12:02 PM Sat 23 Jan 2010 GMT
CEO and Skipper, Russell Coutts held a relatively impromptu Media session in the BMW Oracle Racing base last Wednesday. Following is a slightly edited transcript of that session.
Russell Coutts:
I want to start off by setting the record straight on a few things.
I think that Mr Bertarelli either said or implied that Mr Ellison is trying to win this by spending more money. I've had a lot of experience in America's Cups and I think you can observe that both teams are about the same size; they've got the similar sized boats and similar sized programs; and with my knowledge of what it costs to operate a team like Alingi and what it costs to operate this team I can tell you now they'd be very, very similar. Right the way through this process or this dispute we at BMW Oracle Racing have worked hard not to personalise the issues.
As far as we're concerned the issues have been about the rules, and yet the other side has gone out of their way to have personal attacks on various people in our team, the latest one being Mr Ellison.
I think that's a really unfortunate way to go. When you look at someone like Larry Ellison and if you're going to talk about the amount of money that he spends on this program, let me tell you something: Larry Ellison is one of the most successful businessmen in the world.
He's a self made man. He created his own business empire himself, and a guy like that doesn't get to where he is today by being flippant and wasting money.
I think that's one of the problems that Ernesto Berterelli's got, because Ernesto didn't create his own wealth the same way that Larry did. When you look at Mr Ellison's ability to negotiate various business deals and grow his company and when you compare that with the other side where they haven't even been able to successfully negotiate a settlement in this issue despite our side offering them five or six very good settlement opportunities, one of them which was supported by the majority of challengers way back, somehow we haven't been able to negotiate a settlement.
If you look at the latest episode in Singapore where you had two ISAF representatives that were there to witness the settlement discussions and yet at the eleventh hour they were pulled back - and by the way, we can show you the signed copy of where our side actually signed the deal, and so did the ISAF representative that was there. Then we made another attempt at it this week and it was rejected again. And then they say you're always complaining about the rules. Well yeah, this is about the rules; this is what it's about.
Never in the history of this cup have we had such rule complications, and never in the history of this cup has a defender tried to impose such bizarre rules as wind limits on the racing, as one recent example.
The deed against this is pretty clear; it gives each party various rights or benefits, and one of the benefits the defender gets is to select the venue, and the challenger generally gets to select the timing of the event. Now we're in the deed to give the defender the right to also select the wind conditions that the boat will race in; they get enough of an advantage selecting the venue. And yet what do we see today?
We see a situation where they're trying to impose wind limits on the competition. Not only that - the measurement is at, low and behold, 60 metres. I would suggest that the race committee will not have the capability to measure the wind heights as 60 metres, even if they should.
People say how come we've got all these disputes, how come it's ongoing?
The reason it's so important is Alingi's boat is very fast in light winds and our boat is very fast in strong winds. That's the way it's turned out after all this development from both teams.
What I'd suggest is so much so that it may not even be a close race. If we get very light winds I'd suggest that Alingi's going to have a pretty big advantage, and if we get stronger winds I'd suggest that the advantage looks like it will swing the other way.
Nowhere in the Deed does it give the defender the right to choose the wind limits, yet here they are trying to impose it on the competition to suit themselves and create a totally one sided competition.
That's why we've had to go to the international jury to try and resolve some of this stuff.
Imagine if you had in sports a situation where one of the parties could decide to change the rules at any time; imagine at a football match if one of the players suddenly decided it would be much better for me if I had the right to pick the ball up and run with it.
It wouldn't be football anymore; it'd be rugby or something else.
Mr Berterelli used the example of their sails the other day saying that if they're not allowed to use their sails it's like Roger Federer not being able to use his tennis racquet, but Roger Federer doesn't go to Wimbledon and attempt to use an illegal tennis racquet; he plays by the same rules as all of the other contestants.
What's even more bizarre about this is the other side saying let's just go and race and we'll sort all these issues out afterwards.
Let's stick with the tennis example. Imagine that one of the tennis players turned up to Wimbledon and said there's a dispute over my tennis racquet but let's just play the game and the tournament and after the end of it we'll let the officials sort this out and we might have to reverse the result but let's get this battle on the tennis court where it should be.
