New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: ILCA drop LPE as a builder
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

ILCA drop LPE as a builder

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3536373839 46>
Author
CT249 View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 08 Jul 06
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Post Options Post Options   Quote CT249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 10:20am
Originally posted by iGRF

So, tell me, this class association that's having a go at LPE, why didn't it have a similar 'go' at the Aussies?

https://optimist-openbic-sailing.blogspot.com/2019/04/aussie-lasers-damaging-ilca-emails.html?m=1&fbclid=IwAR0DoynWBqCWLQozXXNtpT1yRBmORWpPPpEI4s2VvPs-i-m4fNb-R3WVHyU


One Designs not one designs at all shock horror probe..


Who'd ever have thought it, cheating Aussies? As if...

So do you actually believe that one side of the dispute is handing out the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?  Any reasonable person can see that those documents don't prove what LPE and their fans claim they do. For a start, the "defect" has been found in ONE boat and there is no evidence in the correspondence that the other 2000+ are similar. ILCA also noted in the correspondence that PSA did NOT admit that the "defect" existed. It appears that there was arbitration but we do NOT know the result of the process. 

Having spent many years investigating stuff a lot bigger than this issue, one can see many ways how these allegations could have been found to be groundless. There could have been earlier discussions about changing the layup and someone could reasonably have got the story wrong. There could have been a problem with material availability and PSA may have sent and email and got the OK to produce a few boats with a different layup, and that email could have been missed in a staff change. There could also have been intent and deceit on PSA's part. The point is that no one knows and going off into lynch mob mode is just silly considering how little has been released.

Note also that using the very same evidence one can "prove" that LPE changed their boat's layup before PSA did. That allegation is contained in a piece by PSA's manager. If we are going to be dumb enough to accept without question everything LPE says then we must also be dumb enough to believe without question everything PSA believed.

Basically, you'd have to be brain damaged to accept without question that a small example of correspondence released by one party represents the truth in a matter like this.


Back to Top
CT249 View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 08 Jul 06
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Post Options Post Options   Quote CT249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 10:24am
Originally posted by iGRF

Originally posted by CT249



]By the way, sailing is actually a very unrestricted sport. No one will stop anyone from creating a new class. If you want to create the Grand Racing Formula class that will allow boats to be made obsolete and impractical each season, no one will stop you. All that will stop you is reality.
I want to build a Contender that I or a woman could actually lift onto a trailer and sail and maybe even squeeze my ample bosom under the boom...

That's like saying "I want to build a Mistral Prodigy that looks OK and doesn't go slow"; you can build it but it's not a Prodigy.

You can go ahead and build your Contender Lite class and no one will stop you. If you can find enough people who actually want to race a boat that has no fleet to sail in, you may even get a class going. 

The thing about dinghy sailing is that if you actually put up and do it instead of complaining, there is no one to stop you from making a new class. That is very different from many other sports, where kit is much more controlled.

I'm not a Contender sailor but I know people who love them, for good reason. The fact that you are apparently too wimpy and ungainly to sail one does not mean that they should all lose the great racing they enjoy and have to lose many thousands of quid to replace the boats they love with your version.


Edited by CT249 - 01 May 19 at 10:26am
Back to Top
Sam.Spoons View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 07 Mar 12
Location: Manchester UK
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3370
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sam.Spoons Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 10:34am
Originally posted by iGRF

 I want to build a Contender that I or a woman could actually lift onto a trailer and sail and maybe even squeeze my ample bosom under the boom...

I thought you'd built a super light Contender with room under the boom called a Farr 3.7?
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 11:56am
Originally posted by CT249


So do you actually believe that one side of the dispute is handing out the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Any reasonable person can see that those documents don't prove what LPE and their fans claim they do. For a start, the "defect" has been found in ONE boat and there is no evidence in the correspondence that the other 2000+ are similar. ]

And yet you believe without question that ILCA were right to dump LP?

The World Sailing Olympic Class Plaques Terms & Conditions states:

4.3 For one design equipment, the Builder shall supply to WS from time to time with the latest and up to date manufacturing/building specifications (including tolerances and quality control procedures) in use by it.
4.4 The Builder agrees it will not use any amendment to the specifications without the prior written consent of WS. WS agrees any amendments will be reported immediately to the relevant class association and the Builder.

