Class Politics Tight tolerances

controlled
by the ILCA Technical Officer. Therefore
each Laser sailor can be sure when he
participates at a regatta that the other
sailors have no technical advantage over
him because everybody has the quasi
identical equipment. However, this system
is costly. The tight tolerances lead to
rejects in manufacturing. Inspection costs
are higher. Copy parts are not controlled
and can therefore be produced at lower
cost

From December Laser World. Tight tolerances lead to reject in manufacturing... Somehow I do not belive that to be the main reason for the higher cost.
 
I would love to see one single example of a tight tolerance in the construction of a Laser sailboat.

Let me qualify that:

I would love to see a description of a tight tolerance that might in any way contribute to a reasonable explanation of the following:
A Kia automobile with a full tank of gas has a lower list price than a Laser on a trailer.

Some improbable and unacceptable answers:

The Laser's suspension system is is built to exactly fit various shorelines all over the planet.
The Laser's hiking strap is built to tighter tolerances than the seat belts in the Kia.
The Laser's mast is built to tighter tolerances than the Kia's drive shaft
The Laser's window shape is more tightly controlled than the shape of the various Kia windows..
The Lasers drain plug is built to a tighter tolerance than the drain plug on the Kia's oil pan.
The Laser's sail is cut and sewn to tighter tolerances than the upholstery in the Kia.
The Laser's control lines are built to tighter tolerances than the various control cables in the Kia.
The Laser's pintles and gudgeons are built to tighter tolerances than the components of the Kia's steering system

Not to mention all those tight tolerances the Laser must meet for tail lights, turn signals, brake lights, headlights, emergency flashers, windshield wipers, radios, speakers, door locks, transmissions, speedometers, oil guages, fuel guages, odometers, tires, spare tires, tire changing equipment, floor coverings, suspensions, shopck absorbers, cooling systems, heaters,

Oh that Laser is soooo hard to build.

let me try to comprehend this...

wasn't that explanation posted on a website by using a computer??
Does any one of you believe the Laser has manufacturing tolerances matching a single tolerance met while the computer you are currently using was manufactured???

Is any one of you using a $7000 computer to read this post?

Aside from the creation of the resins and reinforcements Lasers are among the simplest least technically difficult to manufacture devices currently for sale anywhere on the planet.

Look around the room in which you are currently sitting and try to point at a single device or even a piece of furniture whose tolerances are less stringent than those used in laseer manufacturing.

get a frikkin grip!!!

The adjustable commercial shelving in my office has hundreds of slots and tabs that fit more exactly together than any Laser hull deck joint in history.

Some lies and explanations are somewhat acceptable but

the clowns foisting the "tolerances" fantasy explanation aren't fooling even those of us who think this guy is relaxing after making last night's deliveries.
santa.JPG
 
I'm not sure I think its fair to draw a comparison between a company that builds 1.6 MILLION vehicles each year to a group of four factories that produce ~2500 boats a year - with one producing half of them.

As we all know, the actual cost to build a Laser is substantially less than the retail value. A lot of the price of the boat is tied up in transportation, overhead associated with having real factories and facilities, markup for retailers, etc., etc. I could imagine a lone boat builder being able to produce a boat and sell it at his shop for less than the current retail price, but I bet that savings would start evaporating quickly if you lived far away from that shop. And I'd be surprised if a lone wolf builder could maintain the tolerances and reproducibility of the current boats.

Anyway, an example of what Heini means are the aluminum spars. Even in the era of plastics there is still a huge demand for aluminum tubing so one might think that one could easily source spars. But the spars we sail with are not off the shelf items in this regard, they are custom drawn with tighter tolerances and requirements on quenching and the like. We all grumble about bending our aluminum spars, trying to address that problem requires finding suppliers who will meet the specs at minimum cost. Since these are small special runs (a tiny fraction of the total tubing market), the suppliers are going to charge lots more for all the special handling. In the end its very hard to find a supplier that is interested in such small runs and that gets reflected in the price.

