Rule change vote

LaLi

Well-Known Member
#21
Oh my, what a crazy pile of half-truths and bad will! Just the fact that they mix up what happened at the Youth Worlds in Poland with the Radial Youth Worlds in Canada, makes this source suspect. And they happily (or rather, angrily) mix together unrelated negative (in their mind) issues and blame it all on ILCA.

What maybe most bugs me is the claim how Europeans (such as myself) are supposedly being repressed by ILCA! Damn, if I had a choice between a class run by Americans and Australians, or one run by Italians, it wouldn't be a hard one :rolleyes:

Lali believes as long as the boats are the same weight it does not matter where the weight is and this surprises me!
It's all about how tight the tolerances are, and we simply don't know that. "Strict" in this context sounds (to me) like hundreds of grams, not kilograms. That wouldn't affect stiffness/durability or weight distribution significantly.

_
 
Last edited:

Rob B

Well-Known Member
#22
It seems from the links below there are others concerned about the voting process and the intentions of ILCA. The links argue the NO position quite clearly and reasonably. The previous link only presents facts for the reader to draw their own conclusions. It is reported in the links that Tracy has received a petition of over 600 signatures, which includes well known names in the sailing community, asking him to stand down.

http://saily.it/it/article/ilca-enough-enough-let%E2%80%99s-save-laser/
fake lasers?

Wavedancer is right, it is about trust, and ILCA should have put in place a voting system in which we could trust, and, trusted us with the plans for the class instead of making decisions behind closed doors.

Lali believes as long as the boats are the same weight it does not matter where the weight is and this surprises me!

Perhaps the way forward is for European Club sailors to buy class compliant Lasers available on a fleet deal purchase for about £4k and let ILCA continue on with its Olympic dream and exotic materials. Top sailors will soon realise it is like putting a bigger engine in an old car, it is a compromise and gradually move to other classes and we have seen some move on already.

I wonder is any truth in the claim in one of the links that PSA are hedging there bets by having already signed an agreement to produce the Aero.
More misinformation, but thanks Andy. We'll see how this all sorts out in the next few days.
 

Rob B

Well-Known Member
#23
What I love is instead of offering the Canada boats for sale to the NA market LPE is taking them back!?!? And intends to seize them? Seriously, WTF!!!

Clearly he is emotional and intends to CUT OFF a market he has a monopoly on even to the point of causing himself financial harm?

I don't know what kind of BS ya'll in Europe are being sold, but you're buying it! Think about that when the Laser is OUT of the Olympics and you are stuck with a $5,000.00 garage decoration.
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
#24
instead of offering the Canada boats for sale to the NA market LPE is taking them back!?!? And intends to seize them?
Do you have a source for this? Are you sure that these aren't the PSA boats that were supposed to go back to Australia from the outset?

I don't know what kind of BS ya'll in Europe are being sold, but you're buying it!
I'm not buying any... but I just talked with our long-time national treasurer, and even he (whom I regard as a very level-headed individual) mentioned "the illegal Aussie boats" as something relevant for this vote!

It's depressing how easily baseless but effective propaganda spreads.

_
 

Rob B

Well-Known Member
#25
Do you have a source for this? Are you sure that these aren't the PSA boats that were supposed to go back to Australia from the outset?

I'm not buying any... but I just talked with our long-time national treasurer, and even he (whom I regard as a very level-headed individual) mentioned "the illegal Aussie boats" as something relevant for this vote!

It's depressing how easily baseless but effective propaganda spreads.

_
Rastgar said it himself on the conference call yesterday. I thought they were his boats. How can he seize PSA boats? The 200 illegal PSA boats, (Rastgar said 1,000's yesterday)? That's no where near as relevant as the ramifications of a NO vote. Rastgar "Thinks" WS is going to delay until November. That's a huge bet based on what folks around here are saying. Word is WS drew a line in the sand. They basically choose the Aero after the trails, but left the laser in ONLY because of the existing supply chain and ONLY if FRAND can happen. Based on what Rasty said yesterday his version of FRAND it ain't gonna happen!
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
#26
Rastgar said it himself on the conference call yesterday. I thought they were his boats. How can he seize PSA boats? The 200 illegal PSA boats, (Rastgar said 1,000's yesterday)?
There are PSA charter boats at the Radial Youths in Canada right now. LP also offered their boats, but at a much higher fee. I was under the impression that no new LP boats made it to Kingston, but I may be wrong. The "thousands" of "illegal PSA boats" are another matter (which seems to have taken a life of its own).

