-one challenge at the Isle of Wight next year. In return billionaire owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe will guarantee Auckland as the next venue over the 2023/24 summer even if he wins the Isle of Wight challenge.
Okay, this may not be ideal. But if it keeps TNZ together, it is worth the trade-off.
And I don't think it would be all bad.
Brand New Zealand would get promoted in Europe next year, the America's Cup momentum would be sustained while generating interest in the key northern hemisphere cities, and most importantly multinational sponsors would get exposure in big markets.
For RNZYS members, and the wider New Zealand public – the benefit is that the Cup will be hosted here in Auckland in 2023/24 – and hopefully in a world where COVID-19 is under control and we have the opportunity to host teams, fans, sponsors and super-yachts.
It's a difficult compromise – but if it allows Team New Zealand to stay intact and competitive – it might be a compromise worth making. Dalton's challenge is to convince the squadron membership of this and to successfully persuade them that the alternative is not palatable. That is, a significantly weakened Team New Zealand lines up in 2022/23 summer and loses, badly.
One thing is certain about Dalts - he hates losing with a passion.
He has faced many challenges in his long sailing career. This is certainly another one where he will be facing further controversy. He will need all of his famed determination and thick skin to get through it.
When approached by the Herald, Team NZ CEO Grant Dalton said they were unaware of suggestions Emirates intend to end their sponsorship.
"Emirates have been the naming rights sponsor of the team for 18 years. We have no knowledge of this, however, we are well aware (of) the difficulties that all airlines are experiencing at present due to Covid so (we) would in fact be completely understanding if that was the case."
-
-
@tim what he mean surely is no choice if ETNZ is to have the budget they want/need to defend it successfully
which then asks the question is hosting it here again and all the financial benefits that come with it worth not being competitive
-
Dalton is trying to avoid a repeat of the Coutts/ Berterelli fiasco. AC is a rich man's game, if we can't pay to keep the band together there is nothing stopping them taking themselves and all that IC with them to the highest bidder. But as someone else said, if they do end up signing for a one on one challenge with Ineos for example, any promises to return to Auckland for the next challenge better be ironclad
-
so, assuming everything he says is correct, would people rather have one more comp in NZ and risk losing it (due to lack of funding meaning staff leave etc) or sell out, take it overseas and keep it?
-
@kiwiwomble said in Americas Cup:
so, assuming everything he says is correct, would people rather have one more comp in NZ and risk losing it (due to lack of funding meaning staff leave etc) or sell out, take it overseas and keep it?
No win right? What's the point of having it if we don't get to stage it? I don't think one offshore regatta is going to future proof ETNZ financially long term.
-
@canefan said in Americas Cup:
@kiwiwomble said in Americas Cup:
so, assuming everything he says is correct, would people rather have one more comp in NZ and risk losing it (due to lack of funding meaning staff leave etc) or sell out, take it overseas and keep it?
No win right? What's the point of having it if we don't get to stage it? I don't think one offshore regatta is going to future proof ETNZ financially long term.
definitely not long term, it always seems to be regatta to regatta
counter point, whats the point in winning the RWC if you dont get to host it next time? i know its not the same as technically its a choice....but practically it doesn't seem to be
-
-
as we've said before, just hope hes also not expecting funding from the government if it goes overseas, im a long term fan and understood funding them previously as the goal was to bring the event back to NZ.... but a move overseas would shatter that idea
-
@bovidae said in Americas Cup:
Good to read that Dalton is realistic about the Government and Auckland CC not being an endless supply of money. You need either a rich benefactor or very generous sponsors, preferably both, to survive.
I can't think offhand of any other team that operates the way we do. It has always been a rich man's game, and we are the exception not the rule
-
@kiwiwomble said in Americas Cup:
as we've said before, just hope hes also not expecting funding from the government if it goes overseas, im a long term fan and understood funding them previously as the goal was to bring the event back to NZ.... but a move overseas would shatter that idea
Wouldn't hosting it in a more profitable location reduce the amount of funding needed from other sources?
I don't see the issue with having this overseas - if we host and retain this year in year out it's going to do nothing for the sport.
It's a bit like if David Tua ever wont the heavyweight title. It would have been nice to have an early defence at home, but there is no need for him to martyr himself defending every time at the Trusts Stadium when he could be at the MGM Grand.
-
@rotated i would hope they wouldn;t need extra funding if they take it overseas, we might end up with Ineos Team New Zealand v Ineos Team Great Britain
I was coming around to the idea of it having to go overseas until it was pointed out earlier in the thread that the investment around the Auckland water front last time was based on two event to break even...so if they take it away now they're effectively ripping the tax payer off
-
@kiwiwomble said in Americas Cup:
I was coming around to the idea of it having to go overseas until it was pointed out earlier in the thread that the investment around the Auckland water front last time was based on two event to break even...so if they take it away now they're effectively ripping the tax payer off
Probably me that mentioned it, but it is exactly the case. You can add the Akl ratepayer as well.
They are taking our rates and taxes to pay themselves. The deal was, we give you the money and you win we get a payoff. Like any capital investment.
Having said that I think that the government could reinvest a little more as well to keep a winning team together and to recoup some of the first investment lot. It's not throwing good money after bad because they keep winning. They won't if the team breaks up. More a reinvestment in success type philosophy and the capital grows.
I'll still be pissed if they sell out all of the supporters and fans that pay taxes, bought merch etc, and won't get to see them race again next time. It feels like a real betrayal. Might as well get Butterworth and Coutts back on board.
-
@snowy i think it was
i should also said it s bit silly of the government not to actually have that as a clause in their contract, if they win they have to hold it in NZ as long as this funding is also met or something. Sole negotiation rights is a bit weak
-
@kiwiwomble said in Americas Cup:
i should also said it s bit silly of the government not to actually have that as a clause in their contract, if they win they have to hold it in NZ as long as this funding is also met or something. Sole negotiation rights is a bit weak
First bit is probably a bit tough to enforce regarding the funding. Nice idea though. Yes to the sole negotiating rights. A real give us the money or we bugger off attitude. I know that they need the funds but it doesn't sit well with me as a negotiation in good faith.
It's also bloody rude to take people's money to buy a rugby ball, and then just fuck off with it and not play with the people that bought it.
-
Here's a novel thought let's stop calling them "Team NZ" maybe "Dalton's Hero's", "Wind Hoe's" "South Something Sails" basically anything but not Team NZ,
if they want NZ's support and $$ but don't think NZ has any value for having the event here! Then maybe it's time we stopped funding them and look back at the good times we have had and smile but move on