Its my personal opinion that the solution is to go to composite materials. There are thousands of composite masts in the world, the technology is proven (and, of course, our test spars work well). Better, we will be the major player in that market in the sense that our orders will swamp anyone else - suppliers will WANT our business and give very competitive pricing.

But this would be a diversion from the original question... sorry!
 
far comparisons have never been my long suit...

But let me expand yours...

Generally aluminum tubing is much cheaper than composite tubing.

but we have a self induced equalization of prices.

Our spar business is tiny by comparison to virtually anyone else at the extruders and our specs describe a pain in the ass custom thickness....and a special alloy...not uncommon but special none the less.

We ask the extruder to interrupt a series of multi thousand pound runs to make a year's supply of Laser spars which is still such a small run that set up time and die maintenance is a major part of the expense.

If we need more to finish ayear...the set up costs are hge on a per tube ammortization.

Composite spar builders who specialize in sailboat spars would absolutely love to have a regular run overhead covering contract with those who want the largest number of the simplest to build tubes.

the cost to have that which is usually many times the price is adjusted downward at teh spar manufacturers and teh low cost aluminum is adjusted upward at the extruder.

The answer remains...If you want more affordable Lasers, sell a million.
 
Sounds plausible, but does not explain why the replica manufacturers still find it worth while. Surely their production runs at the extruders must be much shorter... and they can sell a complete rig for GBP 260! http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?VISuperSize&item=320732774068

Almost all problems this class is facing are caused by the creation of a monopolist through the Single Manufacturer One Design concept. The Laser manufactureres behave in every way like a classical monopolist, maximizing revenue.

In its pure form, monopoly, which is characterized by an absence of competition, leads to high prices and a general lack of responsiveness to the needs and desires of consumers.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/monopoly-1#ixzz1hom4cOSb

The class should realize this and move away from the SMOD concept and instead allow several builders to supply boats and parts provided they could demonstrate ability.
 
monopoly (mənōp'əlē), market condition in which there is only one seller of a certain commodity; by virtue of the long-run control over supply, such a seller is able to exert nearly total control over prices. In a pure monopoly, the single seller will usually restrict supply to that point on the supply-demand schedule that will maximize profit.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/monopoly-1#ixzz1hop0sAfy

A situation in which a single company or group owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service. By definition, monopoly is characterized by an absence of competition, which often results in high prices and inferior products.

According to a strict academic definition, a monopoly is a market containing a single firm. In such instances where a single firm holds monopoly power, the company will typically be forced to divest its assets. Antimonopoly regulation protects free markets from being dominated by a single entity.
Investopedia Says:
Monopoly is the extreme case in capitalism. Most believe that, with few exceptions, the system just doesn't work when there is only one provider of a good or service because there is no incentive to improve it to meet the demands of consumers.



Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/monopoly-1#ixzz1hoqizpKB

Anyone recognize this..?
 
Two points:
1) remember that the price differential between "replica" parts and real parts is predominantly due to removing one or two links from the supply chain. For things like sails I'll bet the replica folks are paying the same to slightly more as the builder on a per sail basis, the rest of the difference is the markup through the supply chain. Spars are probably different, here I would imagine replicas being "off the shelf" (with little to no control over their characteristics) and cheaper which make them look even more attractive to you when you see the retail price.
2) Are the builders of Lasers really a monopoly? If that is the case, then I would argue that the Coca Cola company is a monopoly... When I buy Coca Cola from the store it comes from a bottler who is forced to by the syrup used to make that beverage from the Coca Cola company and no one else. You might say, but you are free to drink Pepsi instead, so it is not a monopoly! The same with sailing, you are free to buy any number of other single handed dinghies - Byte, Force 5, Banshee, Canoe, Moth, Megabyte, Finn, etc., etc. The builders do, indeed, charge a premium on Laser but that is because they can. Still, that premium is constrained, at some point people will vote with their feet (ie a Laser is not going to cost $30,000 in 2011 dollars and still sell boats).
 
