No, not that yacht. His other superyacht:
1 Like
If it was his employees who fucked up, I think heās responsible for their incompetence. If it was employees of a company he hired, I think heās at least partially responsible for their fuck up, but so is the company he hired to crew his yacht. If it was the West Bay Port Authority, then I think theyāre responsible. Someone fucked up. Heads must (metaphorically) roll. Deciding whoās based on who has more money instead of who actually fucked up doesnāt protect the reefs, quite the opposite.
1 Like
Yeah I just read your other post. Coming in here and harshing everyoneās buzz with your āfactsā and ārelevant knowledgeā!!! 
3 Likes
If Allenās crew knew that they were going to damage the reef,
then absolutely he is partially responsible. Otherwise, this is entirely
on the port authority.
True, but now itās gone viral, so it becomes a PR issue. Unless he just doesnāt care about his reputation.
1 Like
FWIW, I hated harshing my own buzz too. I like a good bandwagon as much as the next intertuber. Cory* got my hopes up and now I gotta go oil my pitchfork and put it back in the closet until I have more facts.
*I do and always have believed in Coryās sincere and honest good heart. But heās human, and I think his headline jumped the gun a bit at (very understandable) outrage over yet another man-made ecological disaster.
I also think thereās a very solid point to be made that thereās fundamental flaws with any industry that lets this sort of thing happen over and over again. Sacrificing the ecosphere to profit is and shall cost us far more in the long run than the immediate gains that benefit a few people and mainly a very few of those few. While Iām not convinced Paul Allen is the villain here - or ever that, if he does bear some of the blame, that heās the primary or only one - the economy that creates situations where pleasure yachts can destroy coral reefs is not something we as a species can afford to subsidize with the sacrifice of our common natural treasures, most especially among them the sea.
3 Likes
So, he TechTV-ed the coral reef?
If the crew are independent contractors (likely) then Allen has no responsibility for their actions unless it was something he directed them to do personally. If they were employees, then he is only responsible to the level in which he directly supervises their actions. Which is probably not at all. Insurance has nothing to do with this. It simply is an issue of vicarious liability. It is highly unlikely that Allen would be micromanaging the operations of his yacht in such a fashion, nor was expected to. So he is not responsible for the crewās accidental damages.
That being said, the least douchebaggy actions, given the damages, would be to do something to try to ameliorate the situation. Not make a knee jerk response that they are not responsible.
He could donate a large sum to a charity-funded conservation project or three, and that would indeed be great PR. A decent billionaire concerned with the damage regardless would find a way to do this anyway.
That would have been far better than the reaction he gave. Even if people would take it as an admission of fault, contrite actions are far better PR than simply walking away and saying, ānot my fault, not my problemā. That makes him look irresponsible and selfish.
Are you done being an apologetic here?
1 Like
His other yacht, the small one, needs $20 mil a year in maintenance and has a permanent staff of 60.
3 Likes
I used to work at a yacht club on this island. These vacation homes were owned by the super wealthy, who had yachts, big ones. The big thing was to have lots of toys on your yachts. (Jet skis, little motorboats youād launch off, etc.).
I found the big yachts disgusting, a huge waste of fuel and rude to other people in the waterways.
The superyachts to me are just gross. It is inevitable such a large vessel will harm the ocean.
9 Likes
Hey! You scratched my anchor!
7 Likes
Legally that may be so, but donāt you think he has some moral responsibility for any damages caused by mistakes of employees of contractors or a companyās employees whose services he hired?
Again, see above.
Thatās what I said. He should find a way to help whether he caused the damage or not, because he was involved and thatās the compassionate thing to do, not because he has some moral responsibility to fix mistakes whether he caused them or not.
So then you donāt care or think it matters whether or not the Port Authority caused the damage? Because Iād like more facts than the article gives before assigning blame. If that makes me an apologist, then so be it. But like you, Iām not big on knee-jerk reactions, even though my first instinct is to blame the guy whose yacht was the proximate cause of the damage.