Can you imagine that? It's just totally unacceptable. We're asking for the rules to be sorted out before the event. I don't think that's unreasonable. Certainly the way we read the deed constructed in country is one of the fundamental rules.
Constructed in country does not mean building your sails in Minden and claiming this was made (in Switzerland).
Somebody gave me the example today that this might be a little bit like baking a cake: if you correct the ingredients yourself, you mix the ingredients up. You then put it in a mould, cook the cake, pour it out of the mould and it's a cake. Then you take it somewhere else and put icing on the cake and candles and you say by putting the icing and candles on it that was really making the cake; all the rest of it didn't matter.
There's been rules in this competition now for 158 years since this race started; important rules that we believe one side should not unilaterally be able to ignore at their whim and be able to change the rules to suit themselves.
That's what this argument has been about from Day 1, and when you look back even to the early days of settlement opportunities we've created what I believe right up until recent days some very recent settlement opportunities. When you look at our latest complaint about their sails we've even offered them more time if they needed it to create deed legal sails in Switzerland. I would suggest that they can do that; I think that most people that are connected with sailing in this room know that they can build deed-compliant sails in Switzerland. That's all we're asking.
And what do they do? They turn around and say these guys are trying to delay the event. If that's the way they want to be, we'll go racing on 8 February and we won't give them time to build this up if that's what they want.
I think that this was a very generous offer, and I spoke to Mr Ellison about that offer to one, try and sort the rules out before the competition starts and two, make them a reasonable offer so they can still come to the water with a deed compliant and legal boat and race us.
If they don't want to do that we're not going to allow them to break the rules as they like in this competition. I feel very strongly I've never before been at any sailing regatta where one of the competitors tried to determine what wind conditions you should race in or tries to change the fundamental rules or turn up with an illegal sail and then expect the other competitors to say' that's ok, let's just go race this race on the water'.
The problem with this situation is that Ernesto Bertarelli is allergic to racing under fair rules. If we race under fair rules then yes, we can get this competition on the water and you'll see two great teams doing battle.
What I'd probably suggest is a lot of it is going to be wind dependant; I think there's going to be an even bigger difference in the boats to what I thought there'd be depending on those wind conditions.
Clearly Alinghi's geared up to light conditions much more so that we thought and we're probably conversely more geared up to winds in the upper range than what they thought.
From my point of view as a sailor that's been in this sport for a long time and absolutely loved competing and yacht racing - and I love to compete hard and race against the best in the world - from my point of view this is not necessarily the sailing competition that I would have liked.
You've all seen me race in the America's Cup before and I've loved the competition where you've got a close boat race and it's an equal mix of sailing talent versus design technology.
This regatta it's no secret it's all about technology, and I think it's going to be all about the weather. Aside from breakages and major crew mistakes the crew that goes on each boat is not going to be the determining factor here; the difference in the speed of these boats is going to be the determining factor.
I've got this to say to Mr Bertarelli on behalf of Mr Ellison:
Larry is a highly respected, highly successful businessman and Ernesto might wish that he was the same as Larry. No matter who wins this competition that is not going to change, and Larry Ellison is still going to be recognised as one of the most successful businessmen in the world no matter what happens.
As far as I'm concerned we'll see the team that's developed the best technology and the best boat that will win this competition.
I'm tired of the immature, stupid cartoons and personal attacks that are coming out of the other side, and I've restrained myself for two and a half years, but I'm not going to put up with this rubbish any longer.
We haven't been the ones printing obnoxious cartoons and criticising the other party; we've been trying to stick to the arguments that this is about running a fair competition and about having proper rules. It's about time the other side actually started answering some questions as to why they can't accept the rules that have been written for a long, long time now.
Question: if the case is not resolved by 8 February, will you race?
We'll have to.
But what a ridiculous situation that is. If they try and use illegal sails we are going to object, and I think it's reasonable. I've used some examples to you today I'm sure you could dream up in any number of sports and I think it's unacceptable.
We think they are [illegal sails] and we'd like that answered before the race.
Question: If the answer doesn't come before the race?