Its interesting if you look at the Annapolis sailing website you can get a north laser sail (strict one design) for $565 or an North Optimist race sail (multiple suppliers allowed) for $570…….laser sailing is still the cheapest sailing I’ve ever done........
 
Its interesting if you look at the Annapolis sailing website you can get a north laser sail (strict one design) for $565 or an North Optimist race sail (multiple suppliers allowed) for $570…….laser sailing is still the cheapest sailing I’ve ever done........

Well said Mike. I had the pleasure of sailing an RS100 in Europe this summer. It's a terrific little boat, perhaps even more fun to sail than a Laser. I would sell my Laser and buy one tomorrow except...

a) There aren't any RS100 fleets in my part of the world yet, so who would I race with?
b) A new RS100 costs about $14,000. A new Laser is around $6,000. I could do a lot with that 8 grand difference.

We all like to complain about the prices of Laser sails and other parts, but we tend to forget that Laser sailing is still one of the cheapest sailing options around, and that there are active racing fleets pretty much wherever you live. Lasers may, in one sense, be a monopoly but they are still pretty competitive with most of the alternatives.
 
The class should realize this and move away from the SMOD concept and instead allow several builders to supply boats and parts provided they could demonstrate ability.
If you have such strong objections, why do you still sail a laser? There are thousands of other classes of boats around to sail where there is no monopoly. I really can't see why the laser should change to meet your needs or anyone elses'. The success of the laser class is simply because of the monopoly, the tightly controlled production, one design principle and the distribution network.

A huge segment of the sailing population wants to be able to sail a boat which is essentially identical to their mate, be easily able to buy replacement parts including sails and masts off the shelf without wondering if this builder makes "faster" bits than some other builder, they sail lasers because it's easy to get a boat onto the water. I've gone through phases in my sailing career where every winter I sat done and designed my new boat for next season and then built it. I've gone off and worked with sail makers to cut my sail to match my mast and rig set up. I've been through the measurement processes where the class measurer has spent 4+ hours measuring every aspect of the boat. I've even measured one design boats coming off the production line to make sure the boats are within tolerance. The laser is simple & hassle free, go into the store, pick up the boat, put the sail numbers on and go sailing and you have no worse or better a boat than the world champion.

There are better boats out there, but overall the laser is a brilliant compromise which works for a very large percentage of the sailing community and there is no need to change the formula for some perceived benefit, which is going to do away with the reason why the class has become so successful.
 
Sounds plausible, but does not explain why the replica manufacturers still find it worth while. Surely their production runs at the extruders must be much shorter... and they can sell a complete rig for GBP 260! http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?VISuperSize&item=320732774068

Almost all problems this class is facing are caused by the creation of a monopolist through the Single Manufacturer One Design concept. The Laser manufactureres behave in every way like a classical monopolist, maximizing revenue.

In its pure form, monopoly, which is characterized by an absence of competition, leads to high prices and a general lack of responsiveness to the needs and desires of consumers.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/monopoly-1#ixzz1hom4cOSb

The class should realize this and move away from the SMOD concept and instead allow several builders to supply boats and parts provided they could demonstrate ability.

Laser builders have a monopoly on Laser class parts, but not sailboats in general. If they price stuff too high, people will just go sail something else.

I think the only place where multiple suppliers could be applicable is the class-legal sail.
 
Well, then you forget that with Laser being an Olympic class there are really no alternatives for young ambitious sailors wanting to sail single handers. Once a class is granted Olympic status it is also granted a monopoly.

Have you ever tried to complain to LP about a quality issue?

To Alan: Look at Optimist. They have at least 10 manufacturers of boats, yet measurement at Worlds is done in about the same time as at Laser worlds. Why?

With tightly controlled class rules it is perfectly possible to have several manufatcurers without having to measure mast curves etc.

Problem today is that the laser manufacturers behave as monopolists with "a general lack of responsiveness to the needs and desires of consumers."

