brasilolimpico

What are the hotel problems in Rio? Asunción's hotel capacity is far below that of at least a dozen Brazilian cities, both in quality and number of rooms. Rio-Niterói offered a better bid, for a grander event with an Olympic atmosphere. Brazil is currently the largest market for the Pan American Games. I like the idea of Paraguay hosting the games. Geographically, Asunción is closer to my home than Rio. I wish the Paraguayans all the best, but Rio was a more robust proposal. Of course, political factors and the behind-the-scenes strength of the Paraguayan bid had a positive impact.

Brazil is the main market for TV rights to the Games, especially given the US's lack of interest. Choosing Rio would offer a chance to bring back TV Globo, by far the largest media outlet in Brazil and capable of guaranteeing coverage for the event. The IOC awarded London 2012 to RecordTV, but soon regretted the decision, faced with an event with significantly less coverage. They corrected their mistake and have since guaranteed TV Globo coverage for all Olympics. PanAm Sports made a poor choice. Since signing a contract with RecordTV for the 2011-2019 cycle, the event has lost significant coverage, and they were ultimately left off TV in 2023. As far as we know, they remain without a partner for 2027. The 2031 Games in Rio could have meant a good financial deal with TV Globo for 2027 and 2031.

We hosted the 2014 FIFA World Cup during the Brazilian winter, even in cold cities like Curitiba and Porto Alegre, where temperatures can easily drop below zero Celsius. But we could easily host it during the Brazilian summer. It's not impossible to practice sports in the European or Asian summer sun, regions that aren't in the tropics. We have national championship games in December in Brazil, and the regional leagues start again in January, mostly at 4:00 PM, in cities like Belém, Recife, Cuiabá and Manaus, which are scorching. We need to be honest about climate change. It exists, but it's far from requiring flexibility for the summer games. If they want to move the Olympics to November or October, fine, but let's be honest, it's purely to satisfy the lobby of some countries that want to clean up their image through sporting events.

We have high-level sporting events taking place in Brazil in the middle of the Brazilian summer, not just in the South, but also in the North and Northeast, in the tropical zone with high humidity. Climate change is a real problem, but it's clear that the main objective of these discussions today is to serve the candidacy interests of "certain countries."

No candidate is even remotely reasonable or exciting. It's a shame that Madrid doesn't take advantage of this to get its turn as host.

In Brazil, the event has received a lot of media coverage (especially with the forced suspension of the national league and the end of the European season) and people are talking about it on the streets, at work and on social media. The defeats of European teams against Brazilian teams have helped generate local attention. However, we cannot say that it is a huge success, as the TV audience is significantly lower than at a World Cup with national teams. In any case, USA-CANADA-MEXICO 2026 should be far ahead in terms of audience success and attention, the World Cup atmosphere is always magical in Brazil and this time the time zone will be extremely favorable.

India needs to host a major sporting event for its Olympic bid to gain traction with groups more skeptical about its ability to host. India basically has two options on the table: the Commonwealth Games or the Youth Olympics. Of the two options, the “Old Commonwealth Games” are much larger in scale and would have a positive impact. I imagine Modi and his Olympic aspirations would work to ensure a successful hosting of the Commonwealth Games, which would be a powerful card to play. My favorite bid has always been Canada, but hosting such a geographically spread out bid frustrates me. Nigeria is very complex, and the risk of social unrest and security is very high in the country. New Zealand would be great, but I see little appetite for it. South Africa does not seem keen, and its economic and political problems seem significant at the moment for the government to prioritize this.

There is no reason to relax the hosting dates, the climate in the nations of the northern hemisphere that are capable of hosting the games even with global warming does not make hosting on these dates unfeasible. Sports are practiced in the tropics in much higher temperatures. This narrative of "we will change the dates because of climate change" is to meet the specific interests of some people.

I live near the border between Brazil and Paraguay and I know the country. Despite the enormous progress that Paraguay has made in recent years, it is still a country with enormous challenges. I think that hosting the Pan American Games would still be too much for them.

It must be acknowledged that the marketing team did an interesting job with this idea of each country being able to customize its own version. The result has been interesting; we will certainly find some beautiful and creative sticks and others that may be questionable.

From a Commonwealth Games perspective, this could be an interesting development. The entry of the US would ensure a country that is able to host editions of the games without much effort (a relief for Australia), as well as gains in marketing and broadcasting rights.

Paraguay has experienced two decades of good economic growth, has internal political stability and has really made a lot of progress in other areas. However, I think the poverty level is still too high for the IOC to risk the Youth Olympic Games for them. I imagine there are possible options that are much safer than Asunción. Who knows, maybe it will be easier for 2042.