Well we'll get the answer after the race. Yes [we will have a race] and I think the race is going to be very weather dependant. We want them to come to the start line with a Deed legal boat. If I go to the Olympic Games and I'm racing in the Finn class, which is what I did, I expect the other competitors to come with a legal Finn.
It's the judges who have to decide it in this case because both parties - we put a settlement offer on the table that would have resolved all these issues. It was rejected so yes, the judges have got to decide it.
You talk about wind limits, Russell, who in this case has the right to set wind limits, or indeed if any wind limits should be set?
The other side has made a big deal out of the safety of sailing these boats, and I'd suggest that that's not about the safety; it's about trying to get the wind limits that suit their boat.
Fifteen knots at 60 metres - it may be something like 11 or 12 knots on the water - and they're claiming that professional sailors with two and a half years to prepare for an event, that that's unsafe. Give me a break!
You can reef the sails as much as you want; you can go out there and push the boat as hard as you want. You could even decide if you think it's unsafe not to race. But to try and impose your limits on a competition is the most ludicrous thing I've heard in my life, and I've been around yacht racing for a few years now and nobody has ever attempted to do that in any regatta.
There have been wind limits at America's Cup regattas in the past?
Yes, agreed by mutual consent
So who then would set those limits?
There's an argument to suggest that if the teams mutually agreed to not race on a particular day then you wouldn't race; otherwise you'd get out there and race.
Optimist dinghies sail in more than 11 knots of breeze so it should be ok to race the America's Cup in these sort of conditions.
Can the Swiss build competitive sails?
I think if you go and ask any number of other sail makers in the world can they be competitive by building sails in Switzerland - of course they can; it's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in my life. In fact they did actually pioneer 3DI technology and they built test sails in Switzerland for the last America's Cup campaign, as I understand.
Inaudible question on safety:
Look at what they have said recently. They were the ones that decided that the America's Cup should be in Valencia this time. That's not the way that I read the court decision, but anyway.
They said recently that we were the ones that broke off the negotiations - I'll show you the signed copy of the back page of that agreement. We signed it, ISAF signed it and they didn't. I don't know what to believe when they say things, frankly.
And they say that these wind limits are for safety. What do they think that the whole sailing world is stupid? And what, one metre waves? Come on. This is just a joke. And then they say why is the other side complaining. I've never seen this sort of attitude and this sort of expectation of control by one competitor ever in the history of this sport. I challenge anyone else to cite an example.
Inaudible question about wind limits
We've sailed our boat in more than 22 knots of breeze and we've been sailing at 41 knots of speed - actually, more than that on reaching. We prepared for a regatta but we don't know what the weather will be on day one; we don't know what he weather will be on day three. So we built the boat we needed to be ready for whatever is dealt to us by the weather gods.
There's some regattas that you race where the wind is so fluky that you may as well not race at all and do a coin toss, and that's consistent with any regatta that's sailed in the world. It's basically up to the race committee to decide when the conditions are stable enough to start the race.
Do you think that overall the sport has been damaged with this 'they say, we say?'
Go and look and see whether they have put a rule or trying to put a rule on wind limits in the competition. I've got the notice of race here. Look at the facts and the facts of some of the settlement proposals that we've offered; they've been published. Tell me what's so unreasonable about some of those settlement offers and how there was an inability of the other side to negotiate a settlement offer.
They said that they were forced into this multihull competition.
You go back and look at the settlement negotiations we offered a settlement after the Justice Cahn ruling and the first one we offered was on October the 17th - this in 2007. Justice Cahn's decision was the 27th of November.
On the 4th of December we went back to them after Justice Khan had ruled in our favour with another settlement proposal that was supported by the majority of challengers. We didn't hear an answer.
On the 10th of December this article here came out in the Geneva paper.
My French isn't that good but I understand what that opening line says. We forced them into a multihull competition?
I can tell you, and I tell the truth, I wanted a conventional America's Cup in monohull boats where the rules were relatively fair and that I could go out an compete like I have done for years in the America's Cup.
If both parties cannot decide this matter of wind limits who does decide?