Instead they spend their time with lawyers trying to defend their monopolies and develop boats like this one:

bug.jpg


I think it is only a matter of time before a major Laser event will be seriously affected by:

" In a pure monopoly, the single seller will usually restrict supply to that point on the supply-demand schedule that will maximize profit".
 
I think the only place where multiple suppliers could be applicable is the class-legal sail.

Quite right..but as MikeM said "multi manufacturer allowed" Optimist sails are no cheaper. why not?.....

.......well, the Oppie sails tend to be made locally to individual designs and to a high quality; with all the consequent overheads.

The Laser sail is mass produced in the far east, to a simple and old design and has a multiple supply chain each taking their cut.

The argument comes around (again and again) to.....Can we have a better quality Laser sail at the same price please?
 
Those North Opti sails are made in Sri Lanka, right next to the Laser sails. I'm fairly certain other sailmakers in the Opti racket use other far east suppliers as well. They don't have more overhead associated with them, their price is determined by what the market will pay (same reason a Star class jib costs almost twice what a Laser sail costs, yet it's smaller in size)

I think Tillerman and Alan D both have valid points why the Laser is still going fairly strong, low initial cost (relative to most other classes) and strict one design control.

What we are and have been dealing with for what seems like 10+ years is that we, the class members, are demanding a sail that lasts more then 3 regattas and a spar that doesn't permanently bend under normal sailing conditions. We have been getting one reason after another why it hasn't happened, which has led to the influx of the non-class approved replacement parts etc.

IMHO, until we figure out a way to get the new sail and spars in place, we will he having the same discussions year after year.
 
IMHO, until we figure out a way to get the new sail and spars in place, we will he having the same discussions year after year.

Absolutely agree.

Point taken re North sails..but the last five new opti sails i've bought have all been made in the UK.
 
Well, then you forget that with Laser being an Olympic class there are really no alternatives for young ambitious sailors wanting to sail single handers. Once a class is granted Olympic status it is also granted a monopoly.

Have you ever tried to complain to LP about a quality issue?

To Alan: Look at Optimist. They have at least 10 manufacturers of boats, yet measurement at Worlds is done in about the same time as at Laser worlds. Why?

With tightly controlled class rules it is perfectly possible to have several manufatcurers without having to measure mast curves etc.

Problem today is that the laser manufacturers behave as monopolists with "a general lack of responsiveness to the needs and desires of consumers."

Instead they spend their time with lawyers trying to defend their monopolies and develop boats like this one:

I think it is only a matter of time before a major Laser event will be seriously affected by:

" In a pure monopoly, the single seller will usually restrict supply to that point on the supply-demand schedule that will maximize profit".
I haven't got a lot of time to respond, but until the Tornado was dropped, it was a development class with many of the sailors making their own hulls, sails etc. So Olympic status doesn't mean monopoly.

Where do you think the measurement actually occurs if not at the regatta venue? Most classes of boats I've been involved with you need to make a booking with the measurer, you take the boat to a convenient spot for them and they spend half a day measuring them and then supplies the owner with a measurement sticker. With more mass produced boats, the measurer goes to the factory and measures 1 in 5 or 1 in 10 boats coming off the production line. If people want to go down this path, my hourly rate is $AUS100 + plus any additional travel costs as I have another more important business to run which is what feeds me and keeps a roof over my head. By the way, this is how the Optimists are measured (even the laser to some extent), it cuts down measurement times at regattas.

I still don't see why the laser manufacturers need to respond to the desires of the consumers, when the vast majority of consumers are generally happy with the product. Some people would like a trapeze on a laser, some would like a spinaker, etc, the laser manufactures don't need to meet every consumers desire, they just need to supply as per the class specs.

I repeat what I said before, if you don't like the way things are done in the class, find another class to sail, it really is that simple.
 