I bet that Rio 2031 will win the dispute, the reason being the marketing and financial interests of PanAm Sports. The broadcasting rights for the Pan American Games in Brazil brought in a lot of money for the organization, especially when they had a contract with RecordTV (the second largest channel in the country). However, being outside of TV Globo is not good for any event, and RecordTV broke its contract for the Santiago edition in 2023. The 2023 Pan American Games was not broadcast by any free TV channel or subscription TV. The event was pushed to YouTube and the repercussions dropped a lot. I imagine that PanAm Sports would prefer to give the event to Brazil in the hope of getting a good financial deal with some broadcaster in what is possibly its largest market in Latin America. This would even make it easier to market the 2027 Pan American Games, since it is easier to sell to TV channels as the event that precedes Rio 2031 and possibly close both events in a single deal.

I'm still very impressed that the Olympic Games don't give in to displaying advertising boards in sports arenas. Clean sponsor streams are great visually.

From the point of view of sports facilities, the "multiple cities" concept is great! But I believe that for security and the media, having to cover long distances is not that attractive. I think there is no problem in multiple cities, but this is different when we talk about the distance from Edinburgh to Glasgow (76km) or Vancouver-Victoria (100km). But when we talk about multiple accommodations like 'Perth-Brisbane' or 'Vancouver-Toronto' it seems unfeasible to me. The biggest challenge of the games after the issue of the host city is how to reduce the games and keep them relevant, when I say relevant I don't mean from the sporting aspect (which can be a noble reason to keep the games), but from a commercial point of view . At the end of the day it's the sponsorship and broadcasting rights that keep the games going.

I know that Saudi Arabia is without a doubt the largest of all petrostates and the kind of country that can pour rivers of money into anything it wants, but I confess that looking at the stadium projects, several of them seem quite unrealistic to me to build. Especially the stadium in the city of Neom. Anyway, it's incredible how FIFA simply handed this over to Saudi Arabia. Now all this talk about fans caring about human rights is false, 99% of football fans are not going to stop watching the matches because it is a country that does not respect human rights. Let's be realistic, the most that fans care about is whether they can drink until they drop on the streets of Riyadh, and the answer is apparently 'No'.

Bad commercial games for the media. Placing the games in January is too close to the Winter Olympics, which means it overloads the channels by dividing attention between two big (and expensive) products. Placing the games earlier, starting in December during the holiday season, means dividing attention with the Christmas season itself, and in addition, many advertisers would be spending on World Cup and Christmas ads at the same time. The coincidence of the World Cup and Winter Olympics in the USA certainly didn't worry the IOC, they have the main media market hosting an event of theirs, which ensures that in case of calendar overlap, the IOC has its main market giving priority to its event and not to FIFA. It's interesting how SA2034 will adjust all this. In the end, I wouldn't be surprised if the Saudis simply announced that they will go ahead with the World Cup in the middle of the summer, or proposed some other bizarre time like October or March, just to mess up the calendar. I can already see UEFA getting upset about the situation. - Looking from Brazil, a significant market for FIFA, the idea of a World Cup in January is certainly not popular with the media. It is the summer holiday season, with low TV ratings and many Brazilians travelling for tourism. Of course, the Brazilian national team's games will probably still be watched by the vast majority of the population, but the other matches will have to share the attention with the travel season. Any scheduling between December 20 and March 1 is certainly not favourable for the Brazilian media.

https://ge.globo.com/jogos-pan-americanos/noticia/2024/12/03/rio-e-niteroi-entregam-carta-ao-cob-e-oficializam-intencao-de-sediar-o-pan-de-2031.ghtml Rio and Niterói deliver letter to COB and formalize intention to host the 2031 Pan American Games Elected mayors of the cities participated in a ceremony with Paulo Wanderley, president of the Brazilian Olympic Committee (COB); Village to be built in the Port Zone of Rio de Janeiro. — "We are ahead of the game because of the existing infrastructure in Rio de Janeiro and Niterói. There is an advantage in not having to build new structures, and we already have experience in major events. Today we formalized our pre-candidacy, but we will build a dossier that meets the demands of the Pan American Games. At the same time, we will look at the legacy of the event. I spoke with Rodrigo (Neves), and the Village will be in the Port Zone, to enhance the central region of Rio and be close to Niterói. The COB will have a proposal that meets the sporting requirements and leaves a legacy" — explained Paes, who jokingly booed São Paulo's candidacy, mentioned by Paulo Wanderley.

I think Alexandria has some of the same charm as Cape Town, Rio and Barcelona. It would be an interesting city to host the games for a long term date (2044 onwards). I think it is a city big enough to host the games, it is basically the size of Rio de Janeiro and will be even bigger in the coming decades. However, I have to agree that Egypt is unlikely to bid for Alexandria, as it would overshadow its new capital. The problem is that Cairo and the surrounding area (where the new capital is located) is excessively hot, and the IOC would need to accept another time of year, but before giving Egypt the chance to host in the fall, they would probably prefer a "petro-state". What is feasible in Africa that could launch an Olympic bid to host between 2036-2048? I imagine Morocco, but its economy is too small. Nigeria will certainly be a booming economy within twenty years, but I don't see the IOC wanting to go there any time soon, especially with all the issues of poverty (worse than in South Africa) and internal conflicts. In the end, South Africa and Egypt are the most "viable" countries, although the IOC is unlikely to want to take the risk. Egypt also has the burden of living under an authoritarian regime, which is an image risk that the IOC, if it accepts to take, will prefer to be in the "petrostates".