Rastgar "Thinks" WS is going to delay until November. That's a huge bet based on what folks around here are saying.
That's something he may actually be right about. Delaying is a WS/ISAF/IYRU tradition, and I was a bit surprised that they really voted at the mid-year meeting. They wouldn't have had to until this year's annual conference.

his version of FRAND
Would like to hear that! Is this material in written form somewhere?

_
 
Thread starter #27
In response to my initial post LaLi laid out a clear case in favor of a YES vote. Others agreed but then the thread devolved into a number of accusations and rumors and charges of misinformation. So can someone state clearly the case for a NO vote? Today is the last day to vote and I would like to understand the choices. Thanks.
 

torrid

Just sailing
#28
In response to my initial post LaLi laid out a clear case in favor of a YES vote. Others agreed but then the thread devolved into a number of accusations and rumors and charges of misinformation. So can someone state clearly the case for a NO vote? Today is the last day to vote and I would like to understand the choices. Thanks.
The best case for a "NO" vote, with which I do not entirely agree, puts me in the unfortunate situation of defending Laser Performance. LP clearly owns the IP to the Laser trademark and has made a substantial investment in it. They have exclusive rights to build boats per the LCM and to sell them - in their trademark service area. The ILCA vote and the whole FRAND process are an affront to their legitimate business interests, and as a non-lawyer I wonder if this creates legal liabilities for the ILCA and WS.

This model worked well back in the day when there was a benevolent builder who supported the class. This situation obviously no longer exists. Maybe I'm being a hypocrite, but I went ahead and voted "YES" as I feel the only way for the class to move on is without LP and hopefully bring another builder online in North America.

Neither vote is an ideal situation. It's a bit like voting for president.
 

Rob B

Well-Known Member
#30
Would like to hear that! Is this material in written form somewhere?
I'm not aware of a written transcript. He did say he had "all the documents" and "could" post them somewhere for all to see, but don't believe that has happened.

His version of FRAND sounded like a bit of a mixture where builders still enjoyed some kind of monopoly at the same time as adding builders. It was confusing. A bit of what he said was confusing and hard to follow. He jumped back and forth on things a lot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

torrid

Just sailing
#31
I'm not aware of a written transcript. He did say he had "all the documents" and "could" post them somewhere for all to see, but don't believe that has happened.

His version of FRAND sounded like a bit of a mixture where builders still enjoyed some kind of monopoly at the same time as adding builders. It was confusing. A bit of what he said was confusing and hard to follow. He jumped back and forth on things a lot.
Someone post on this at SA. The feeling was he was opening to licensing builders in LP territory where he doesn't have much presence, places like Africa and South America (**COUGH COUGH** North America **COUGH COUGH**). Presumably HE would be licensing builders there, and any fees paid would not be shared with PSA or PSJ.
 

Wavedancer

Upside down?
Staff member
#32
It appears to me that many European sailors believe that a NO vote would maintain the status quo.
The fact is that World Sailing is forcing changes in our Laser world due to pressure from the Olympics (on whom they are VERY dependent for financial support) and FRAND regulations.

PS: I plan to be quiet for a while on this topic until the results of the voting will be published. My hunch is that this will take (quite) some time. Moreover, there are rumors that the whole process that World Sailing has started will be delayed as well.

 

AlanD

Former ISAF Laser Measurer
#33
Whilst I believe the Olympics damage not just Lasers but sailing in general, I respect others with differing opinions and those chasing the dream.

I think LP has done a huge amount of damage to the class over the last decade or so. Poor supply chain outside of Europe, attempting to block the the development of new component suppliers eg PSA rudders and centreboards, which was driven by the poor quality Compton boards which we received in our region. Then you had the issue of the LP stopping payment of the Licensing fee. Whilst this was going on, certain ILCA European officials sided heavily with LP on each issue, trying to protect LP dominance of the world Laser market.

I'm a firm believer that the class deserves a quality product, at a reasonable price and the whilst no product will be identical even when pumped out of the same factory, every product needs to fall within reasonable tolerances. I have no issue with a builder placing tighter tolerances on themselves than what the construction manual requires, I remember those European ILCA officials wanting PSA to have lower tolerances so that their products were more random.

The Laser was designed nearly 50 years ago, it used materials and techniques that were relatively new at the time, those materials have improved, so has the understanding how to use them. If PSA is illegally manipulating the location of the glass fibres, as a qualified metallurgist with a strong materials science background that will not impact on the stiffness of a new hull, but it will improve the long term durability of the hull several seasons on. I can understand LP wanting to make their product less durable, they want you to buy a new boat each year, because you've worn the old one out (in built obsolescence). After nearly 50 years, we should be expecting a better product, that tighter quality control and a more durable product.

Even though LP has little impact on my region, as you can see I'm not a fan of LP or those class officials trying to protect them.
 
Top