We all like to complain about the prices of Laser sails and other parts, but we tend to forget that Laser sailing is still one of the cheapest sailing options around, and that there are active racing fleets pretty much wherever you live. Lasers may, in one sense, be a monopoly but they are still pretty competitive with most of the alternatives.

Nothing else even come close to what the Laser can offer.
I started sailing last January after 25 years away from any boat.
Spent $1000.- for an '89 laser, including trailer. I just wanted to see whether I would still like sailing a dinghy.
I liked it, so I bought a new sail (and an illegal practice sail) and went sailing.
I am having a blast sailing it and I am competitive enough to have plenty of fun racing in the geezer fleet (though Tracy and Pete always kick my butt....).
But I also broke the top section, bent the new one, broke the boom (old type, short sleeve) and I had tgo buy another sail for next year.
And while now I am not worried about the boom (the class solved this problem), the new top mast is bent and will probably break again and the new sail cost almost as much as the boat...
The class is awesome but it doesn't mean it can't be improved.

E
 
I still don't see why the laser manufacturers need to respond to the desires of the consumers, when the vast majority of consumers are generally happy with the product. Some people would like a trapeze on a laser, some would like a spinaker, etc, the laser manufactures don't need to meet every consumers desire, they just need to supply as per the class specs.

I repeat what I said before, if you don't like the way things are done in the class, find another class to sail, it really is that simple.

Alan:
I agree the class shouldn't respond to every consumer desires, but I think it should address actual problems faster.
It is a mystery to me as to why the class did not sleeve the top section when they sleeved the boom. They were both breaking 30 years ago (the boom more often) but somehow they only fixed the boom.
I can't find another class to sail; the Laser is still the best.
E
 
Two points:
1) remember that the price differential between "replica" parts and real parts is predominantly due to removing one or two links from the supply chain. For things like sails I'll bet the replica folks are paying the same to slightly more as the builder on a per sail basis, the rest of the difference is the markup through the supply chain. Spars are probably different, here I would imagine replicas being "off the shelf" (with little to no control over their characteristics) and cheaper which make them look even more attractive to you when you see the retail price.
2) Are the builders of Lasers really a monopoly? If that is the case, then I would argue that the Coca Cola company is a monopoly... When I buy Coca Cola from the store it comes from a bottler who is forced to by the syrup used to make that beverage from the Coca Cola company and no one else. You might say, but you are free to drink Pepsi instead, so it is not a monopoly! The same with sailing, you are free to buy any number of other single handed dinghies - Byte, Force 5, Banshee, Canoe, Moth, Megabyte, Finn, etc., etc. The builders do, indeed, charge a premium on Laser but that is because they can. Still, that premium is constrained, at some point people will vote with their feet (ie a Laser is not going to cost $30,000 in 2011 dollars and still sell boats).

Wow. Great thread with lots of insightful views and thoughts expressed.

Like many here I too think that Laser sailing offers the best bang for the buck and an extremely high quality leve of racing. I race in various other classes including big multihulls and I have to say its a joy to be able to go out and race the Laser. No self serving politics of ratings, equal boats, big fleets. There is a lot to love about Lasers.

That said, its sometimes a bit stunning that I have a 30 foot racing (and cruising) multihull for only about 3X the price of my Laser sailing. On an absolute basis comparing to other classes I have to wonder about the cost - though this ignores the quality of the racing. People have compared the cost of the Laser sail to the Opti sail, but having purchansed both, the Opti sail seems to be much better and seems to last far, far longer.

Anyway, I wonder if SFBayLaser might expand on their post above because it cites an example that heavily influences my thoughts and I have often wondered how far from reality my perspective actually is. Lets talk about that sail. The replica sails can be purchased for for a huge discount (both absolute $ and % basis) compared to the class sails. They also last longer. I agree your comment that they likely cost a bit more to make compared to the class sail in part because of smaller production runs. So why can they be sold for so much less (absolute $ and %)? This implies there is a huge taking up of $s somewhere.

