Are these class legal?

[jeffers]

I suspect not as they are not the standard blocks:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/271220767230?lpid=54&device=c&adtype=pla&crdt=0&ff3=1&ff11=ICEP3.0.0&ff12=67&ff13=80&ff14=54&ff19=0

There is no note to this effect on the item that I can see

 

[AlanD]

You're only permitted a spring, ball or tape to between the two blocks, so the spliced rope is illegal and would need to be cut off. Looking at other items which they have on ebay, there is a definite lack of Laser Trademark stamps on the items that should have them.

 

[jeffers]

Thanks Alan, I was pretty sure that might be the case. I will be sending the seller a message.

 

[jeffers]

I have been in touch with the company concerned about this item (and the others). They tell me they will 'look in to' adding a notice to the effect that these are items are not legal for class racing (I won't hold my breath). In the mean time caveat emptor.

 

[laserxd]

there's no performance advantage to using those, especially against the new blocks

Do you think racers are buying them?

 

[AlanD]

The class rules are set up in a manner where performance advantage is a non issue. If it's authorised, it's not legal, it doesn't matter even if it's a performance disadvantage.

 

[jeffers]

I would say there is a danger of someone who is new to the class who is not up to speed with the 'quirks' of the class rules who may buy them and then end up having to buy 'official' blocks to race with.

 

[AlanD]

I would say there is a danger of someone who is new to the class who is not up to speed with the 'quirks' of the class rules who may buy them and then end up having to buy 'official' blocks to race with.

Fully agree, this is why I'm anti people using "replica parts" on there boats they don't race. When / if they sell their boat, the new owner may want to race and is in for an expensive surprise.

 

[Emilio Castelli]

Below is a list of parts that are functionally equivalent or identical to each other beside being stamped with a laser trademark.
I'm sure this can be refined and made more complete but it gets the point across.
I left out sails, masts, blades since I do not consider them identical to the official ones.

Part /Official /No Laser TM /Delta
Bailer $75.00 $20.00 $55.00
Bow eye $15.00 $5.00 $10.00
Deck blocks + plate $64.00 $56.00 $8.00
Deck cleats $108.00 $40.00 $68.00
Fairlead $12.00 $8.00 $4.00
Hiking strap plate $9.00 $1.00 $8.00
Rudder lift stop $5.00 $2.75 $2.25
Large traveler block $24.00 $9.00 $15.00
Small traveler block $17.00 $8.00 $9.00
Gooseneck $53.00 $18.00 $35.00
Vang strap $16.00 $7.00 $9.00
Vang tang $27.00 $13.00 $14.00
Mainsheet block $22.00 $6.00 $16.00
Mainsheet block w tang $24.00 $6.00 $18.00
Total $471.00 $199.75 $271.25

I would not have any problem paying the extra money if this money (and I mean 100% of it) went to the class association.
Since this is not the case and most (all?) of the $$ goes to the trademark holder, I think the class should allow identical parts w/o the Laser TM to be used in racing or alternatively renegotiate with the trademark holders.
In practical terms I do not think anyone would ever be protested for using any of these unofficial parts in any race.
E

 

[Old Dude]

Emilio - Well done. You document a 136% mark-up for the TM parts that have no measurable differnce on performance. If you added in the sails, masts, and blades it becomes closer to a 300% mark-up (or even 500% depending o the market/region). And clearly many club fleets do not consider the non-TM parts an issue and allow the use of these components including even sails. I have never ever seen a club level (where most Laser sailors are) protest over the use of these parts (which are frequent and obvious) many write SIs that allow them. When considering the sails and all its reached the point where one can save more than $1000 USD.

While I think such a mark-up is inexcusable, I too would be OK with it IF it went into the class and was used to broadly support the sailing we love. But its not going there. I don't know if it goes to BKI, LPE, PSA but it sure goes somewhere that does not benefit us; the sailors.

AlanD - You know I am a big fan of ILCA but I have to say at some point maybe we should be looking at allowing more flexibility here. The steadfast mantra of SMOD (and we never have been and are not really SMOD anyway) addreses something is at best maybe relevant for the Worlds or Olympic level sailor but does not matter (performance wise) for the vast majority of people that are sailing at the club level. The numbers suggest they don't seem to join the class anymore and maybe (?) its in part because we continue habits that are not aligned with their interests and pocketbooks.

An Old Dude

Below is a list of parts that are functionally equivalent or identical to each other beside being stamped with a laser trademark.
I'm sure this can be refined and made more complete but it gets the point across.
I left out sails, masts, blades since I do not consider them identical to the official ones.

