Bayesian: TISG reiterates ‘unsinkability’, takes legal action

The luxury yacht Bayesian. (Image courtesy of Perini Navi).

The Italian Sea Group (TISG) has reiterated the “unsinkability” of the Bayesian and is to take legal action against the New York Times for an article it published on the sinking of the yacht in August 2024.

The company says it “firmly denies the absurdities” published in the October 31st newspaper article, which it claims reported a narrative about the tragedy which was “completely devoid of technical consistency without mentioning the source which, if truly qualified, would have had no problem being quoted”.

TISG says it acquired Perini Navi, the builder of the 56m sailing yacht Bayesian, from a bankruptcy auction in 2021 and “therefore cannot in any way be held responsible for any event possibly referable to the sinking”.

Seven people out of the 22 onboard lost their lives when the Bayesian sank in a storm off the coast of northern Sicily in the early hours of August 19th.

In the immediate aftermath, TISG CEO Giovanni Costantino drew criticism by claiming the boat was “unsinkable”.

In a statement announcing the lawsuit, TISG refuted eight points in the article and said it “firmly reiterates the unsinkability of the Bayesian sailing yacht, if properly sailed and operated”.

It added the action against the American newspaper was for the “image damage referable to the brand and reputation of Perini Navi, so far a symbol of technological perfection and the highest expression of Italian yachting in the world”.

TISG refutes the article’s claims that the single-mast design led to instability, stressing the Bayesian “while having a stability curve slightly different from a ketch, still fully and largely complies with the stability criteria set by the Maritime Coastguard Agency for commercial sailing vessels”.

It takes issue with a  reference to a host of designers and engineers finding “glaring weaknesses” in the boat’s design, saying  it was designed by “one of the world’s most famous naval architects, Ron Holland”.

The group also pushes back against claims the doors and hull openings represented a weakness, saying they adhered to regulations and “cannot in any way represent a design flaw or weakness if operated properly”. It added that all the technical documents were physically checked and validated during the on-board stability test in the presence of class and flag surveyors.

TISG counters claims made in the article that the ballast was positioned too far back to compensate for the heavy mast positioned further forwards.

“This arrangement did not in any way compromise the fixed ballast centre of gravity height on Bayesian. Every expert naval engineer can confirm that,” it said.

The article also reports naval architects as claiming the sunken deck forward of the mast reduced bouyancy but TISG says this is only the case at “very high heel angles”, adding the area had drains to evacuate water trapped there and said it did not affect the regulatory stability requirements.

TISG also “strongly disputes” claims that the Bayesian could take on water at heeling angles below the safety threshold set by the British Maritime and Coastguard Agency. It says the yacht was “fully compliant” with regulations.

Italian investigators and the UK’s Marine Accident Investigation Branch are still piecing together what happened and the causes of the tragedy.