Wow... this will be fun!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...p.html?s=print

On 1/1/11 12:43 PM, wrote:
Wow... this will be fun!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...p.html?s=print


Where would the actual racing take place? Out in the open ocean or...a
course around Alcatraz Island? The latter would sure draw shoreline
crowds on all sides of the Bay.

On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 12:50:18 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

On 1/1/11 12:43 PM, wrote:
Wow... this will be fun!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...p.html?s=print


Where would the actual racing take place? Out in the open ocean or...a
course around Alcatraz Island? The latter would sure draw shoreline
crowds on all sides of the Bay.

I don't know... maybe both? I guess they would have to suspend tankers
and such from going in and out.

I think Ellison was trying to promote crowds to watch, so they would
have to do some sailing in the bay for that to happen.

"Harryk" wrote in message
...

On 1/1/11 12:43 PM, wrote:
Wow... this will be fun!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...p.html?s=print


Where would the actual racing take place? Out in the open ocean or...a
course around Alcatraz Island? The latter would sure draw shoreline
crowds on all sides of the Bay.


Reply: Could be around Alcatraz to the Farallon Islands and back. already
a couple sailboat races a year that do that. About 26 miles to the islands.
There are questions on how a bankrupt city like SF can afford to do the
upgrades required.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110101/...iling_americas

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 18:41:54 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Harryk" wrote in message
...

On 1/1/11 12:43 PM, wrote:
Wow... this will be fun!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...p.html?s=print


Where would the actual racing take place? Out in the open ocean or...a
course around Alcatraz Island? The latter would sure draw shoreline
crowds on all sides of the Bay.


Reply: Could be around Alcatraz to the Farallon Islands and back. already
a couple sailboat races a year that do that. About 26 miles to the islands.
There are questions on how a bankrupt city like SF can afford to do the
upgrades required.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110101/...iling_americas

Wow... you're just a downer for everything. I guess creating 8000 jobs
and pumping $8B into the economy is the wrong thing. But, of course,
San Francisco is Pelosi country, so it must be a terrible idea.

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:30:46 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 00:05:58 -0800, wrote:

Wow... you're just a downer for everything. I guess creating 8000 jobs
and pumping $8B into the economy is the wrong thing. But, of course,
San Francisco is Pelosi country, so it must be a terrible idea.

Newport ran a huge loss for every American's Cup they ran for many
many years - that's why they only ran it every four years - fund
raising to keep the city and state solvent. The America's Cup just
isn't very interesting to the average sports fan - at least not the
way it is constituted now as far as tourism goes. It just isn't going
to attract the huge numbers needed to support the multi-million dollar
yachts. I was there when Australia II won over Liberty - we watched
most of the race off shore, then ran in to the pier to watch them come
in. The Mrs and I could walk around, no crowds other than sailors and
support staff - maybe 1,000 people total in the general area? Maybe.

And it was even worse in previous races - nobody other than the
sailing community cared. When Courageous took on Southern Cross, I bet
there weren't 500 people watching in total. Or at least it didn't
seem that way.

Having said that, if Ellison succeeds in downsizing the boats to
something more reasonable and races that can be viewed from shore,
then maybe, just maybe. As it is? No - ain't gonna happen. Other
than folks like you and me who might be interested in sailing races of
the size and scope of the current America's Cup, there isn't much
there - the average sports fan doesn't care about billionares building
half billion dollar boats to race in one race.

8 Billion to the economy? No way - just ain't gonna happen and I
highly doubt you will see 8,000 PERMANENT jobs out of this. Temp
maybe - a big maybe.

I really disagree. Firstly, it seems to me that watching some amazing
boats (72' catamarans) racing around and in/out of the bay would be
fantastic. Even Fleet Week draws 1000s of spectators, and the bay
itself is jammed. Ellison, if nothing else, is a pretty savvy
businessman.

Secondly, I really think this fantasy about permanent vs. temporary
jobs is totally stupid. Define permanent? Nobody can any more. It just
isn't reasonable to hold up the economy because of some strange notion
that if a job doesn't last forever it's no good. Total nonsense. All
jobs boost the economy and fuel more jobs and more economic growth.
This is BASIC economics.

On 1/2/11 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:30:46 -0500,
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 00:05:58 -0800, wrote:

Wow... you're just a downer for everything. I guess creating 8000 jobs
and pumping $8B into the economy is the wrong thing. But, of course,
San Francisco is Pelosi country, so it must be a terrible idea.

Newport ran a huge loss for every American's Cup they ran for many
many years - that's why they only ran it every four years - fund
raising to keep the city and state solvent. The America's Cup just
isn't very interesting to the average sports fan - at least not the
way it is constituted now as far as tourism goes. It just isn't going
to attract the huge numbers needed to support the multi-million dollar
yachts. I was there when Australia II won over Liberty - we watched
most of the race off shore, then ran in to the pier to watch them come
in. The Mrs and I could walk around, no crowds other than sailors and
support staff - maybe 1,000 people total in the general area? Maybe.

And it was even worse in previous races - nobody other than the
sailing community cared. When Courageous took on Southern Cross, I bet
there weren't 500 people watching in total. Or at least it didn't
seem that way.