Part /Official /No Laser TM /Delta
Bailer $75.00 $20.00 $55.00
Bow eye $15.00 $5.00 $10.00
Deck blocks + plate $64.00 $56.00 $8.00
Deck cleats $108.00 $40.00 $68.00
Fairlead $12.00 $8.00 $4.00
Hiking strap plate $9.00 $1.00 $8.00
Rudder lift stop $5.00 $2.75 $2.25
Large traveler block $24.00 $9.00 $15.00
Small traveler block $17.00 $8.00 $9.00
Gooseneck $53.00 $18.00 $35.00
Vang strap $16.00 $7.00 $9.00
Vang tang $27.00 $13.00 $14.00
Mainsheet block $22.00 $6.00 $16.00
Mainsheet block w tang $24.00 $6.00 $18.00
Total $471.00 $199.75 $271.25

I would not have any problem paying the extra money if this money (and I mean 100% of it) went to the class association.
Since this is not the case and most (all?) of the $$ goes to the trademark holder, I think the class should allow identical parts w/o the Laser TM to be used in racing or alternatively renegotiate with the trademark holders.
In practical terms I do not think anyone would ever be protested for using any of these unofficial parts in any race.
E

 

[AlanD]

Old Dude, the thing I'm worried about is how it impacts under the current rules. What happens in the future is a different matter and I suspect no one including yourself & Emilio have yet put anything in writing to the ILCA requesting the rules get changed. Whilst I'm no longer a measurer, one of the reasons why I got out was because of the increasing difficulty of determining if boats were actually legal. If the class is losing volunteer class officials because they don't get the support of the members or the association, the class is in far worse condition than just the issue between Kirby & LP.

The whole reason why the class grew to be so strong was because we all sailed the same boat within a specific region, even if there were small regional differences (i.e. which sails were available in which region which was generally only the one sail). We're losing site of why the class became strong in the first place.

 

[Old Dude]

Old Dude, the thing I'm worried about is how it impacts under the current rules. What happens in the future is a different matter and I suspect no one including yourself & Emilio have yet put anything in writing to the ILCA requesting the rules get changed. Whilst I'm no longer a measurer, one of the reasons why I got out was because of the increasing difficulty of determining if boats were actually legal. If the class is losing volunteer class officials because they don't get the support of the members or the association, the class is in far worse condition than just the issue between Kirby & LP.

The whole reason why the class grew to be so strong was because we all sailed the same boat within a specific region, even if there were small regional differences (i.e. which sails were available in which region which was generally only the one sail). We're losing site of why the class became strong in the first place.

I respectfuly disagree.

Neither you or I can know for sure why the class became strong in the first place. Personally, I suspect it has far less to do with SMOD and much more to do with an easy to rig boat, that was reasonably affordable, did not need crew, could be transported and maintained easily, was not too hard but not too easy to sail (reasonable performance), had large fleets just about anywhere one went, and had a class association that was in it for the long haul such that the class was unlikely to die, thus ensuring good resale value for the boats. If people were really into the class primarily because we had such strict rules about what parts could and could not be used, then all these non-TM parts and the sailors using them would not be welcomed, they would be shunned. Respectfully, that is not what it is happening. Virtually every club level fleet I know of has grown or maintained in numbers the last few years and they all allow non-TM parts/components. And it's clearly not just because we can't find the TM parts. Take sails for example. It's not hard at all to find class TMed/buttoned sails. They just cost 400% to 500% of what the "generic" sails do. And every year I see more and more people using them and more and more clubs writing rules to allow them. If we are being honest, the bulk of the sailors are not rejecting this trend or clinging to some dated concept called SMOD that was never really so. They are embracing affordability, practicality, and access.

I simply offer for consideration that on this point the class - which I love and respect - is perhaps out of step with the masses and maybe that why the masses don't join the class much anymore. We seem to have a divide. The minority that includes the high level sailors are joining, but the majority - the club level sailors are not and they are also pursuing a course that is 180 degrees at odds with the class by allowing the non-TMed parts.

 

[AlanD]

You're not offering anything. If you want non TM parts, instead of replying to me. Write a letter to the ILCA, cc NALCA and your district LCA and actually put forward a proposal. Encourage others with a similar opinion to do the same. Sorry, having a discussion on a forum means f*** all. The same applies with everything else posted here about rule changes, be it Bottle Port or any to do with rigging. If you want something to be made class legal, it's up to you to approach the ILCA formally and not the ILCA to think up something random and think wouldn't that be wonderful.

