I agreed with Jake that the folks who sail these events (and would likely be a candidate for winning them) should dictate how it is run more than the rest of us part-time hacks.

Sing it with me now...

"I can't stand this indecision, married with a lack of vision, everybody wants to rule the world..."

I may be a consensus builder to a fault, but my goal is to correct this asap.

Mike

Is there really only six boats competing in this event?
Just curious on how this event went to nothing?

http://www.regattanetwork.com/clubm...?regatta_id=5784&custom_report_id=35


Registrants For
2012 U.S. Multihull Championship for the Hobie Alter Trophy : Pensacola Beach Yacht Club, Pensacola Beach, FL
November 15-18, 2012

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F 16
Sail# Class Skipper/Crew Hometown Club
1. 10 F 16 Joseph bello
Sarah Streater
*, * USA Fort Walton Yacht Club
2. 257 F 16 Sarah Newberry
Kenny Pierce
Miami, FL USA Miami Yacht Club
3. 15 F 16 Kirk Newkirk
Andrea Zern
Pensacola Beach, Florida USA Pensacola Beach Yacht Club
4. 2010 F 16 Sandra Tartaglino
Glenn Holmes
Tiverton, RI USA NENSA
5. 09 F 16 Tom Whitehurst
Mike Pedersen
Pensacola, FL USA PBYC
6. USA 214 F 16 Eric Witte
Tyler Holmes
Fairfield, CT USA Dynamic Sailing

Hoofy ya gotta pay attention son.

Go Mr. Tyler!

Dave,

I did read the past emails and discussions. I am curious as to this being an open event, and the organizational stages of this years event starting in March, why only six boats. Half the six boat fleet is an hour or less away.

I would assume that from at least April compeitiors could have at least planned to attend, that is eight months. It is not like this regatta came out of nowwhere.

So was it choice of boat?
Scheduling?
Interest of cats sailors in general not interested inthe Alter Cup?

Real curious as we ahve some youth getting out of monohulls and into beach cats at our local club, and would like to encourage them.

In my opinion, it was because the event was A) not typically a common sailor/everybody event so people considered it differently when deciding if they were attending B) F16 nationals that took place roughly within a week of this event in the same area.

I think it was very close to being a well attended event - I knew several people that were on the fence.

The most common reasons we've heard so far are:

1. Difficulty in obtaining a boat.

2. Schedule was too full and expensive this year, with the F18 Worlds on the other side of the country.

We knew this might be a lower-attended event and the F16 was chosen, and these dates chosen, with the expectation that boats would be nearby and available for charter. We did not expect a large carry-over from the F16 sailors, but did hope their boats would be available (which would help offset the costs of attending their own championship).

US Sailing is adamant that all charters are a private concern, and our hands were somewhat tied with managing this. In the future, I would like to see us take a more direct role in ensuring that anyone who needs a boat, gets one.

There may be something to the format change, but nothing other than time will fix that. Without a miraculous infusion of major cash, the old format will not be coming back. While I came into this as a diehard, thinking there might be a way to make this work; new provided boats simply cost way too much.

Mike

Mike, I can't let that sail by without pointing out that the restricted funds are still there. Would you share the balances of those funds?

I also would remind you that "way too much" is a matter of opinion. The committee had success negotiating an affordable charter fee when the manufacturers felt they got reasonable promotional value; something that eroded over time.

I *fully* appreciate you think the format this year was the only way to make it happen. I hope that the rumors that members of the committee feel the *sailors* are to blame for poor attendance this year are unfounded.

True.... The last and sole manufacturer did a couple of years in a row and is now marketing a different way.

Bottom line.... the possiblity of manufacturer provided boats is now ZERO.

John.... you have not offered your point of view on a BYOB event.

How many sailors in the country on spin boats or sloops will schedule two major championships in a season....

How sustainable is this support. IE can you expect these sailors to race year after year.

Here's your solution.USS Buys all the Hobie Tigers you can find and make that the all time, official Alter Cup boat.

