The voting for the proposed rule change ends on September 23, just over 3 weeks from now, still a little bit of time to discuss for those still on the fence...
Well if they are building better boats then EVERYWHERE else in the world and people in Europe are prepared to pay a premium for Australian boats what does that tell you? Ringing any bells yet?!I don't know where I saw that, and I don't have time right now to do a thorough search. Anyone else have this info in their brain? If I am wrong, I'll address that.
I'm directing my anger at the heads of the class because it seems to me, from information that people have contributed in this thread, that they've short-sightedly chosen the wrong builder, in order to keep up the supply of boats. Global contracted with Kirby; this contract was acknowledged for two years by PSE or LP or whatever they call themselves. By accounts, Global makes better boats. Why would you choose, or ask us to choose, illegal, badly built boats?
Global Sailing = PS Australia, pretty simple concept. Take your boat from Australia to Europe, bet you don't come back with it!Global Sailing doesn't build boats, PS Australia does. Popular rumor in North America is that the Australian boats are "better", though I would like to see some solid evidence from regatta results that can prove that.
The ILCA Technical Officer is charged with periodically inspecting each factory to insure construction of Lasers according to the Laser Construction Manual. Its an amazingly thorough inspection and there is a vast collection of data on boats built at each factory. I don't believe there is any evidence from these inspections that would support the idea that boats from one factory are clearly superior to those from any other.
Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Santa? Easter Bunny? Seriously, I cannot believe how naive you can be. That the world is all fluffy and we just want to go sailing in all the same boat in a 10 -15kt sea breeze with bikini girls handing us drinks at the top mark.The singular most annoying part of the rule change is not that which has been removed but that which remains.
Why does the class care whether a builder has the right to use the word Laser or the starburst?? Would it be that hard for us to change this??
I don't give a hoot what some builder calls the toys we use to play our game. I give a hoot whether all the toys are as exactly alike as reasonable building practices can manufacture for us.
It seems to me, in fact, that the ILCA is asking me to vote for a rule that goes EXACTLY OPPOSITE that which would be good for the sailors.
Case in point>
If I decided to make molds and build toys that are exactly like the thing Kirby designed, I might be able to supply my local fleet with boats so we could play our game with toys sold through a local dealer at 1/3 to 1/2 the purchase price of those boats supplied by the monopoly builders who currently supply our toys.
Now I fully understand that many of you would be annoyed by a newfound need to measure boats at regattas to see if they are like the monopoly builders boats...
But. How many thousands of dollars are you willing to spend??
Also note...Some have already told us the popularity of knock off parts is already requiring a lot of checking and measurement to make cetain teh parts came from those who own copyrights to the starburst logo and name.
Builders and consumers of knock off parts have become sneaky.
If we alowed local builders to be up front and in the open, we could also expect they would deliver the exact same parts they promised or face our community's wrath. I know I damn sure wouldbn't build any toys for our game that were not up to snuff. I have a reputation to uphold...as would most anyone in the business. The community is small and the pissed off sailor customer gossip is not someone with whom I care to contend.
How long are you willing to wait for backordered parts from the monopoly builder and supplier of all parts who is currently supplying the North American market?? How is theh supply of official builder parts at your favorite supplier?? How has it been for the last three years??
Do you suppose the monopoly suppliers will love us more and do a better job if we gather and say our marriage vows a second time??
If the Builders want to throw open the discussion about rules related to who can supply toys for the ILCA game, Let's go along with them and have a good long look at ALL our options.
My bet is we could find ourselves being served by builders who really want our buisness and who would simply love to make a decent living manufacturing toys for us to use.
May the builder with the most reliably "alike" boats and sails, the best price, and the best aftermarket customer service win that contest!!!
or we can actually legislate a fresh rule that says, "Those who own the copyright on the word laser and the starburst can have their way with us."
I have noy yet cast a ballot as, "ask again when you have something better to offer" was not an option..
but there is hope, the ballot has already been reworded in the middle of the election. Who is to stop our beloved leaders from rewording the ballot a second or third time...or even once more after all the votes have been cast??
Mostly, I always wonder how with all that splashing they manage to keep the chips so crunchy.Do you believe in the tooth fairy? That was Mom.
Santa? Yes Virginia.
Easter Bunny? Well Duh!! Who do you think Hosts the Easter Laser Regatta??
Seriously, I cannot believe how naive you can be. You have no basis for belief and probably insufficient skills to pass judegment even if I made the necessary information available to you. However, you can rest assured, my niavete extends most thoroughly to trying to understand those who hand us drinks at the weather mark.
That the world is all fluffy and we just want to go sailing in all the same boat in a 10 -15kt sea breeze with bikini girls handing us drinks at the top mark. That's how it works in the regattas I attend, with hot dudes serving drinks to the ladies and gay fellows.
Have you been missing out?
Completely agree - no new info to shed any more light..I'm agreeing with Joe on this one.
I waited until a few days ago before voting and then cast a vote on the basis that the requested further information was not forthcoming and appeared would be unlikely to appear between now and the time poll closed. If they wanted to convince me to vote for the change, they failed.
Obviously being a member of the class association and for that matter an ISAF Class measurer doesn't get me onto Heini's mailing list. Hell, I don't even get notification of any new equipment coming onto the market or notification of any recent class rule interpretations.I received the following circular today with the request to also post to this forum:
Clarification on the vote of the fundamental rule change
Dear Laser friends,
Next Friday September 23 is the deadline for the vote on the fundamental rule change. The importance of this rule change triggered a lot of discussions between the Laser sailors and on the different web forums. These discussions were very healthy and contributed to a better understanding of all the different issues involved. Personally, I kept a certain restraint in order to allow an as free discussion as possible. For those who want to refresh their memories on the reasons of the rule change can go to http://www.laserinternational.org/rules2011 .