SFBayLaser suggest its in the distribution/supply chain. Can you please explain why you think that? What difference in the supply chain would there be there? I have always guessed (and I welcome correction) that the main difference was that because it was not an official class sail, that some combination of designer rights (Kirby and/or GS) and class royalities (ICLA and/or ISAF) did not get paid and this implied that some combination of same got a HUGE cut. I am not saying I am right about this, just that logically, since I am buying the class and replica sail from the same retailer and the difference is so huge that the difference was not the supply chain but rather whatever designer rights and class royalities had to be paid. And IF this is correct, given the relatively large absolute and % difference it implies that somebody is making a lot of money for basically nothing. I doubt ICLA is seeing that much money from sales of sails. And if its ISAF and designer rights, the implication is that our game could be made much much more affordable and in so doing even better (bigger fleets).

I would welcome an education here.
 
I will reiterate, there is a huge difference between the sail and other parts of the boat when it comes to replica knock-offs. The sail is a part that wears out and competitive sailors need to replace periodically. It is one thing to pay a mark-up for a rudder that will last a lifetime compared to once a year on a sail. You then need to add the poor quality of the class-legal sail on top of that. A knock-off inferior rudder which sells at a discount is probably not much of a threat to the one-design aspects of the class. However, better quality knock-off sail which sells for 1/3 the cost of the class sail is a threat.

I suppose a similar argument could be made about the upper spar section.
 
My understanding is that the current sail cloth specified for the Laser sails is somewhat unique so that is likely to increase costs since it requires special production runs just for Lasers (based on what I recall from previous discussions here). The tighter specifications also mean that it is likely there is more waste/expense for sails that don't meet the standards which means more cost in the manufacturing process (ie our strict one-design process probably means a certain number of sails get rejected for fiddly reasons that don't really make a difference in terms of performance or longevity).

We don't really know all the costs that go into the distribution/supply chain but here is my attempt at taking a guess starting with the assumption that building a sail in Asia costs only $100 in materials and labor (which I think is likely to be a little low).

(all amounts & percentages are just a guess.)



Hypothetical Laser Sail Cost

Class Legal Knock Off
Manufacturing Cost $100 $100.00
ICLA Class Royalty 30% $30 $0.00
ISAF Royalty 30% $30 $0.00
Designer Royalty 30% $30 $0.00
Shipping 10% $10 $10.00
Distributer Mark-up 30% $60 $33.00
Retailer Shipping 10% $16 $0.00
Retailer Mark-up 30% $44 $0.00

Total Retail $320 $143


Granted, I'm just pulling the percentages for royalties, shipping and markup out of . . . thin air but even with these assumptions a class sail is over double the cost of a knock off. It is likely that there are other costs in the distribution/supply chain that I didn't even consider which would likely add to the cost of the class legal sail compared to the knock offs like. For example, is a 30% markup on a low volume item enough to stay in business? Also is the percentage and placement of the royalties in the correct sequence? It's possible that some or all of the royalties might be structured more like VAT and added in several times during the process or calculated later when the cost is higher. I also have no idea what, if any, the effect of taxes and duty might have on the cost for either class legal or knock offs. I was just a history major and math and finance aren't my strong suit so maybe someone else has better assumptions. . .

Taking a quick look online it looks like a North Class Legal sail costs $565
An APS practice sail that is " heavier" 3.8 oz cloth runs $179.95. They also advertise a 4.5oz "training" sail for $454.00 which is pretty close to the class legal sail price. Could it be that the heavier cloth is a less common weight that increases the total cost?
The Intensity sail lists for $199.95 (on sale for $179.95) and is made of a "firmer dacron" "3.7 oz polyester".

Given that Vanguard was the first Laser manufacturer in the US to not go out of business (if I recall correctly) I kind of doubt that anyone is making a huge profit on Laser stuff. The retail price differential of the practice sails compared to class legal isn't that far off percentage-wise from my guess above.