Nd

EDIT: "Blame" is an extremely negative word that does not move us forward. Each of us has a stake in the future of this event. Those of us who work with US Sailing to plan the event, based on the limitations we have, and the results of the sailor survey; and our sailors themselves. The committee did its best, with no event scheduled at the beginning of the year, to come up with an event. The sailors need to step up and attend, or the event has no future.

Two key words in your post above: Restricted and Opinion.

It is the opinion of the President, Executive Director, Board of Directors, Championship Committee, and Multihull Championship Committee that the balance of the restrcicted fund, approximately $50,000, barely earns enough interest to support drawing the required $2,000 annual draw per the gift document.

Drawing more than $2,000 per year requires approval of the Board. We were quoted $15,000 to $20,000 to have provided boats for the 2012 event. This is much more than an incremental increase, even over prior years when $7,000 at a time was being withdrawn.

But of course you know all of that. Do you have a new proposal?

Mike

Hi Mike -

"Disgust" is also a very negative word, but it got used anyway. I agree that a volunteer with that sort of attitude will have great difficulty navigating a way forward. We have a fundamental disagreement that the sailors have an obligation to "step up." That's quite a sales pitch. FYI, there were several years when the venues and boats weren't known until well after New Years - your situation wasn't unique, so don't feel too put-upon.

The balances of the Hoyt-Jolley and the two Steven's funds should have been reported to you at the AGM. Don't forget those important tools. For perspective, the $2,000 interest language was written in 1998 or 1999 - the charter fee was bumped to $4K shortly after that (2001), and got bumped twice more as we were required to replace promotional consideration with cash. Consider that for a moment - it was the office that drove the cost of charters up as they made national sponsorship agreements that increasingly marginalized the manufacturers' support.

In the entire history of the event (through 2011), we never got anything other than a unanimous vote of the Board to allocate whatever charter fee the committee deemed necessary to run the event. We had to stand before the Board and talk about the event and the budget, but that was all. The resistance to spending the money came solely from an employee who had never been to the event. It was the pervasive attitude on the committee that our job was to host a quality event as long as possible under the tightening constraints of sponsorship that did nothing for the sailors or the host's bottom line. I take it back - we got cool hats. The last Chair was ready to take the event in a new and sustainable direction, but got shown the door for his ideas. The committee was in full agreement that our primary function wasn't to have a bank account. How were the Hoyt-Jolley funds spent this year? Absent charter fees, they don't appear to have gone toward entry fees for competitors...

I know that calls were placed to previous champions (well, some of them, anyway ) to ask why they weren't attending. I know what several of them said; a BYOB event isn't attractive as the Championship. I'm seeing that message got diluted somewhat in the translation.

You guys have a chance to get many more boats for next year, though it may only be a flash in the pan due to location and the fleet being considered. It will certainly be conducive to a much more marketable event for the future if you can take advantage of the situation - I can't imagine this year's sponsors are thrilled, or that prospective sponsors are very impressed or motivated. The committee got what they wanted this year - it's impossible to say that past committees who posted full rosters to over a quarter century of events were failures. Take what lessons you can from this year and be humble enough to apply them.

I would love to know the full story on this, but it seems that it is verboten to post it.




Shouldn't this info be accessible to any US Sailing member?

John:

Thanks for not answering the question "Do you have a new proposal?"

Has the "new and sustainable direction" you refer to above actually been documented anywhere?

No one said the prior events were failures, but the model did not allow for growth, and a 10-boat fleet was not viewed as a relevant championship by US Sailing.

More importantly, that model is simply no longer affordable. Your opinion on this has been duly noted, and as mentioned above, overruled by those with current responsibility and accountability for the funds.

Drawing down $15,000 to $20,000 a year is not sustainable. We are trying to ensure that this championship has a future beyond the next 2-3 years. Burning through the fund will not accomplish that.

The BYOB event IS the championship. We are trying to find ways, with the limited funds, to make them as attractive as possible. To that end, this year's funds were earmarked by the committee to be spent on a full-day clinic, free to the sailors. This would be captured in the minutes, available online.

