New Zealand

The $293m blowout: How America’s Cup cost benefit reports ‘swimming in red’ provides a vague optimism

Analysis:

The devil in the detail is what New Zealanders perhaps hoped they’d uncover with the release of 283 pages of cost benefit analysis of the 36th America’s Cup last week.

Out of the four

– Long-term environmental benefits for Auckland and New Zealand
– Positive experiences and memories for Auckland and New Zealand residents
– Positive Māori outcomes
– The role sailing on home waters may have played in ETNZ’s successful defence of the America’s Cup, which has created the option for Auckland and New Zealand to host a future America’s Cup event (subject to commercial negotiations).
– Greater awareness of sailing
– Educational outcomes

“But the bias is: We won! If we hadn’t won, the evaluations would likely have been rather less happy, and, of course, for future decision making, the possibility of not-winning has to be allowed for.

“It was interesting that a non monetary benefit listed was what you could call the home-field advantage – that having it here increased the chance of us winning, if only because it reduced the number of competitors, also because our sailors know the Gulf so well, and winning delivers the option value of being able to choose where to defend the Cup next time.”

Of course, it’s now known that winning AC36 has not provided value to New Zealand in having a choice to host the next event – which will instead be made by Team NZ executives such as Grant Dalton.

The $293m blowout: How America’s Cup cost benefit reports ‘swimming in red’ provides a vague optimism SourceThe $293m blowout: How America’s Cup cost benefit reports ‘swimming in red’ provides a vague optimism

Back to top button