While I'd like to see a cheaper, longer lasting sail just like anyone else but when I think of all the other areas where companies are trying to rip me off I can't that worked up over the deal I'm getting on Laser sails.
 
The only "royalty" on the sail is the class button, which adds approx $12-15 (USD) - No designer, no ISAF - those are only on new boats IIRC (Kirby would have banked twice as much then has has if he was getting royalties on the parts sold after the initial boat sale)

The cost cloth difference is negligible, the cloth in the class legal sail is only unique from the standpoint that no other sails are built from it, and the specs are such that there is actually less finished material rejected then a typical dacron used in other classes.

I believe the assumption that manufacturing costs between the class approved and the non-class approved are correct.

So, the cost difference between the class sail and the non-class sail as they leave the first step in the supply chain (the sailmaker) is really just the royalty button. The rest of the difference is in the markup
 
So now we are there. The monopolist, LPE, would as predicted restrict supply to maximize profits. Anyone think this would have happened if you had several builders bidding for the supply to the championships?

-----------------------------
Delay in the opening of Late Entry Applications - Latest Information
6 February 2012

We are still urgently trying to secure the provision of charter boats for the championships in Argentina. As soon as we get any positive information we will announce it here and email all the sailors who have made an application. Until then we will not open the application list for late entry.
--------------------------------------------
 
So now we are there. The monopolist, LPE, would as predicted restrict supply to maximize profits. Anyone think this would have happened if you had several builders bidding for the supply to the championships?

-----------------------------
Delay in the opening of Late Entry Applications - Latest Information
6 February 2012
We are still urgently trying to secure the provision of charter boats for the championships in Argentina. As soon as we get any positive information we will announce it here and email all the sailors who have made an application. Until then we will not open the application list for late entry.
--------------------------------------------

That's an interesting conclusion to draw from that statement, though maybe not the one I would make.

Traditionally the builders have provided charter boats to the world championships - specifically the builder owning the rights to the region in which the championship is held (e.g. PSA for the upcoming Master Worlds). They build the required number of boats, ship them to the venue, charter them to the sailors (through ILCA but with the charter fee going to the builders), then sell them (at a discount). Depending on the venue, some fraction are sold onsite to dealers who cart them off, some are shipped from the venue to dealers, etc. The point is that ILCA and/or the regatta hosts have not traditionally purchased the boats for the events.

At this point I don't think this is news or anything even resembling a big secret... LaserPerformance have decided they no longer want to participate in the boat charter business for major events like this. As I understand, the lone exception is here in North America for the High School and College Sailing singlehanded championships, but other than those they will not provide charter boats for any other events (US Sailing Singlehanded Champs, European Champs, World events, etc.).

Going forward LaserPerformance says it will focus entirely on boat building. All previous "support" functions once performed by LP will be transferred to their sister company McClaren which will handle sports marketing. Organizations once receiving "support" from LP can now apply for sponsorship to McClaren. As you may recall, McClaren already sponsors sailors, like Anna Tunnicliffe and US Olympic sailor Rob Crane.

Also, remember that South America is defined to be LP's territory, through its ownership of the trademark and through all the builders having contracts with ISAF and Bruce Kirby. So, even if ILCA wanted to buy boats for the world championships they would be constrained to buy them from the builder in the region of the host venue.

You may interpret all of the above as you see fit.

In the meantime, ILCA is still working very hard on finding a solution to provide boats to the 4.7 Worlds.
 
Well this was news to me at least.

Never heard about similar problems in opti and 420. In fact in opti it is tough bidding with several companies wanting to supply the 270+ oppies. Wonder why these classes are different? Tracy; to me this sound like using nice words for something which may more bluntly be described as LP blackmailing ILCA.
 
First I'm hearing about it too, but I admit I have not checked the latest Laser Sailor, or the NA or Intl Laser sites in case this info has been posted there..

"All previous "support" functions once performed by LP will be transferred to their sister company McClaren which will handle sports marketing"

Is supplying a fleet of new boats for charter considered one of the "support" functions or is LP/McClaren basically saying they are no longer going to supply boats under a charter arrangement ?