During the last few weeks, however, a certain number of issues were brought up, which need clarifications:
If you want to preserve the Laser Class in its current set-up you need to vote YES. If you vote NO the Class in its current set-up will soon cease to exist.
- The whole issue started when ILCA was advised by Global Sailing, who purports to be representing Kirby’s interests, that as per July 11 2010 they had terminated the license agreement with Laser Performance Europe. ILCA is not a party to these agreements and does not even know their exact content. Therefore to pretend that the purpose of the rule change was to terminate the royalty payments to Global Sailing is not correct. The only reason of the rule change is to assure the supply of a sufficient quantity of new Laser boats compliant with the ILCA Class Rules available in Europe and other countries in 2011 and beyond to satisfy the demand of its current and future ILCA members.
- We understand that currently negotiations might be under way between Bruce Kirby and Global Sailing for Bruce to get his rights back. Under the current ILCA Class Rules a valid builder agreement is required between the “design rights holder” and the licensed Laser builder. Who the owner is of the design rights is unimportant in this context. Since the licence agreement with Laser Performance Europe has been terminated, only a new (or the renewal of the old) licence agreement between the “design rights holder” and Laser Performance Europe would solve the issue and potentially make the rule change unnecessary. We have informed all parties involved (Global Sailing, Bruce Kirby and Laser Performance Europe) of that and have asked them to inform us if they had come to a new agreement. This has not been the case up until today.
- ILCA has always preferred a peaceful solution. If all three parties are close to agree on a solution, we will not stay in their way and give them reasonable time to conclude their negotiations on a new licence agreement with Laser Performance Europe.
Please consider and with best regards.
President International Laser Class Association (ILCA)
I somehow doubt that through these discussions on different web forums, that we have a better understanding of all the different issues involved. Personally, I'm none the wiser than I was 6 months ago. The ILCA hasn't provided us with such information, the builders / GS haven't added anything either other than a small post be Chris here and the only readily available additional information has been provided by Bruce Kirby and to some extent Tracy who also isn't officially involved.The importance of this rule change triggered a lot of discussions between the Laser sailors and on the different web forums. These discussions were very healthy and contributed to a better understanding of all the different issues involved. Personally, I kept a certain restraint in order to allow an as free discussion as possible.
Fred, this is where you get it wrong. We are told by Heini's email that Global Sailing informed the ILCA office that they had terminated their contract with LaserPerformance Europe. I do not know why they chose to terminate their contract, perhaps they had problems with LPE, perhaps they had a different vision going forward, etc. Whatever the reason, that is their choice and, I claim, we as sailors will never know the actual reasons (in fact I could imagine plenty of he said, she said, stuff which might be fun to watch but would not resolve the situation).If I comprehend the above it says:
We are removing the builder qualification requirement for a contract with the designer because LPE wants to build lasers without a new contract.
That's a good point. However, we all believe Bruce has the interests of the sailors at heart and want to see him succeed in the short term. I would hope that ILCA could position itself to gain the rights in the future, just to prevent this from happening again. But the price tag is high so not clear if that could be engineered.Nice write-up Tracy. I have issues with the way this was handled by the ILCA, mostly lack of communication. However, I agree that it was largely a defensive maneuver to protect the interets of the class.
One thing this whole drama has demonstrated is the vulnerability of the class. Suppose the Red Sea parts, Bruce Kirby gets his rights back, he agrees to a new contract with the builders, and peace is brought to the world. We would basically have returned to a temporary status quo. Who is to say there won't be a similar issue again in a few years? I'm still leaning towards "yes".
This is why I voted no. The ILCA office has not provided the information which would persuade me see a change in the fundamental rule necessary. We're being asked to blindly make a major change without enough background information.There are literally millioins of dolars of future buisness riding on our decisions. The informative silence is deafening.
Which is why I will have nothing more to do with the Class Association. Such behaviour by those at the op might be considered acceptable/normal in the US (though I doubt that) but in the UK elected leaders of associations run for the members benefit are accountable to the membership. The ILCA is not a limited term dictatorship. Those elected leaders are clearly aware that the membership wants answers and clearly know what they want answers to and are unprepared to give and details. In fact they are saying nothing.Where the hell are the full length expanations of teh positions held by the two builder powers and their arguments for and against a rule change by the class. Whgat is each group offering us or promising to do for us if they prevail?
There are literally millioins of dolars of future buisness riding on our decisions. The informative silence is deafening.
According to Bruce Kirby himself, didn't this whole thing start as a result of LPE stopping royalty payments to Global Sailing?We are told by Heini's email that Global Sailing informed the ILCA office that they had terminated their contract with LaserPerformance Europe. I do not know why they chose to terminate their contract, perhaps they had problems with LPE, perhaps they had a different vision going forward, etc.
Doesn't a YES vote effectively wipe out this possibility? Why can't the ILCA table the vote to a later date to see how this recent development plays out?The recent complication is that Bruce Kirby may be buying back Bruce Kirby, Inc. and working to restore the situation to the way it was pre-2008. I'm all for that and I hope he is successful.
Well, if you like to give the ILCA board the benefit of the doubt, one could assume that their motives for the proposal are the ones they stated, namely that they see a imminent adverse affect of the GS - LPE commercial dispute for the class, namely that LPE must shut down production because they can no longer sell class legal boats if the contract their contract with GS/Kirby or whoever ends sometime soon unless either a) the dispute is settled soon or b) we change the class rules soon thereby allowing LPE to continue selling class legal boats even if they breach some contract with GS or Kirby Inc or whover. There is logic in that. Most of what you say is conjecture, right?...
Please tell me why I shouldn't feel this way or why I'm wrong. I don't know, but if it looks like a rat and smells like a rat...