 

[Old Dude]

You're not offering anything. If you want non TM parts, instead of replying to me. Write a letter to the ILCA, cc NALCA and your district LCA and actually put forward a proposal. Encourage others with a similar opinion to do the same. Sorry, having a discussion on a forum means f*** all. The same applies with everything else posted here about rule changes, be it Bottle Port or any to do with rigging. If you want something to be made class legal, it's up to you to approach the ILCA formally and not the ILCA to think up something random and think wouldn't that be wonderful.

That's fair thoughI will say that bouncing ideas off folks be it in a forum or in the dinghy park over a beer are what leads to to those proposals...

Did not intend to raise your blood pressure; just an exchange of views.

 

[deadrock]

To take Old Dude's point, a club cannot write rules to allow non-class-legal equipment for racing. I say this with absolute certainty because as the then UK Laser Measurer, I wrote to the RYA Rules Committee last year to get clarification.

Some believe that, even if replica kit is out for class-racing, it is OK for Handicap racing. Sorry: even then, any boat entered as a Laser and racing with a replica sail is still subject to protest by any other competitor. Moreover, if a boat persists in sailing with replica kit, it becomes a deliberate flouting of the RRS, and that can get very messy. For many sailors club racing is their only racing, and club sailors deserve the same strict one-design racing that made the Laser so successful as a racing dinghy.

To deal with Paul's and AlanD's points on the subject of these traveller blocks, I first saw them on the stand of a supplier of 'replacement' kit at the London Dinghy Exhibition in the spring. They are not legal in any way, and I warned the Chief Measurer to be on the lookout for them.

Some years ago I tackled LP, asking them to start stamping all their class-legal items, not just the big-ticket items, so that sailors (and measurers) could be sure that they were using class-legal kit. When it came to these minor components I was told that it would be too expensive to implement.

 

[Old Dude]

I think you are technically correct Deadrock.

But yet it gets done and the parts and sails are used with increasing frequency. Those using the gear are not shunned; it seems more likely that somebody protestingt the gear would be shunned at many clubs.

Might that not tell us something about the interest and focus of club level sailors? Do we not care?

I could easily support a view that said it all must be TM if the money (even just a decent part of it) went back to benefit the sailors (all of them). But that is not so. It apparently goes to some rich dudes who fight among themselves and put at risk and/or sue the very class association and volunteers that helped make them rich.

Anyway, as Alan points out the venue for change is someplace other than this forum, either by voting with one's feets and pocketbook as many now do or putting a proposal to ILCA.

Cheers.

 

[Emilio Castelli]

Write a letter to the ILCA, cc NALCA and your district LCA and actually put forward a proposal. Encourage others with a similar opinion to do the same.... If you want something to be made class legal, it's up to you to approach the ILCA formally and not the ILCA to think up something random and think wouldn't that be wonderful.

I think the class right now needs to wait and see what the legal outcome of the litigation is. Once the situation is clearer the class should propose changes of some of its class rules OR get a much better deal from the suppliers.
I think the class should always look after the interest of its membership w/o waiting for the membership to complain; this is one of the reasons for our dues.
When the time is right I will certainly bring this up in the appropraiate formal way as well (over a bottle of wine with Tracy).
E

 

[Alex/Steve]

It is a quandary.

As far as I am aware both my daughter's boat and mine are legal and we try hard to keep it so.

But we have an old boat in the back yard which we are "doing up" to sailing condition to donate to our club for young sailors to use as they progress. It will only ever be used as a club boat. Basically we can't afford to use official parts to do it.

So do we give up because it won't be class legal or do we continue so someone will have the opportunity to sail it?

Steve/Alex

 

[deadrock]

Steve and Alex,

It shouldn't be quite such a quandary as you seem to make out. It is perfectly possible to refurbish an old Laser to a reasonable standard without using the expensive post-2000 kit. A UK-based joint RYA/UKLA/LaserPerformance initiative called Activate your Laser was aimed at getting those disused Lasers sculling around at the bottom of every dinghy park back into use, especially by youngsters.

One of the main reasons for introducing the 'new' fittings in 2000-odd was to make the Laser easier for women and youth sailors to sail. The problem (which I pointed out in the UK Class Association magazine before the proposal was voted-on) was that these enhancements inevitably cost a lot more than the standard kit. Which they did.