"Also, remember that South America is defined to be LP's territory, through its ownership of the trademark and through all the builders having contracts with ISAF and Bruce Kirby. So, even if ILCA wanted to buy boats for the world championships they would be constrained to buy them from the builder in the region of the host venue."

I thought I recalled someone saying that LP no longer had a contract with BK ? I guess that doesn't matter if they still have the trademark ownership, that would be enough to prevent, say, PSA from supplying a fleet of charter boats, correct ?

Messy.. (unless we hold all major champs in a region serviced by PSA :D )
 
My guess is McLaren might help hook up a few top-level sailors with a charter boats, but not 200 boats total.
 
What about the Sunfish class? I would imagine they are in a similar bind for their world championships.
 
My guess is McLaren might help hook up a few top-level sailors with a charter boats, but not 200 boats total.


Except that is not how the senior/open worlds are run. The idea of supplying all new equipment to everyone was so that it became a test of sailors, not equipment (subject to builders tolerances )
 
What about the Sunfish class? I would imagine they are in a similar bind for their world championships.
Maclaren was on every hull and sail on the 2011 Sunfish Worlds boats (Curacao). At that time, the relationship was a mystery, to me at least...

I just read though that the planned 2012 Worlds, which was supposed to be in Ecuador, will not be sailed over there because of certain 'issues'.
 
Hmmm. So Maclaren is now handling all the support functions for LP including "sports marketing." But what are they marketing?

As far as I know, Maclaren's actual products are baby strollers and related "parenting" products. But I don't see much publicity for Maclaren baby strollers associated with their sailing sponsorship efforts so far.

Are they just marketing the name "Maclaren" as some brand associated with sailing? If so, to what end? Will we soon see Maclaren Sunfish? And eventually Maclaren Lasers?
 
Well this was news to me at least.

Never heard about similar problems in opti and 420. In fact in opti it is tough bidding with several companies wanting to supply the 270+ oppies. Wonder why these classes are different? Tracy; to me this sound like using nice words for something which may more bluntly be described as LP blackmailing ILCA.

Most of those charters are from companies that buy lots of boats and then charter. They also have some builders like McLaughlin supply boats but they are mostly companies that charter then sell them off later. I don't think you see the builder support that the Laser class gets with other fleets (though it has been great). I don't know the financials of chartering but I can see the pain of lugging around the boats making sure things are not broken, fixing them and then selling them after a few regattas. Though the drop in price for a relatively new boat is good for buyers because they eat up event boats all the time.
 
I would disagree. The main companies doing charter will be builders , Winner(DEN), BlueBlue(POL), FarEast(CHN), Lange(CHI), Nautivela(ITA). And they offer good support as part of the package with spares and repairs available on site.

My point is that they do this because it is profitable. I am sure it has been for LP also, but refusing to offer this they Blackmail ILCA. What prevents ILCA or any other company from buying 200 boats from Australia and then ship them to where ever there is a championship and then sell them afterwards. I am sure 200+ boats sold in Europe after the 2012 championships there would make a nice bump in LP sales budgets.

This story can become very interesting if say the womens worlds in Boltenhagen will be without boats. Maybe I can offer one of mine f0r a good price..?or maybe they need to use RCLasers for the Olympic qualifications...
 
What prevents ILCA or any other company from buying 200 boats from Australia and then ship them to where ever there is a championship and then sell them afterwards.

The trademark.

Nobody, not event ILCA, can buy boats from one builder and bring them into the trademark territory of another builder without that builder's permission.

Whether is profitable or not is open to debate but, in the end, we don't have access to the builder's books so can't confirm. They would like us to believe they lose money on the proposition.
 
I hate to keep drawing conclusions, but given the deafening silence there is not much else we can do. To me it looks like LP is trying to put the squeeze on the ILCA by not providing boats, maybe clearing the way for them to create their own class association.
 

Back
Top