Americas Cup Funding.

Forums › Off topic › Americas Cup Funding.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

zaptor

745 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1073026 24-Jun-2014 00:07

KiwiNZ: I have no issue with Government funding to assist amateur sport, I have a big issue with Government funding of professional sport.

I do have issues with Government funding of "amateur" sports. If it's for the artificial feel-good accomplishment of winning at the highest level, then at least there is a (somewhat shallow) rationale.
Consequently - that being the case, is it not reasonable to apply the same rationale to winning something (as "prestigious") as the AC? I always kind of thought that was the _real_ reason behind funding a challenge - that we would WIN.

But, we just crashed and burned. Meaning little if any future funding if we used the same performance-based criteria that HPS NZ uses.

I mean, I can appreciate the sales pitch. But, Dalton didn't deliver last time... there are no points for silver.

Edited: For layout

zaptor

745 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1073028 24-Jun-2014 00:24

joker97: what's in for us the public to invest in this boat?

It's also a question you can apply to any sport. Why does the taxpayer actually fund any sport in the first place?

joker97:
I think there are lots of things that are bad investments, not just the black boat. so the Dunedin stadium is owing 150 million or something, and every year the rate payers just manage to repay the interest, not touching the actual debt. I think we should just declare DCC bankrupt and rename the city

Well yes. It's a nice stadium though.

In this country it would only ever happen with rugby - which it has.

I do wonder why with the all the issues plaguing the FWC (this AC funding question pales in comparison), why people still support it by watching it.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1073053 24-Jun-2014 06:54

zaptor:
KiwiNZ: I have no issue with Government funding to assist amateur sport, I have a big issue with Government funding of professional sport.

I do have issues with Government funding of "amateur" sports. If it's for the artificial feel-good accomplishment of winning at the highest level, then at least there is a (somewhat shallow) rationale.
Consequently - that being the case, is it not reasonable to apply the same rationale to winning something (as "prestigious") as the AC? I always kind of thought that was the _real_ reason behind funding a challenge - that we would WIN.

But, we just crashed and burned. Meaning little if any future funding if we used the same performance-based criteria that HPS NZ uses.

I mean, I can appreciate the sales pitch. But, Dalton didn't deliver last time... there are no points for silver.

Edited: For layout

By amateur sport I am more thinking of the likes of kids Rippa Rugby, kids yachting, swimming in schools etc etc.

mclean

581 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

#1073434 24-Jun-2014 13:55

The trouble is successive governments have seen supporting TNZ as a no-brainer from a commercial point of view. They think that by keeping the team operating they can, with $30m in seeding funding, return more than that in tax. That is the GST and income tax on >$200m, most of which comes from overseas, and most of which is spent in NZ. The simple fact is that for the last campaign TNZ paid more than $30m in tax alone, so it makes commercial sense without considering any of the side benefits which are harder to quantify.

But I think the government is now starting to realise that the moaning NZ public and news media has made supporting TNZ an electoral hot potato and, as always with politicians, it will be political expediency that wins the day over simple commercial considerations. After all they can always fund hospitals from tax-payer funds rather than the tax take from Emirates sponsorship - most voters are so short-sighted they can't see the difference.

Maybe it's time TNZ cut it's apron stings from the NZ government and moved its operation to some more pleasant part of the world where they can operate free of all the crap they have to put up with here.

zaptor

745 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1073468 24-Jun-2014 14:39

mclean: The trouble is successive governments have seen supporting TNZ as a no-brainer from a commercial point of view. They think that by keeping the team operating they can, with $30m in seeding funding, return more than that in tax. That is the GST and income tax on $200m, most of which comes from overseas, and most of which is spent in NZ. The simple fact is that for the last campaign TNZ paid more than $30m in tax alone, so it makes commercial sense without considering any of the side benefits which are harder to quantify.

If that's indeed the case, then I don't see what the problem in funding the AC is?

Is there a public audit on the ROI from the $30m? That might help alleviate public concerns over the matter.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#1073780 24-Jun-2014 22:38

JimmyH:
itxtme:

Use the search button, find the last thread that has this information. Both an independent and internal reports. Same methods as used to check the financial impact of every other event NZ tax payers fund. But lets all ignore that right?