'Activate' involved using ILCA-legal parts to make the Laser easy to sail without using the more expensive items from the new fittings, but getting most of the effect by adapting existing kit legally. A key part of the programme was the involvement of the UK builder, who provided packs to help sailors rescue old boats. I'm not sure about the current status of the programme in the UK, but a guy by the name of Brett Cokayne was the mastermind.

If you want to plan a similar programme wherever you are, the information to help you do just that is at:
http://www.laser.org.uk/base.php?SessionCRC=1458577957&PageSelect=Activate
There is no reason why such a programme should not be started wherever you are in the world.

If you want to see how you can improve on the original (i.e. pre-2000) fittings, go to:
www.designcake.com . The site will show you how to rig a workable outhaul, vang and cunningham without breaking the bank.

So far as sails are concerned, see if you can persuade the better sailors in your area to donate their old sails. They are likely to have ILCA-legal sails in their attic that are no longer competitive but are perfectly serviceable. I have, and the only stipulation I have is that the numbers are removed; I don't want to see one of my old sails passing me.

 

[torrid]

I'm OK with SMOD to some degree, even if it means paying more for parts. However in the case of the class-legal sail, and I know I'm beating a dead horse here, I really feel I'm getting taken advantage of.

 

[deadrock]

I'm OK with SMOD to some degree, even if it means paying more for parts. However in the case of the class-legal sail, and I know I'm beating a dead horse here, I really feel I'm getting taken advantage of.

You and me both. As I said in one of my last editorials, don't look for the situation to change, whatever the outcome of the legal action. The Aussies, Americans, Europeans, and everyone else all have to pay roughly the same margin-rich price. Has anyone wondered why that is? LP and PSA would sell at least twice as many sails if they dropped the price to £300 (and kill off the replica market as well). Yet LP and PSA still persist with their asinine pricing policy. I would buy a new sail every year at £300; I haven't bought a new sail since 2009. I just make do: so, I suspect, do you and thousands like you.

 

[jeffers]

Has anyone wondered why that is? LP and PSA would sell at least twice as many sails if they dropped the price to £300 (and kill off the replica market as well). Yet LP and PSA still persist with their asinine pricing policy. I would buy a new sail every year at £300; I haven't bought a new sail since 2009. I just make do: so, I suspect, do you and thousands like you.

This is exactly my argument. I would pay that level of money for a new sail every year (or every other year) quite happily.

I will not pay the £470+.

What galls me even more is that if you speak to LP they WILL match the price of replicas if you do a bulk order. Why not just make the damn thing price competitive in the first place and then the replica issue will go away as those club that have turned a blind eye to replica sails will no longer turn a blind eye..... (my own club included).

 

[Deimos]

I'm OK with SMOD to some degree, even if it means paying more for parts. However in the case of the class-legal sail, and I know I'm beating a dead horse here, I really feel I'm getting taken advantage of.

I agree. Measuring things in %ages does not always give a clear picture. So if I pay 6 cents for something but find I can get it elsewhere for only 5 cents I do not worry too much about the 20% mark-up. But if I'm paying $100000 for something 20% would be a much bigger issue.

Ian

 

[torrid]

I haven't bought a new sail since 2009. I just make do: so, I suspect, do you and thousands like you.

Bought a second-hand boat about five years ago. Had only been sailed twice with an Intensity sail, class-legal sail was still in the plastic. The FIRST I raced with it I capsized in bad location, and the current got me pinned against a moored boat. I had to get towed off, and the mast was drug across an anchor chain. Left some small tears in the luff sleeve that I just put up with.

For about a year I've been meaning to buy a new sail, but have held off due to the "impending" release of the new design. I think I will finally break down next spring.

I suspect some sort of deal to be made among the warring parties soon after, and the new sail design will be rolled out.

 

[Cavi]

I honestly feel LP is way too greedy. Beyond that I fully understand that rules are rules and why they exist. But, with small things like the little plate on the deck that holds the two blocks. That has to be LP, Really? You are going t oallow any blocks, but the plate has to be LP. Lets get real.
One of the posters here declared that he was against anyone using aftermarket parts because they might one day sell their boat to someone who might want to have it class legal. Well, first off, I will go back to the little plate. The aftermarket one is identical, and does not require any mods to use it, so if a future owner wants to be legal he can swap it.
Now I own a 9181 boat, and I want the newer stuff but I will never race at the level where I would really need to be class legal. With a boat of my vintage anyone who is serious enough to want to race at a level where they will "need "to be legal 100% can go through the boat and replace the one or two items that are not class legal, but don't expect me to shell out the big bucks to play around at home with a boat that I picked up for $1000. If I end up serious enough I would probably end up investing $3000 for a decent boat. Now if someone took a newish boat and started replacing stuff for the copies. It would still be their problem. I would much rather someone buy a 'training "boom and still enjoy sailing than quit sailing because they could not replace the boom when it broke. For alot of kids and adults alike the difference in cost of a sail or a spar might be enough to ground them. If they sell the boat latter, buyer beware. Most likley if the buyer is serious about racing they will know ahead of time the questions to ask and the rules and maybe pass up on a boat that has some parts that were replaced.
At my local club, they have 3 sunfish, none of which would ever pass for class legal, not even close, but over 100 kids a year learn to sail on them, my son included. Should they complain that someone sold the club a "nonlegal" class boat? He## no. The more kids that learn to sail the better.

