I've just spent the last couple hours reading through all this instead of playing with my "Weekender/Laser/Kirby". What seems to be the root cause of this issue is that LPE doesn't want to pay royalty rights in order to enhance its financial position. The other intriguing question is whether or not GS has anything of value it purchased from Bruce Kirby. I can understand why ILCA is concerned, and rightly so, about this dispute. However, how can ILCA guarantee no liabiliity exposure in a potential lawsuit from either of the two parties no matter what the outcome of the proposed rule change? Did the attorney that was hired answer that question? Not sure how real the threat is that the class is destroyed if no agreement is reached. Couldn't GS replace LPE as the supplier in most of the world, leaving LPE high and dry, or trying to market a "substitute" boat? Should we not know the financial well-being of the builders(and their ownership group) before choosing sides -- YES for LPE, NO for GS? Is losing Olympic class status -- probably better in the long run, anyway -- really part of this issue, or just a threat to get YES votes? I agree with most of the comments that we should have a lot more information before casting a vote. I'll look forward to the Q&A commentary from ILCA.