James Farmer

Legal Commentary

America's Cup Part 3

Monday, December 04, 2017
I have twice before written a commentary on the America’s Cup.   I feel qualified to do this, having served as a director of Team New Zealand from 2004 to 2013, been a member of the Challenger Commission for the Valencia Regatta (2007), a member of the International Committee that investigated safety rules following the death of an Artemis sailor, Andrew Simpson, in San Francisco and other related activities.

The achievement of finally winning the Cup back earlier this year was of course a superb team effort and the fact that Team New Zealand chose not to nominate Peter Burling for an individual award at the Halberg awards but restricted its participation in that event to the team section is a justified recognition by them of the fact that it is not possible to single out any one member - sailor, designer or manager – as “winning” the Cup.

It is sad therefore to see of late strong public reaction to the news that Team New Zealand is said to be asking the Government and/or the Auckland Council for a so-called “hosting fee” for the event to be held in Auckland, over and above the $130-190 million to build the bases in Auckland, against the further “news” that Abu Dhabi and Sochi in Russia have been offering large sums ($80 million or more) as a fee payable to Team New Zealand for the right to hold the event.

Typical of the public reaction are these letters to the NZ Herald:

“Team NZ, the hosting fee is a step too far.  By all means go to Abu Dhabi or Sochi with or without the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron, but as Team NZ I’m not so sure.  How about repaying the loyalty that’s been shown to you over the years.”

“If [Team NZ] want to accept money from foreign sources on condition that the competition is held elsewhere, so be it.  Goodbye and good luck.”

Then there was the large piece written by Lizzy Marvelly in the NZ Herald on 2 December which supports public funding for the necessary infrastructure but refers to the hosting fee as outrageous and “a slap in the face to New Zealanders who have supported Team NZ, both emotionally and financially, for decades”.   She draws unfavourable comparisons with the Peter Blake era and concludes it’s “time for Team New Zealand to live up to the name”.

Coming so soon after a General Election in which homelessness and child poverty featured so strongly, all of this is reviving the idea that the America’s Cup is a rich man’s sport and not one that “ordinary” New Zealanders should support.  (The fact is of course that they have and they do.)

It would seem likely that the Government and the Council will find the funds for the infrastructure.  That will be sufficient to ensure the Cup is held here and avoid what we have been told is the contractual obligation to move the Event to Italy if the infrastructure cannot be established.

For myself, apart from whether Abu Dhabi or Russia are even legal alternatives given Team NZ’s contractual arrangements with Prada, I cannot imagine that Team New Zealand would in fact seriously contemplate moving the Event offshore and it would be helpful and in their own interests in retaining public support if they came out in the open right now and said that this is not a possibility.  The failure to make a public statement to that effect will, even to people who believe that it is inconceivable that Team NZ would do so, look rather like corporate blackmail aimed at the Government: “Pay us a hosting fee or we will go elsewhere”.  

Board members such as Sir Stephen Tindall and Bob Field have done so much for New Zealand and, presumably (like me for 10 years as an unpaid director), have been involved with the company for one reason and one reason only – to bring the Cup back to New Zealand.  It is inconceivable that, having achieved that, they would be parties to seeing it leave these shores so quickly for a hosting fee.  I refuse to believe that they would.   Nor do I believe that men who have made their justified reputations on corporate integrity would negotiate with the Government and/or the Council for the allocation of public funds in such a crude fashion.

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 December 2017

Recent Posts

  1. America's Cup Part 3A Chris Goode 11-Dec-2017
  2. America's Cup Part 3 Chris Goode 04-Dec-2017
  3. Pro Bono Publico as an Aid to Living a Balanced Lifestyle Chris Goode 08-Nov-2017
  4. Terence Arnold Retires From the Supreme Court Bench Chris Goode 10-Apr-2017
  5. From Violence to Redemption Chris Goode 15-Mar-2017
  6. Drugs, Sports and Society Chris Goode 18-Oct-2016
  7. Are Our Law Schools Churning Out Too Many Lawyers? Chris Goode 25-Aug-2016
  8. Equiticorp 20 Years On Chris Goode 07-Jun-2016
  9. The Year in Retrospect Chris Goode 19-Jan-2016
  10. A Good Year for the Farmer Legal Family Chris Goode 30-Oct-2015
  11. Having a Balanced Life Style - Part 4 Chris Goode 21-Sep-2015
  12. A Balanced Life Style (Part 3), Prisoners' Voting Rights, Top Gun, 7000kms in a Corvette, John Maynard Keynes and Atticus Finch Chris Goode 05-Aug-2015
  13. Biographies Chris Goode 13-Apr-2015
  14. The Cost of Justice Chris Goode 13-Mar-2015
  15. The Increase in Unrepresented Litigants and Their Effect on the Judicial Process Chris Goode 11-Feb-2015
  16. Evidence - Notes of Presentation to Continuing Legal Education Seminar November 2014 Chris Goode 01-Dec-2014
  17. Corporate Governance and Directors' Liability Chris Goode 19-Aug-2014
  18. Paper Presented on 2 August 2014 at the Competition Law & Policy Institute of New Zealand 25th Annual Conference Chris Goode 05-Aug-2014
  19. Life in the Fast Lane Chris Goode 06-Jun-2014
  20. 2014 - Roaring Past Chris Goode 04-Jun-2014
  21. Commentary on Paper Delivered by Professor Andrew I Gavil at Commerce Commission Conference Chris Goode 19-Nov-2013
  22. America's Cup Wrap Up Chris Goode 04-Oct-2013
  23. Happiness, Living a Balanced Life and Legal Practice - Part II Chris Goode 15-Aug-2013
  24. America's Cup 2013 Chris Goode 01-Jul-2013
  25. Why the Rules of Evidence Matter in Civil Cases Chris Goode 12-Mar-2013
  26. The High Court in Review Chris Goode 08-Oct-2012
  27. "Criticism of Supreme Court needs to be put in context" as published in the New Zealand Herald 11 May 2012 Chris Goode 23-May-2012
  28. Recent Reform Reports Chris Goode 03-Apr-2012
  29. Happiness, Living a Balanced Life and Legal Practice Chris Goode 09-Jan-2012
  30. In Defence of the Supreme Court Chris Goode 12-Dec-2011
  31. Cross Examination Notes Chris Goode 11-Nov-2011
  32. The passing of three leaders of the Bar Chris Goode 14-Sep-2011
  33. Commentary on my commentary on Morse Chris Goode 14-Sep-2011
  34. How good is our Supreme Court? Chris Goode 08-Aug-2011

Georgia Racing

Website Managed by Generate Design