The international jury has to decide, don't they, and that's why we've gone to the international jury in this case. If it's a deed of this matter such as the construction of country technically you have to go to the New York Courts, and if the New York courts do what they did in the case where they appointed the three expert panel, fantastic. We would love that, but it's up to the New York courts to do that. We can't go to the jury and ask for a decision; the courts have to direct the jury to make that decision or get that expert opinion and then the courts ultimately use that expert opinion to make their decision on the deed.
That's the process that we have to live under.
I've had to go back and look at some of the earlier regattas and there's pretty much always been a mutual consent document between the parties way back. You've got to ask yourself why. Look at the facts and you'll understand the reality of what's happened here.
How far can you take this constructed in country into the detail of the boat?
Our position is that if it's a readily available, non-custom item then you can source that and use it, for example a standard fault. It could be one or a standard piece of carbon fibre. The courts may not agree with that and they may take a position, and I could actually see how they did that, where every item has to be Deed compliant or sorry deconstructed in the country including the nuts and bolts. If they do that we're happy to go into the race like that.
If they took a ruling where you weren't allowed any even standard, commercially available, non-customised items we'd have to make a few changes but we'd be ready to race on February the 8th.
We may decide we would like the rules decided beforehand or clarified but we may well decide to go into a conservative way of interpreting that.
We definitely don't believe that you can go away and get some of it and somebody else in another country to construct something that is highly customised for that particular boat and would only be suitable on that particular boat and you go away and it's a major component of the boat.
To us it's very clear and if you read the settlor's intent at the time of executing this deed which is very important in a document like this it's very clear that that was not acceptable.
Alinghi have said the carbon fibre is Japanese and the design is French?
As I've said many times what they say and what the reality is for my observation is often a long way different. Go to the website and see how many Swiss they've got on their design team if they want to play that game.
Inaudible question: If they refuse to comply with the rules on sails?
It is like me turning up to the Finn regatta at the Olympics, and saying: 'Listen I refuse to comply with these rules. If you don't let me sail I'm not going to sail. And why should I have to comply with the rules?. I want to use this sail because it is faster, and I don't want to comply with the rules. Why won't you let me race? Why won't you let me break the rules.
In all honesty, that's the sort of conversation I'd have with my five or eight year old children about playing snakes and ladders. It's not the sort of conversation I'd expect to have with someone of more maturity or supposed more maturity.
Will you be on the boat?
I'll be in the boat if it makes it faster. I decided a long time ago that unfortunately this has developed into a very complicated America's Cup and there's nothing I love more and there's nothing I like more than thrashing around in a competitive match race.
To me a close boat on boat race shows real sailing skill; that's what it's all about in my opinion. When it's biased too much towards technology - it's interesting. There's no doubt that as an engineer I'm fascinated by a lot of the things I see but it's not where I think this sailing competition should be.
Can you describe how Larry feels about the whole situation, because we don't hear a lot from him?
He's [Larry Ellison] been sailing with me in the RC 44 circuit covering the boat in the match races which rates against the pros. He's won two of those match races over the last few years and Larry is not a pro sailor. Unfortunately his shareholders prefer him to be looking after Oracle Corp and rushing around the world and doing deals like buying Sun Microsystems rather than sailing.
He turns up to the regatta a few days before each one to go sailing and he beat a field in a match race that included Ben Ainslie, James Spithill, and a whole bunch of really good helmsmen. And he's passionate about it. We also won a match race on Lake Garda where he beat Dean Barker and another helmsmen overall in a match race.
He's won five Maxi World Championships on Syonara.
It's a little bit insulting when the other side says Larry Ellison's not a sailor. Look at the facts. Larry's sailing record is actually a lot better than the person that's claiming that he's not wanting to go sailing. I've sailed with both of them and I can tell you that in my opinion Larry Ellison is a much better sailor.
I challenge Ernesto to get out there in a one design of any class and win in an open international field, not some competition on Lake Geneva where certain competitors are banned from competing.
Question: Didn't you do tactics for Larry, then?
I did tactics for Ernesto Berterelli when we won the Farr 40 World Championships too, so I'm a pretty good judge of who the better sailor is.
Question: Because of the extreme technology do you think this Cup will be decided on breakdowns?