ETA:
Question: Arenāt yacht owners and/or operators legally obligated to carry insurance the same way motorists are? Admittedly, Iām not a boat owner, but that seems like something that would be required. Now Iām curious. Iāll google it later when I have a moment.
Allen already does this, to the tune of millions per year. (If he gets hit with a fine for this, it will amount to about 1 fill-up of the yachtās tanks.) More to the point, in my mind, is WhoTF thought it was necessary to moor this massive craft as close to the reef as possible. Standing off the reef by another couple of cable lengths would have avoided all of thisā¦
2 Likes
Legally that may be so, but donāt you think he has some moral responsibility for any damages caused by mistakes of employees of contractors or a companyās employees whose services he hired?
Not really, but it would still be the stand-up thing to do something about the damages given his resources, besides run away. Its the difference between being a jerk and being a decent person.
He should find a way to help whether he caused the damage or not, because he was involved and thatās the compassionate thing to do, not because he has some moral responsibility to fix mistakes whether he caused them or not.
I think we are in full agreement and I think I misread the tone of your post. My bad. Foul on my part.
Question: Arenāt yacht owners and/or operators legally obligated to carry insurance the same way motorists are?
I donāt think so mainly because unlike oneās car, a yacht of a certain size is unlikely to be driven by its owner. Its more like the liability of oneās chauffeur or personal pilot. Short of giving them a command to do something bad, there is little liability attached to the owner if such a skilled employee does something stupid. Its just because the skills in piloting a big ass yacht and a plane are generally outside the realm of general knowledge of their owners.
1 Like
On that weāre in full agreement.
Takes two to tango. My tone could have better matched my intent. I do have a somewhat overly argumentative streak when I engage in online discussions, something Iāve known for years and usually keep a handle on, but it does get the better of me at times. No harm, no foul 
Good point. Not that I expect maritime law to change on my opinion, but I wonder if it wouldnāt be beneficial to compel yacht pilots to be bonded and/or insured against any damages they cause. Then theyād have to pass that expense on to their clients, which seems like a good idea.
1 Like
Such shenanigans. These guys told Allen to park his boat there, knowing heād wreck the reef, knowing that would allow them to recoup some restoration funds from various entities, which of course they pocket. Allen got used here.
1 Like
That is what Allen is claiming, and this may be true.
My remote mind-reading are really bad, so I was unaware. How did you learn this?
Their prognostication powers are poor, since that hasnāt happened.
The Port Authority may have been acting with bad intent, but how do you know this exactly?
2 Likes
As a product of a capitalist indoctrination upbringing, I am somewhat hesitant to suggest things like āwealth capsā or the like. However when I see things like these superyachts I do start thinking āYou now officially have too much money.ā Seriously, when I read how much just the fuel for one of these things costs, I might be getting comfortable with taking away huge piles of wealth from those owners.
4 Likes
I think that when most people think of wealthy people, they think of people like a friend of ours who took over a family business and made it very successful. He pays taxes, he employs people in his neighborhood, he works his butt off. However, if you really start to explore the very wealthy, what you find are people who may have started less wealthy but have a magnitude of wealth that is unfathomable. The Walmart heirs could purchase all of California. Thatās insane.
One of the oddest things about working on Figure 8 Island is that itās a place with homes that most of us could only dream of owning - and these were peopleās summer homes. You and me, if we owned a house like this, damn straight weād be there all summer enjoying every last drop of sun. But, the people who are wealthy enough to own these houses take them for granted. The island, even at peak season, had way more empty houses than full ones. However, the island was overrun with gardeners and maids tending to the empty houses.
3 Likes
Thatās what took the heads off of a lot of French nobility, once upon a time. Itās not that some people make more money or have more political power per se, itās that some people get to the point of being so stinking rich that they start to make choices which are (appropriately) offensive to 99.9% of the population.
4 Likes
Thatās not it at all.
Weāve decided Paul Allen is the bad guy because heās a filthy patent trolley.
4 Likes