 

[Bruce Hudson]

Why not brand these parts as "ILCA" (or have "ILCA License No. xxxxx-xxx")and have the ILCA control the manufacture and sale? Each part is contracted for a limited time, say 4 years, and then must re-bid to the ILCA to get the approval to have the trademark.

We will then have a lower cost of parts, and a lot of the copied parts will simply go away (or become the official supplier) plus the the ILCA manage it for a standard mark up of 25% or similar. Distribution are via the ILCA website and via the builder's regular channels.

Can someone propose a better solution?

 

[Bruce Hudson]

Bought a second-hand boat about five years ago. Had only been sailed twice with an Intensity sail, class-legal sail was still in the plastic. The FIRST I raced with it I capsized in bad location, and the current got me pinned against a moored boat. I had to get towed off, and the mast was drug across an anchor chain. Left some small tears in the luff sleeve that I just put up with.

For about a year I've been meaning to buy a new sail, but have held off due to the "impending" release of the new design. I think I will finally break down next spring.

I suspect some sort of deal to be made among the warring parties soon after, and the new sail design will be rolled out.

Buy some white one sided sticky and stick then to your sleeve. Did that for a practice sail and got a few more years use out of it.

Most sailmakers have it.

 

[jeffers]

Why not brand these parts as "ILCA" (or have "ILCA License No. xxxxx-xxx")and have the ILCA control the manufacture and sale? Each part is contracted for a limited time, say 4 years, and then must re-bid to the ILCA to get the approval to have the trademark.

We will then have a lower cost of parts, and a lot of the copied parts will simply go away (or become the official supplier) plus the the ILCA manage it for a standard mark up of 25% or similar. Distribution are via the ILCA website and via the builder's regular channels.

Can someone propose a better solution?

ILCA does not have that sort of power. Most of the power resides with the builders/rights holders which is why the class is the way it is and why they can dictate what is to happen on a lot of issues. ILCA can request changes but if all the builders and the rights holder do not agree then it will not get through.

 

[jeffers]

I honestly feel LP is way too greedy. Beyond that I fully understand that rules are rules and why they exist. But, with small things like the little plate on the deck that holds the two blocks. That has to be LP, Really? You are going t oallow any blocks, but the plate has to be LP. Lets get real.
One of the posters here declared that he was against anyone using aftermarket parts because they might one day sell their boat to someone who might want to have it class legal. Well, first off, I will go back to the little plate. The aftermarket one is identical, and does not require any mods to use it, so if a future owner wants to be legal he can swap it.
Now I own a 9181 boat, and I want the newer stuff but I will never race at the level where I would really need to be class legal. With a boat of my vintage anyone who is serious enough to want to race at a level where they will "need "to be legal 100% can go through the boat and replace the one or two items that are not class legal, but don't expect me to shell out the big bucks to play around at home with a boat that I picked up for $1000. If I end up serious enough I would probably end up investing $3000 for a decent boat. Now if someone took a newish boat and started replacing stuff for the copies. It would still be their problem. I would much rather someone buy a 'training "boom and still enjoy sailing than quit sailing because they could not replace the boom when it broke. For alot of kids and adults alike the difference in cost of a sail or a spar might be enough to ground them. If they sell the boat latter, buyer beware. Most likley if the buyer is serious about racing they will know ahead of time the questions to ask and the rules and maybe pass up on a boat that has some parts that were replaced.
At my local club, they have 3 sunfish, none of which would ever pass for class legal, not even close, but over 100 kids a year learn to sail on them, my son included. Should they complain that someone sold the club a "nonlegal" class boat? He## no. The more kids that learn to sail the better.

I agree the builders are too greedy but the class is what it is.