The ILCA letter was a Defect Notice written after an investigation into the PSA boats and states "Appendix 1 of this letter identifies the ISAF Plaque numbers of the Laser class sailboats produced by Performance Sailcraft Australia Pty, Ltd. ("PSA") known to not comply with the manufacturing specification of the Laser Construction Manual ("LCM"). The 2,280 boats identified in Appendix 1 were manufactured between September 2006 and November 2015*".


* Not sure how this is possible given the Defect Notice was written in March 2015

So, in a nutshell:

. Prior to this dispute, routine ILCA inspections did not discover irregularities in PSA built Lasers for 9 years.
. Prior to this dispute, ILCA did not terminate PSA's contract upon confirming the irregularity and did not, apparently, inform World Sailing.
. Prior to this dispute, ILCA changed their rules to remove the designer's rights.
. Prior to this dispute, ILCA changed the Laser plaques to remove the designer's name, the Laser logo and Laser name.
. ILCA acted hastily in terminating LP's contract there appears to have been very little notice period and no attempt at settling the dispute prior to sacking LP.
. ILCA acted hastily in changing the name and logo of the class there has been no membership approval of the changes.
. ILCA acted hastily in photoshopping (what I believe are) LP built (and logo'ed) Lasers to remove the sunburst and replace with the new ILCA logo in their promotion material.
. EurILCA disapprove of ILCA's actions.
. The name of the class association has not changed, so we now have a situation where the International Laser Class Association represents ILCAs but not new-build Lasers.
. The International Laser Class Association (commonly abbreviated to ILCA) are likely to have to defend the case that in their chosen boat name "ILCA" the L does not stand for Laser and that such a name is not intended to mislead the public into thinking the boat is a Laser.
. World Sailing has not approved or endorsed any of ILCA's actions, despite ILCA's claims.

Things I am unclear about:
. Were ILCA within their rights to terminate LP's contract when they did? All sorts of reasons to doubt it.
. Are old Lasers now expected to be referred to as Lasers or ILCAs? Recent race reports on Y&Y still refer to them as Lasers.
. Is it feasible to have a class association named after a different, trademark protected, class and not your own class? Surely not!
Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6496
Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 11:59am
Aussis not cheating?

Denial is that a river in Egypt?

Edited by iGRF - 01 May 19 at 12:00pm
Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6496
Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 12:07pm
Originally posted by CT249



Originally posted by iGRF

Originally posted by CT249



]By the way, sailing is actually a very unrestricted sport. No one will stop anyone from creating a new class. If you want to create the Grand Racing Formula class that will allow boats to be made obsolete and impractical each season, no one will stop you. All that will stop you is reality.
I want to build a Contender that I or a woman could actually lift onto a trailer and sail and maybe even squeeze my ample bosom under the boom...

That's like saying "I want to build a Mistral Prodigy that looks OK and doesn't go slow"; you can build it but it's not a Prodigy.
You can go ahead and build your Contender Lite class and no one will stop you. If you can find enough people who actually want to race a boat that has no fleet to sail in, you may even get a class going.
The thing about dinghy sailing is that if you actually put up and do it instead of complaining, there is no one to stop you from making a new class. That is very different from many other sports, where kit is much more controlled.
I'm not a Contender sailor but I know people who love them, for good reason. The fact that you are apparently too wimpy and ungainly to sail one does not mean that they should all lose the great racing they enjoy and have to lose many thousands of quid to replace the boats they love with your version.



Two very different cases there, the one an attempt to bring a class into the modern era once more and the Prodigy was actually faster and preferred at the trials to the RSX but there was nobody left in the political situation at Mistral that had the necessary 'sway' with the IYRU to match Neil Pryde and everyone new at the trials it was just a necessary charade and the deal had already been done.

As to the Contender I would have thought it more a question of being more inclusive to sailors of all sizes and genders, but like I said Classes are from a bygone era, male dominated and will not countenance anything that might upset the status quo of the existing members even if it is to the detriment of themselves and they're own future. So, Sexist, Heightist and Gender discriminatory.

Edited by iGRF - 01 May 19 at 12:08pm
Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6496
Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 12:10pm
Originally posted by Sam.Spoons

Originally posted by iGRF

I want to build a Contender that I or a woman could actually lift onto a trailer and sail and maybe even squeeze my ample bosom under the boom...
I thought you'd built a super light Contender with room under the boom called a Farr 3.7?