While I struggle with this (Ford can't blame customers for buying Toyotas if Ford cars aren't attractive enough), we do have to hold sailors accountable when they say they want a championship then fail to attend.

In case you've been living under a giant rock for the past year, it should be completely evident that we were the first ones to openly ask all multihull sailors what they want, and have been trying to apply that information to rebuild the event. In some cases, the responses show equal aversion to both the old model and making changes. Bottom line, no matter what we do, we're not going to please everyone, so we need to decide whether the good of having the event outweighs not getting our individual preferred format options.

Mike

It sounds to me that US Sailing is the problem.

-----------------------------------------------------

Take the trophy away from USS, have the new champion host the next one at their yacht club each year. Rotate spin and non-spin each year. BYOB on P/N. No more stupid charter fees. Everyone must have insurance. Everyone races ALL the races. Make it accessible to everyone; no eliminations. The sailors get to pick which and how many big events they want to go to each year. It could be a 30+ boat event depending on the time of year!

Back in the day, the A/C meant something. The feeder races were the Area Championships. The funds collected from these races paid for the entry of their top team. The host YC or equivalent housed the sailors. Costs of attending were low. Only 10 or so teams from the USS represented areas raced for the A/C trophy. It was the USS multihull race, not some intergalactic race!

Currently, we are faced with having to bring our own boats. As fragmented as the classes are now, it is time to explore something else. In order for this race to continue, IMO, P/N numbers must be used. You have made this a spin only event and there are a lot of sailors out there with non-spin boats. The reality is you can not mix them in a P/N setting; the tables do not accurately reflect the speed of the spinnaker. I know P/N racing is not popular, but it might lead to something sustainable through our weak economic period.

After reading all this stuff, take a year off, take the pressure off, and regroup. 6 boats is not a show. Kudos to those who are there now keeping it alive.

All this is an attempt to see what may stick on the wall.

Respectfully,
Bob

I don't see US Sailing as the problem. They have been very supportive and are taking a loss this year.

I like your thoughts Bob.

Mike

Hi John
Do you really think that the members of the committee did not evaluate the attractiveness of a BYOB championship to the usual Alter cup crowd, the F16 Class, and the rest of the community BEFORE the event moved forward??

The dominant point of view on the championship committee asserted that the championship and trophy are of real value to sailors and they would compete for the championship on BYOB. We took our best shot scheduling the event and ID'ng boats for private charter.



The message got diluted???

1. Difficulty in obtaining a boat.
2. Schedule was too full and expensive this year, with the F18 Worlds on the other side of the country.

These are reasons that I can address on a committee moving forward.., As a committee member, I would judge that we over estimated our solutions or they were not good enough.

"a BYOB event isn't attractive as the Championship" begs the question... what do you mean by attractive?


The minority point of view on the committee asserted that the "special" Alter cup sailors would not compete because they were not getting a good enough deal compared to the highly subsidized charter boats of past years.

Sadly, you just confirmed this assertion had a lot of merit.

Not attractive enough event is honest... However, Nobody has a pot of money that can be accessed year after year to make the event more attractive by providing boats to this group of sailors. The money needed to solve your problem does not exist for us or any championship in the country and we can't solve it by giving you stuff...

you write


MY ATTITUDE on the committee is that the job is to organize a quality event for ALL Groups of sailors in the US... (Sloops, Spins and single handers), the host Yacht Club and their volunteers AND the organization staff that maintain the event year after year, under the constraints of 2012. (I also don't believe in fairy god mothers who promise lots of free money from unnamed sponsors )
For the record... I have NOT gotten a cool hat... or anything other then heartburn.



flash in the pan?.. chance? Thanks for the vote of confidence.



I have no problem giving you and past volunteers a pat on the back...happy now! now MOVE ON.



Once again... What are your recommendations for BYOB events.
I will humbly await a cogent answer.

Perhaps something more then...."Your offer was not attractive enough for me".. or


Yes we do have a fundamental disagreement because I say that the sailors, yacht clubs and USSA staff and volunteers ALL have an obligation to step up. There is no free lunch and racing is a partnership among these players. It is not a buisness deal or a charity.

Guys, I don't have a "new" proposal for you. My suggestion was to do the event on Waves here in Ca on 20 boats. When it was decided that nobody but me wanted to go to the mat on the charter fees, I supported taking a year off to regroup - a provided boat event every two years would be better than a BYOB event. I also said that it would be far better to spend serious money on a last hurrah before an extended hiatus rather than force the event this year and risk poor turnout, making it harder yet to attract or keep sponsors. I got shuffled off to Buffalo early, and told point blank that the past events could NOT be considered successes because the funds had lost money in a down market and not been augmented by new sponsorship. We've had terrific ideas of sponsorship for individual boats, so there was scoring between the Subway boat and the Home Depot boat (for example) independent of the regular team scores. The idea of buying a fleet was proposed and we looked at making the event a perennial affair like the Congressional Cup, hosted at a single club each year - that one, in particular, works well. You've had my ideas, and you've had the ideas of others - don't say you haven't gotten ideas. You guys picked one and the continued insistence that BYOB is the only solution is the chorus. I disagree - what else do you want me to say?

The Alter Cup and the Stevens Trophy were unique - that was the hook. If the event is another BYOB event, then you'd better come to grips with the reality that yes, it is a business, and you've put yourself into a market with a lot of competition.

Mark, it ain't about a pat on the back for anyone. Certainly not for me, anyway - I was chair a long time ago. But you should ask yourself; how many past chairmen or committee members did you ask about your job? There have been 60 or 70 volunteers on the youth and adult committees just in the last 10 years. You kept a couple of them on until you got tired of hearing them say something other than "BYOB," which, by the way, isn't an idea that originated on the committee. I hear you guys say you don't want to look back, but I have to say (again) I think it's a huge mistake. Why were people like Art Stevens, Steve Leo, Jamie Diamond, Jake Kohl and Dave Ingram a little bitter in the end? Doesn't it seem remarkable to you that the position of chairman has universally resulted in burn out with the office? I guarantee that none of those guys had issues with the job during the week of the event - that's the only thing that made the bureaucracy worthwhile. But that is what convinced me the bureaucracy is what needed to be excised from the event, not vice versa.

I have to agree with Bob that US Sailing is the problem with there rules and fees. Sailors don't attend the qualifiers in my opinion because of the extra fees at least I don't any more and won't in the future. I remember driving to a qualifier and paying 70.00 for a family membership so my wife could race with me in one event which we won but did not go to the Altercup because of cost and time. I personally won't go to another qualifier or Altercup because of cost and value. There are so many more events to go to that are funner and don't have the added US Sailing cost. How many boats were at the F16 Nationals the week before ? I guess the cost was less is why it was attended
more.
This years Altercup just tarnished the trophy with no past champions and such a small turnout. I do give the sailors that went kudos for going, but I don't think you could call it a real Altercup with so few of the best sailors in the US attending.
Also did want to say thanks to all the past and current chairmen and volunteers for your time and efforts on putting on the events.

Mike why don't you poll the question about the event leaving US Sailing and there rules and see what you get or was that in the survey you already did.

Dave.... It is not all about you!

from the NOR of the Atlantic Coast i420 event this weekend

2. ELIGABILITY AND ENTRY
2.1. This regatta is open to all boats of the International 420 class.
2.2. All sailors must be current members of US Sailing (www.ussailing.org) and the US I-420 Class Association (www.USI420.org).

YACHT CLUBS are part of the system.... It's a partnership... AYC does not want a reggata differnetial of a few bucks... they want everyone to fully participate...
It is a partnership... not a purchase.. and not charity of...
Sailors,
Yacht clubs and their volunteers
US Sailing, ISAF, and the larger racing community that provides the infrastructure.

It's not all about you... This Yacht club is running the event and they expect all of the sailors to be part of the system.

I am as cheap as the next guy... AND I don't like to be told what to do either... but I get the partnership between sailors, Yacht clubs and US Sailing/ISAF and the world wide scene.