It's very likely [that this Cup will be decided on] breakdowns and wind. I'm pretty sure I can tell you which boat's going to win the race as soon as I see the weather forecast. They're two great boats and if by some great fluke the weather conditions evenly meet both boats then we'll have a great race on that day.
Question: Don't you think the racing will be decided by the weather?
Some people may well have thought that the racing should be decided by the weather; I don't happen to be one of those people. I think it would be a much better contest if the boats were more equal and it came down to the way the boats were manoeuvred and the tactics involved. I don't think that will play a big role in this.
Inaudible question on Larry Ellison's involvement:
He's [Larry] never struck a situation where he's been unable to negotiate for that length of time when it made perfect sense to the majority of the world that you should have negotiated a settlement.
It was a genuine offer if they needed more time to build their sails in Switzerland we would grant them more time.
Inaudible question on what legal outcomes and their impact on the racing
I guess we'll see a race and it will be decided afterwards.
That was a confidential agreement and it's disappointing that the other side breached that confidentiality. There are other points that they asked for that are also in the agreement and I'll hold the confidentiality and won't mention those points, although because of the untruths that were told I was prepared to show the signature page. We did ask for that [one month postponement], we would like it, but it's not essential to us; we can go racing on the 8th of February. We think it would be a better regatta if it was outside the Winter Olympics and I believe that the host city thought the same; but if we go racing on the 8th we'll be ready to go. I'd suggest both teams would be more ready with more time but 8th of February we'll go, absolutely.
Question: Do you think multi hulls or monohulls are better for the America's Cup
Personally I think it's better in monohulls but that's the sort of decision that should be made by the America's Cup Committee; it's a big call. You look at how the Version Five decision was made - the last America's Cup boats - that was a group of people that actually didn't even involve the defender. A group of people decided on that rule and it had a good life and the Cup. I make no secret of the fact lately that I believe that the future of the Cup is neutral and independent management; I don't think you can have a competition like this that works when you have one party trying to dictate the rules to everyone else. I think if the America's Cup community can achieve that then it will be a massive step forward and maybe that's the only good thing that will eventually come out of this; I certainly hope so. Larry Ellison pledged - probably because he doesn't view this as a business but as a passion - that should he be fortunate enough to win he would turn the event over to neutral management, and that is the future.
Question: Given that last time this happened in 1988 there was a watershed in terms of the development of the America's Cup, do you think there will be another revolution again when this is over?
There's been enough happen that hopefully there's some lessons learnt that this never happens again, and neutral and independent management would be one of them.
Question: Will independent management will be a change for the better?
There is a mechanism that this could work. Prior to the last America's Cup the challengers used to organise their own series and the defenders used to organise their series and at the end the America's Cup was organised. The problem with that was that you had sponsors for theChallengers Selection Series and you might have had Citizen sponsor the challengers and Omega sponsor the America's Cup. There was confusion, so after 2003 the two parties mutually agreed that SNG should manage the commercial rights of the Cup; that was the first time that was done in the history of the Cup.
The Alinghi people made a big thing of the America's Cup has always been like this where the defender controls everything.
In actual fact it's never been like that; there's always been mutual consent when the boats go racing. When you read the Deed of Gift, the start time of the races have to be by mutual consent. We had that situation last time.
In many ways the television rights and the marketing rights and everything were centralised and it made it a better event. But move the clock forward to this debacle after 2007 and then rather than be happy to control the commercial rights they wanted to control everything and that's where it failed.
I look back to 2003 and perhaps there was a mistake and there will be an opportunity to do it right this next time. There was a mistake in that both parties could have mutually agreed to form a management body that would manage it on behalf of everyone and that would be a better system.
Inaudible Question
It wouldn't be a problem if Larry Ellison won it because he wants to make this whole thing better and to him it's pretty obvious that it's just not going to work with one party dictating all the terms or trying to.
It's like the cake; the icing and the candles were put on in Switzerland and you can't call that Swiss made. If they can tell you to use the same as what they've been using they were built in Minden, Nevada. Nevada unfortunately is not Switzerland.
by Sail-World
|
Double Is Pt, QLD
Stand Up Paddle - Wave & Cruising Boards
Kitesurfing - Kites
Foiling - Components (Wings,Masts,etc)