Personally I find the idea of spending USD150.000.000 on a boat race obscene.
Problem is I guess that mono hull match racing makes for pretty boring TV. Funnily enough of course the fastest AMCup boats of all time failed to get any TV coverage in many parts of the world.
The problem is not the money. Sir Keith Mills, from the Origin team explains correctly the problem:"The format and timetable decided by the defender is simply not viable.Ē
By viable format he means that as it is proposed there is no way for the AC to be economically viable. This means that the race will not be able to generate the money (publicity and broadcasting rights) to pay itself (and each of the boats).
If the race could generate enough money to pay a reasonable number of $160M campaigns, I would not see any problem with it.
As it is, as RichH have said :"The AC is becoming very 'sad' as the clear advantage automatically goes to those with the 'deepest pockets' and excludes those who canít afford the meteoric rising costs to 'play'."
Regarding Monohulls versus Multihulls I would like to point out that the previous edition (monohulls) generated a lot more public interest (a lot is not enough to express the difference) than the last one ( multihulls).
I was in Valencia both times and you cannot imagine how miserable poor was the last edition.
Public interest means money!!!!and money means that the teams are paid with that money.
I believe that both monohulls and multihulls can make interesting races if the boats are fast and spectacular. But for interesting races it is also needed a considerable number of contenders and boats and teams very close on performance.
The chosen boats will be fast and spectacular, but we are going to have boring races if the contenders are only one or two, with no matched performances.