At the end of the day you bought the boat so you can, in theory, do what you like. The problem comes when you come to sell it as you cannot really sell it as a Laser as it does not comply with the class rules. You may also find a rather upset buyer coming knocking on your door (even if the boat is sold as seen).

Caveat Emptor only goes so far. If you sell something you know to not be genuine (in the UK at least) it is fraudulent and you could end up in court.

 

[Bruce Hudson]

ILCA does not have that sort of power. Most of the power resides with the builders/rights holders which is why the class is the way it is and why they can dictate what is to happen on a lot of issues. ILCA can request changes but if all the builders and the rights holder do not agree then it will not get through.

Shame. Though can't help wondering with the legal case, the possibility of 'the system' being re-evaluated / re-created is maybe a little higher than zero.

 

[49208]

Shame. Though can't help wondering with the legal case, the possibility of 'the system' being re-evaluated / re-created is maybe a little higher than zero.

Why ? It was BK/IB who set up the original class structure, the model for how the boats would be built/sold etc. BK, IIRC, never suggested anything should be changed in that regard, he just wants the payments from Rastegear that he claims are due to him.

 

[torrid]

What's needed is a builder that actually cares about the class.

 

[AlanD]

What's needed is a builder that actually cares about the class.

Both the Australian & Japanese builders do care about the class. Pity that the builder inyor region is only concerned about themselves.

 

[jeffers]

Both the Australian & Japanese builders do care about the class. Pity that the builder inyor region is only concerned about themselves.

I thought the Japanese builder had their license revoked by BKI as they were also in dispute?

 

[Bruce Hudson]

Agree that the Australian and Japanese builders care about the class. However the same issues still exist in the market down under.

I bought a self bailer in NZ for NZ$95 (US$81). There were replica ones available for less ($65 from memory), though at that time I thought I was going to be sailing in the nationals so wanted a genuine part. (Turns out I didn't.) The official part came with a card that said it was made in Brazil, and was probably shipped to USA, shipped to Australia then on to NZ, with freight and margins each time it changed hands. Pretty sure that the total cost of manufacture can be achieved at less than US$10, and a less than US$20 could be achieved. The supplier of my self bailer (Dan Slater) agreed - we both shrugged, I paid the $95 and the deal was done.

I also replaced a Gooseneck for NZ$88 (US$75) - from West Coast Sailing it's US$53.

Sails at that time were listed as NZ$990 (US$843) from the local supplier (Takapuna Sailing Centre). A new Laser (basic, no turbo vang - again at Takapuna Sailing Centre) cost $10,500 (US $8,943) - these are all 2011/12 prices. Smaller, remote markets like New Zealand can expect to pay higher prices than larger markets closer to manufacture. The same three prices from West Coast Sailing are bailers US$75; Sails US$565; and entire boats US$6065.

Smaller markets like Australia / NZ have fewer sales to spread the operating costs, so I would expect the cost to be higher in smaller markets.

I'm not sure that the builder's manual says who can supply parts. The class rules determine what's legal and what's not - for example, changes to the vang system came from the class rules.

If the parts (including the sail) had an efficient manufacture / distribution then a 10% saving could be made to the overall cost of a new Laser. However the builders must remain profitable - we can't have builders going bust.

 

[jeffers]

You are correct in that it is the class rules but these do state which parts must be 'builder supplied'.

So if you buy your bottom vang assembly direct from Holt or Harken (and it will not have the Laser stamp on it if you do this) then it is not class legal as parts like this must come through the builders hands. Why I do not know. It would be more efficient for the builders to license the supply of these parts and allow direct supply the chandlers/dealers (cutting out 1 step in the delivery chain).

The way the Laser class works is, in a lot of respects, cumbersome. This is partly down to the class/builder/rights holder relationship and partly down to the fact that it is an Olympic class so anything other than a minor change will likely need to happen at the start of an Olympic cycle (new sail and top section).

Other classes I have been part of work differently. They may still have a rights holder, builder and class association but the class has a greater deal of control and in a lot of cases, the class own the rights to the design anf the moulds (so no royalty issues to a 3rd party). What muddies the waters is that the ILCA do not own the copyright to use the name Laser and the burst logo, this is owned by the relevant builders or their subsidiaries.

This is unlikely to change unless the TMs become available on the open market and the ILCA have the means to purchase them on a worldwide basis.

This would give them, along with BKI a much greater control over the hiring and firing of builders.

Part of the dispute is over the right to use the name Laser and the burst logo in Europe and NA (which is why a name change has been mooted as a possible solution).