Team NZ management did not want ratepayers reeling from the impact of Covid-19 to foot the bill.
If that logic made sense at the time, it is questionable now, with Team NZ apparently preparing to begin negotiations with overseas venues about defending the Cup overseas.
Although there has been no official confirmation, no one has disputed the Herald's report that the syndicate has told negotiators appointed by the Crown their bid to keep the Cup in Auckland has been unsuccessful.
Having already, over several years, provided millions in cash and use of prime real estate on Auckland's waterfront to host the last event, authorities' offer of a fresh package believed to be valued at $100m (it is not clear how much of it is cash) seemingly may not be not enough.
Goff this week hinted at one of the sticking points when he said taxpayers and ratepayers had given him the message that they did not want millions of dollars "simply contributing to a host fee".
The situation is not altogether a surprise. Even before the recent America's Cup round began, Team NZ was seeking expressions of interest to possibly take the next one offshore if they won.
It is far from clear that the team can maintain public support if they leave.
While some callers to talkback radio this week warned about the possible impact on the boat building and tourism industries if the Cup leaves, others fumed that the Government already appeared to be offering too much to try to have it stay here.
Previously Team NZ principal Grant Dalton has warned that foreign interests would happily strip talent from the syndicate.
An alternative to taking the America's Cup offshore might be to sell the syndicate. But that begs the question: What is the purpose of Team NZ?
Infrastructure improvements aside, many question why taxpayers — and Auckland ratepayers — poured millions into the America's Cup event.
Is it to promote New Zealand as a high-value tourism and marine destination? Is it to act as a showcase of New Zealand's abilities for engineering and innovation? Is it to build a sense of our ability to compete against the world's best? r is it to ensure the continued employment of the crew and management on internationally competitive salaries?