Actually finally managed to beat a Contender on Handicap last Thursday, in order for that to happen he had to break his trapeze hook and capsize a couple of times. Don't get me wrong I love the Farr, but it is a tough call to sail it to handicap and I'm not there yet...
Back to Top
Late starter View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 24 Feb 07
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 479
Post Options Post Options   Quote Late starter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 2:18pm
That Farr 3.7 pic that GRF put up the other day really is a cracking looking boat. Wish I was young enough/fit enough to sail one. 

Back onto Lasers, or whatever we're calling them now. Someone up-thread made some good points about the value of volunteers such as the guys that run our classes and clubs, and someone else made some points about LPE not being the sort of company one might want to do business with. I sort of agree with both, I've sailed Lasers on and off for 40 years (bought my first Laser in 1979 and I've usually had an old Laser in the back of the boat park as a spare boat since) and after buying the boat from Banbury or wherever never had contact with them until my next boat purchase. On the other hand I sailed at class or club events all the time, and 40 years later I still sail my laser in the occasional club race. I think you can probably guess where my loyalties are, which are firstly to the class and my club, and secondly to wherever I can buy Laser spares from. LP aren't on my radar as I don't see how they add any value to me sailing around in my 25 year old Laser. 

I don't want or need to get dragged into the "he said/she said" details of what is a contractual dispute between builders. Perhaps a court will decide at some point, but given the original Kirby v Rastegar suit has been running since 2013 perhaps not. In the meantime I can't think of a single reason why I'd support LPE in any way as someone with no real axe to grind either way. 

Back to Top
bdu98252 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 07 Jun 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Post Options Post Options   Quote bdu98252 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 4:20pm
Originally posted by CT249

Originally posted by iGRF

Class Associations as I've frequently been on the record as saying before, are the most negative feature of dinghydom. They are an anachronism held over from a previous era, they hold up development restrict the sports growth by foisting old outdated heaps of junk on unsuspecting newcomers, are entitled beyond their worth.

Whoever gave any class association the ability to decide who builds the Laser was a fool in the first place and it will not be the first time some bunch of politically motivated class imbeciles bit the hand that fed them, ask the Mistral Class, where are they now? Hundreds of thousands of s went into building that class and within ten short years of it gaining autonomy due to the Olympic selection, it was gone. I can't believe the Laser has lasted as long as it has, testament presumably to the hundreds of thousands of s worth of free boats, charter boats, shipping costs around the world, God knows how much LPE must have spent over all this time, no, don't talk to me about Class Associations and their restrictive practises.

Heaps of other sports have associations that are just like class associations. For example, the most popular "equipment intensive" sport in the western world is cycling, and cycling's main event is held on kit that is highly restricted. And the dinghy classes that foster the fastest-developing classes are not very large or growing very quickly - in fact most of the fastest-developing classes are shrinking.

The marketplace has spoken, and it's largely spoken in favour of the classes that don't give the big spenders a big advantage, and don't force people to throw away their boats. 

Speaking of IMCO; didn't the first IMCO board sell over 330,000 units, and didn't sales and class numbers drop dramatically in the period that the class changed both board and sail about four times? 

By the way, sailing is actually a very unrestricted sport. No one will stop anyone from creating a new class. If you want to create the Grand Racing Formula class that will allow boats to be made obsolete and impractical each season, no one will stop you. All that will stop you is reality.

Cycling is not a good example as whilst the rules are defined strictly there are a number of bike manufacturers making a profit from selling bikes that whilst branded separately I doubt the bike brand at the tour de france is the deciding factor. The laser manual states how you build the boat making it significantly more restrictive than the cycling world in addition to them being as near identical as possible. So yes sailing has more classes but something like a Solo is more equivalent to bikes and not the one design classes like a laser. 
Back to Top
Sam.Spoons View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 07 Mar 12
Location: Manchester UK
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3370
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sam.Spoons Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 19 at 8:46pm
Pedantic, I know but the Solo is also a One Design class (just not a Single Manufacturer One Design class). But you are right, it is more analogous to cycling. I think CT's point still stands though.

Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3536373839 46>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy