wait, why are spain and italy even in consideration for the america's cup?

//brazil and canada maybe.

dugitman: Somaticasual: wait, why are spain and italy even in consideration for the america's cup?


(a) Valencia, Spain offers "generous financial bid," (b) Italian port offers $645 million

Still, why weren't they just dismissed off-hand and not even mentioned?

In fairness, I suppose they may have anticipated my reaction..

dugitman: My understanding FTFA is that the winning team from the last AC chooses the site for the next. This leads me to believe "Americas Cup" is the name of the trophy and not the venue.

That's the way I've always understood it, too.

If Spain and Italy want to host, they're going to have to win the race first, just like everybody else.

hogans: If Spain and Italy want to host, they're going to have to win the race first, just like everybody else.

..they're going to have to offer the biggest incentive to the team that won the last race, just like everybody else. That 'team' is Larry Ellison and the America's Cup is all about billionaire bragging rights, so it's probably going to be in SF.

(And Spain had hosted the last two because a Swiss team has owned the Cup for a while but Lake Geneva isn't exactly a prime location for ocean sailboat racing).

dugitman: Somaticasual: Still, why weren't they just dismissed off-hand and not even mentioned?

Disclaimer: I am not a yachtsmen, though I do like the way it sounds.

My understanding FTFA is that the winning team from the last AC chooses the site for the next. This leads me to believe "Americas Cup" is the name of the trophy and not the venue.

/yachtsman yachtsman yachtsman

I stand corrected. With a side of sarcastic "that's blatant false advertising!"..

Look, these yacht races you throw are very expensive. You're using my police, my sanitation people, and my Oldsmobiles free of charge. So, if you mention extortion again, I'll have your legs broken.

Tuck up those silk pajamas

dugitman: Somaticasual: Still, why weren't they just dismissed off-hand and not even mentioned?

Disclaimer: I am not a yachtsmen, though I do like the way it sounds.

My understanding FTFA is that the winning team from the last AC chooses the site for the next. This leads me to believe "Americas Cup" is the name of the trophy and not the venue.

/yachtsman yachtsman yachtsman

The Americas Cup is named after the America, the boat that won the Cup originally in 1851.

The United States did not lose the cup until 1983.

FTFA: Under a proposal that Mayor Gavin Newsom's administration recently presented to race organizers, the city would provide free land and future development rights on the property in exchange for the America's Cup event authority paying $100 million to $150 million to shore up the piers, dredge the area around them, and install new breakwaters and utility lines.

The Port of San Francisco would retain ownership of the property. Future development would be under a long-term lease and still require governmental approvals. Structures to house team headquarters, a public amphitheater and new mega-yacht slips would be temporary and paid for by race organizers.

So a city in a state with a huge budget deficit that is trying to stay afloat says they'll provide a great location for a race and allow developers to continue to use the land afterward just so long as they agree to make some improvements that, frankly, would probably be required for long-term development anyways.

The developers get to build what they want there and reap the benefits, likely recouping the initial investment in infrastructure without going to the hassle of actually buying expensive waterfront property, and get to stage a nifty event right there to begin with.

And Subby has a problem with this? How dare a city engage in fiscal responsibility regarding sporting events!

ZAZ: Lake Superior in November. Last ship afloat wins.

Or the Superior Court of the State of New York (which is pretty much where the last Cup was decided). Last litigant standing wins.

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: Look, these yacht races you throw are very expensive. You're using my police, my sanitation people, and my Oldsmobiles free of charge. So, if you mention extortion again, I'll have your legs broken.

Well done.

the city would provide free land and future development rights on the property in exchange for the America's Cup event authority paying $100 million to $150 million...

We'll give you free stuff if you give us $100-150 million.

ZAZ: Lake Superior in November. Last ship afloat wins.

Cold, dude... I've got *personal* reasons for asking you to reconsider that comment (probably not too many Farkers can say that, though, you just happened to touch on a rough spot for me, my father was on this ship you might have heard of, Gordon Lightfoot wrote a song about it). Otherwise, I'd probably consider it funny.

I for one would love to see it back in Newport that's where it belongs but that's never going to happen.

Larry Mahnken: The United States did not lose the cup until 1983.

Did it fall over board? Did they ever find it???????

D-Liver: the city would provide free land and future development rights on the property in exchange for the America's Cup event authority paying $100 million to $150 million...

We'll give you free stuff if you give us $100-150 million.

Simpletons do not realize that development rights on that pier could run into the billions.

IoSaturnalia: Lake Geneva isn't exactly a prime location for ocean sailboat racing).


It would be like NASCAR on water.

Laps ahoy!

RogueViking: The developers get to build what they want there and reap the benefits, likely recouping the initial investment in infrastructure without going to the hassle of actually buying expensive waterfront property, and get to stage a nifty event right there to begin with.

And Subby has a problem with this? How dare a city engage in fiscal responsibility regarding sporting events!

I"m not upset at a city realizing they can't afford the race and coming up with an alternative plan...

I think their offer is sort of ballsy/funny...Spain's pitch is "hey..we'll give you $650 Million if you let us host it!!!" and San Fran's pitch is, "If you put up $150 Million to fix up our dilapidated piers we'll let you own them lease them in future _{subject to our city's ridiculous very sane laws.}

tartie_pants: I for one would love to see it back in Newport that's where it belongs but that's never going to happen.

Hey - that Cup was bought by the shareholders of the Oracle Corp fair and square. If the NYYC wants to host again, they can find their own fanatic and their own Fortune 50 corp to cough up $200M or so every three years.

Whatever economist calculated that the America's Cup would bring $1.5 Billion in economic impact to San Francisco is on crack.

mrtoadswildride: RogueViking: The developers get to build what they want there and reap the benefits, likely recouping the initial investment in infrastructure without going to the hassle of actually buying expensive waterfront property, and get to stage a nifty event right there to begin with.

And Subby has a problem with this? How dare a city engage in fiscal responsibility regarding sporting events!

I"m not upset at a city realizing they can't afford the race and coming up with an alternative plan...

I think their offer is sort of ballsy/funny...Spain's pitch is "hey..we'll give you $650 Million if you let us host it!!!" and San Fran's pitch is, "If you put up $150 Million to fix up our dilapidated piers we'll let you own them lease them in future subject to our city's ridiculous very sane laws.

I'd open up a bottled water store or a plastic bag shoppe

Development in San Francisco as an incentive?

Better hope nobody reads the papers. That's like promising a vegan restaurant owner an ideal location--in cattle country.

It'll cost more than it's worth.

steamingpile: Larry Mahnken: The United States did not lose the cup until 1983.

Did it fall over board? Did they ever find it???????

D-Liver: the city would provide free land and future development rights on the property in exchange for the America's Cup event authority paying $100 million to $150 million...

We'll give you free stuff if you give us $100-150 million.

Simpletons do not realize that development rights on that pier could run into the billions.

Aannnnd douchebags don't realize that putting up the money themselves will put those billions into the city instead of corporations.

D-Liver: Aannnnd douchebags don't realize that putting up the money themselves will put those billions into the city instead of corporations.

I take it you didnt read, they are buying leases from the city so the money goes into the corporation for that price, city just retains ownership of the actual property. They would make billions and san fran gets a developed harbor plus retail/residential money from taxes/spending.

Did someone not take business econ 101 in college?

"smug"

*chug*

steamingpile: D-Liver: Aannnnd douchebags don't realize that putting up the money themselves will put those billions into the city instead of corporations.

I take it you didnt read, they are buying leases from the city so the money goes into the corporation for that price, city just retains ownership of the actual property. They would make billions and san fran gets a developed harbor plus retail/residential money from taxes/spending.

Did someone not take business econ 101 in college?

Yes, because what a commercially overbuilt SF (18% vacancy rate) needs is more buildings, on expensive leased land. Wow, how are the developers not jumping over themselves to line up the nearly impossible to find commercial real estate money for this?

\SF has higher commercial vacancy rates than Vegas, my hometown. No one is building any new space here for the next 10 years.

Y'know, the only reason Valencia can even offer a "generous financial bid" is because they stole millions from their taxpayers building a brand new harbor with a Formula 1 racetrack in the middle of it so they could host this thing a few years ago. If not for the fact that the cupholder chooses the next starting port, San Francisco would never have a chance.

ZAZ: Lake Superior in November. Last ship afloat wins.

YES

mikaloyd: Witchyman: It'll never get off the ground.. er.... water....Just think of the en-vir-on-ment-al impact of just the dredging! The Greens'll be in full derp mode! The seals! Think of the seals! And also the squirrels!!!!

In ten years they will all have moved to Boulder, Austin, or Seattle because they destroyed the local economy and San Francisco can become a real harbor again.

Most of the Bay's problem with lack of small boat infrastructure could be solved by excluding the California Sea Lion from the Marine Mammal Act. But instead of blowing off a few M-80's at Pier 39, the powers that be are now going to be spending $100M for new dockage.

Don't get me wrong here - I'm about as green as they come and I pretty much like all other pinnipeds. However, the Californians have been pretty successful exploiting humans and the MMPA. For example, there is a large group that sits at the base of the fish ladders in the Columbia and picks off the salmon runs as they swim by the bottleneck. When the salmon fail to appear, the Californians go after the 100 year old sturgeon that are hanging around. They're smart creatures, but wild animals need to stay in the wild.

scandalrag: Yes, because what a commercially overbuilt SF (18% vacancy rate) needs is more buildings, on expensive leased land. Wow, how are the developers not jumping over themselves to line up the nearly impossible to find commercial real estate money for this?

Only 18%? That is not entirely true, especially near the water but hey keep trying

How about back to Newport RI where it belongs.

steamingpile: scandalrag: Yes, because what a commercially overbuilt SF (18% vacancy rate) needs is more buildings, on expensive leased land. Wow, how are the developers not jumping over themselves to line up the nearly impossible to find commercial real estate money for this?

Only 18%? That is not entirely true, especially near the water but hey keep trying

Since you know the commercial real estate market so well, why wouldn't they be demoing old buildings on the waterfront and expanding upwards already if this was in demand? For that, you wouldn't even need a hard money lender like you would here, and wouldn't have that pesky two year delay while you wait for the cup to finish?