Having said that, if Ellison succeeds in downsizing the boats to
something more reasonable and races that can be viewed from shore,
then maybe, just maybe. As it is? No - ain't gonna happen. Other
than folks like you and me who might be interested in sailing races of
the size and scope of the current America's Cup, there isn't much
there - the average sports fan doesn't care about billionares building
half billion dollar boats to race in one race.

8 Billion to the economy? No way - just ain't gonna happen and I
highly doubt you will see 8,000 PERMANENT jobs out of this. Temp
maybe - a big maybe.

I really disagree. Firstly, it seems to me that watching some amazing
boats (72' catamarans) racing around and in/out of the bay would be
fantastic. Even Fleet Week draws 1000s of spectators, and the bay
itself is jammed. Ellison, if nothing else, is a pretty savvy
businessman.

Secondly, I really think this fantasy about permanent vs. temporary
jobs is totally stupid. Define permanent? Nobody can any more. It just
isn't reasonable to hold up the economy because of some strange notion
that if a job doesn't last forever it's no good. Total nonsense. All
jobs boost the economy and fuel more jobs and more economic growth.
This is BASIC economics.


I agree with your point about jobs; in today's corporate climate,
everyone is a temporary employee *until* the corporation can figure out
how to contract out the job and avoid all fringe benefits.

I'm absolutely opposed to the taxpayers fronting money or taking on debt
to support the leisure activities of billionaire sportsmen. Stadiums and
other big time pro venues should be built and paid for by the owners of
the teams, not the taxpayers.

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 15:02:12 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 11:19:54 -0800, wrote:

I really disagree. Firstly, it seems to me that watching some amazing
boats (72' catamarans) racing around and in/out of the bay would be
fantastic. Even Fleet Week draws 1000s of spectators, and the bay
itself is jammed. Ellison, if nothing else, is a pretty savvy
businessman.

Well, I hope so - I'd like to see it as it's something that I enjoy
watching. When they had the Cup races live on Versus (then Outdoor
Life) channel, I watched every race.

I watched some of the last one, but for people on the shore, I doubt
they could see anything. In SF, it would be much different. There
would be viewing available from three sides inside the bay (at least)
and even some from Marin for the offshore part.

Secondly, I really think this fantasy about permanent vs. temporary
jobs is totally stupid. Define permanent? Nobody can any more. It just
isn't reasonable to hold up the economy because of some strange notion
that if a job doesn't last forever it's no good. Total nonsense. All
jobs boost the economy and fuel more jobs and more economic growth.
This is BASIC economics.

You need to take a remedial basic economics course then. A permanent
job is defined as one without a definite end date. Temporary jobs
have a definite end date.

No course required... Cali is an "at-will" work state. Perhaps you're
talking about staff positions? As for contract work, many people have
open ended contracts, where the money is approved quarterly or even
yearly. This is true for most staff positions these days. The job is
reevaluated at intervals determined by the company. When a position is
"no longer needed," it's eliminated via a layoff aka RIF. Not much
difference, and both types of jobs contribute to the economy. Please
prove otherwise.

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 22:38:52 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:37:02 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 15:02:12 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 11:19:54 -0800, wrote:

I really disagree. Firstly, it seems to me that watching some amazing
boats (72' catamarans) racing around and in/out of the bay would be
fantastic. Even Fleet Week draws 1000s of spectators, and the bay
itself is jammed. Ellison, if nothing else, is a pretty savvy
businessman.

Well, I hope so - I'd like to see it as it's something that I enjoy
watching. When they had the Cup races live on Versus (then Outdoor
Life) channel, I watched every race.

I watched some of the last one, but for people on the shore, I doubt
they could see anything. In SF, it would be much different. There
would be viewing available from three sides inside the bay (at least)
and even some from Marin for the offshore part.

Secondly, I really think this fantasy about permanent vs. temporary
jobs is totally stupid. Define permanent? Nobody can any more. It just
isn't reasonable to hold up the economy because of some strange notion
that if a job doesn't last forever it's no good. Total nonsense. All
jobs boost the economy and fuel more jobs and more economic growth.
This is BASIC economics.

You need to take a remedial basic economics course then. A permanent
job is defined as one without a definite end date. Temporary jobs
have a definite end date.

No course required... Cali is an "at-will" work state. Perhaps you're
talking about staff positions? As for contract work, many people have
open ended contracts, where the money is approved quarterly or even
yearly. This is true for most staff positions these days. The job is
reevaluated at intervals determined by the company. When a position is
"no longer needed," it's eliminated via a layoff aka RIF. Not much
difference, and both types of jobs contribute to the economy. Please
prove otherwise.

Don't have to prove otherwise - you provided your own proof. A
contract has a definite ending date and thus is considered
"temporary". Consultants like professional engineers work this way
all the time - either by the job or in terms of time. The fact that a
contract can be extended isn't relevant - it has a definite ending
date and as such is considered temporary.

See - that wasn't hard.

There is no such thing as a permanent job any more. Name one.

Certainly none of the auto union workers had "permanent" jobs. Not
even police or fire. You can call it whatever you want, but the fact
is that there's no such thing. This isn't Japan.

You can have a staff position, but even that is reevaluated
periodically and can be terminated.

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 20:53:33 -0800, wrote:

There is no such thing as a permanent job any more. Name one.

Retirement.

It's very steady work with a reliable pay check and I enjoy it.