Its a political hot potato, thats clear just from the majority of people here at geekzone. Ask yourself why would they still fund it??? It is financially beneficial - that is all.

It's a little unnecessary to take that tone with people in what has been a fairly civilised discussion.

You made some fairly absolute statements about it being a proven fact that the Government made a net profit on funding the event, and a couple of people asked you for some evidence in support of that. The aren't "ignoring" anything, to the contrary, they are asking for links to the independent and internal reports that you have cited to justify your assertion. Which, in my opinion, is a fair and reasonable question to ask.

Oh but I have justified them repeatedly....

http://www.med.govt.nz/majorevents/news/americas-cup-evaluation-reports

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
8846 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1073822 25-Jun-2014 00:17

Dratsab: I think you're looking at it wrong - it's a challenger series, not a defender series. From the challenger perspective, what's the point of racing the defender in this particular series? Is it so if the defender wins it contributes to the challengers elimination? Is it so if the challenger wins it means absolutely nothing as the defender can't be eliminated?

I have read this several times and simply can't follow what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate?

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek

#1073836 25-Jun-2014 05:26

eracode: Dratsab: I think you're looking at it wrong - it's a challenger series, not a defender series. From the challenger perspective, what's the point of racing the defender in this particular series? Is it so if the defender wins it contributes to the challengers elimination? Is it so if the challenger wins it means absolutely nothing as the defender can't be eliminated?

I have read this several times and simply can't follow
what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate?

Because the defender is automatcally in the final, I believe the question is 'Why should they be racing in another points series?'
And do any points they win alter the outcome for challengers.

No the defender cant / doesnt eliminate challangers. Including the defender in racing may help every team see where they are in a competive sense, but essentially its exposure for sponsors.
Otherwise defender sponsors only get their brands aired during the AC match rather than during lead in events over a couple of years.
]

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1074351 25-Jun-2014 15:40

Team New Zealand has released a statement this afternoon confirming it will challenge for the 35th America's Cup.

Chairman Keith Turner said the team had secured sufficient private funding and sponsorship to be able to commit to a challenge without having to ask for Government funding.

Good on them! Well Done Team NZ, Good Luck.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1074360 25-Jun-2014 15:47

Yachting: Team NZ challenge to go ahead

It's not clear to me. All they have done now is commit to the challenge.

Now they have committed to the challenge do they expect government funding to flow at some point down the track?

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1074362 25-Jun-2014 15:49

gzt: Yachting: Team NZ challenge to go ahead

It's not clear to me. All they have done now is commit to the challenge.

Now they have committed to the challenge do they expect government funding to flow at some point down the track?

They are saying no, but I wouldn't rule it out. They needed the commercial sponsors to put money on the table and commit and they have.

thecatsgoolies

414 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1074363 25-Jun-2014 15:49

networkn: Team New Zealand has released a statement this afternoon confirming it will challenge for the 35th America's Cup. Chairman Keith Turner said the team had secured sufficient private funding and sponsorship to be able to commit to a challenge without having to ask for Government funding.

Good on them! Well Done Team NZ, Good Luck.

Well done. I had a feeling there was private and corporate funding out there. How it should be anyway.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1074366 25-Jun-2014 15:51

thecatsgoolies:
networkn: Team New Zealand has released a statement this afternoon confirming it will challenge for the 35th America's Cup. Chairman Keith Turner said the team had secured sufficient private funding and sponsorship to be able to commit to a challenge without having to ask for Government funding.

Good on them! Well Done Team NZ, Good Luck.

Well done. I had a feeling there was private and corporate funding out there. How it should be anyway.

1000% agree.

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1075699 27-Jun-2014 18:04

If it has an exceptional value in bringing people to NZ then I say fund it but the profits must benefit NZ as a whole and must attract people that would not otherwise come here.
NZ has sports people that travel the world and raise quite a bit of awareness for our tourism industry, Haydon Paddon NZ only ever full time driver in the WRC for example will generate more international TV time that the Americas cup did, but he gets nothing. And why should he ? he's a rally driver, a very good one, but he's playing a very expensive sport. The only sport more expensive would be boat racing. Great to hear they got private sector funding though, perhaps the govt could incentivise tourism by subsidising return flights for those who stay longer.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4