Any decision that gives 2036 to South Africa will only be good for one day: the day of the announcement. The chaos of organizing the "national games", corruption, economic crisis, etc. would certainly guarantee the joy of the press for 7 or 10 years. The post-game legacy would be non-existent, except for several white elephants. I know that some colleagues may point out that it would be an opportunity to provide access to sports infrastructure in a third world country and develop the sport in the long term, but look at us in Brazil, with practically no Olympic legacy for the people, including with several competition venues being in worse conditions than Athens. Not to mention the complicated weather conditions in July and August. This story of transferring the Olympics to another time of the year due to global warming is something that the IOC will certainly test first for some "petrostate", because it is to serve these countries that there is lobbying for these ideas. Cape Town and Durban are significantly further south than Rio, in fact they are almost in the same position as Sydney and Melbourne, and get this: the IOC gave 2032 to Brisbane. I would venture to say that the Tropic of Capricorn is a good reference for deciding which city can host the Summer Olympics in the Southern Hemisphere. And again I insist, summer games at another time of the year are something for the "petrostates" and not for climate change or countries in the South. Who knows, in the 2050s we might not be able to watch the games in Alexandria or Morocco. I personally think that Alexandria would be an excellent city to host the Olympic Games, in a quick search I found better weather conditions than in Tokyo.

Your friend the ambassador has a more optimistic assessment than most international agencies. I have not seen any report that points to South Africa as a country that is almost a first world country, not even in terms of infrastructure. It is a country with enormous development challenges and that should have other government priorities. Arab countries are so criticized for spending huge sums of money on sporting events, and South Africa, with even worse economic and social indicators, should it be applauded? And if the experience in Olympic bids is a factor, let's go straight to Istanbul if Madrid's absence is confirmed. People who live in the rich and privileged countries of the world certainly cannot see the challenges of living in underdeveloped nations like Brazil and even more so South Africa. Look at Rio, it is a beautiful city if you concentrate on the South Zone and Barra, but I don't see many foreigners venturing into the North Zone. A simple trip from the International Airport to the South Zone is constantly interrupted by shootings and murders in broad daylight. Of course, the government is present during the weeks of the Olympic circus (or the G20 Summit), but after the circus leaves, people return to total abandonment. The city of Rio is hell on earth, people are robbed EVERY day on Copacabana Beach by gangs of young delinquents, when they are not killed. That same night, a gang of criminals blocked the main tunnel leading to the South Zone and robbed the drivers. Who saw this? No one from the media in Europe or the USA. Guaranteeing 30 days of security is easy in Brazil and South Africa. Certainly the 2010 World Cup could have been a safe place, but it left no legacy for the common people. In addition, those who enjoy these events are always the country's elite and not the poor. The Olympics in South Africa are a waste of government money! It's only good for the IOC's marketing.

It is good to read some sensible colleagues on this website. The huge amount of economic and social problems, public health crisis, violence and poor transport infrastructure (to support a national bid) are significant problems that put this plan at risk. Unless we assume that what the South African government has been missing in all these years since 2010 was an Olympic host to solve the country's problems. South Africa needs to show its capacity to host a major multi-sport event, its last attempt with the Commonwealth Games ended in failure. How about we start with the Youth Olympic Games as suggested by another user? Furthermore, I imagine that the concept of “national hosting” has not necessarily been tested yet, especially in an area as large as South Africa. In 2026 we will see the concept of “regional games” for the first time in Italy, but note that the distance from Milan to Cortina is 260km, while from Durban to Cape Town is almost 1,300km. If the IOC wants to test new ways of hosting the games, I imagine it would be more reasonable to test them in more obvious countries. Switzerland 2038 is a clear example, and if we want to test this in the summer games, what about a Benelux, Nordic or Japan-Korea bid? It is as unrealistic to imagine SA2036 as are the occasional daydreams about a unified bid by the two Koreas.

I am not preventing a debate about the Olympic bid; on the contrary, I am debating it and showing how I see it as absurd, considering the current situation of an undeveloped country in economic difficulty. It is not my decision or anyone else's on this site, but I imagine that this does not prevent the subject from being discussed. I think it would be absurd for the IOC to place the burden of the games on a people who are so deprived of so many other more important things. South Africa is not like France, the United Kingdom and the United States, which can host the Olympic circus for two weeks and then move on as if nothing had happened. Hosting an Olympic Games demands a series of costs that fall on the people, look at the legacy of Athens and Rio. For two weeks everything is beautiful, but after the circus leaves for the next city, what is left for these people? We need to be realistic here, if the IOC wants to go to South Africa, fine, but it would be fair to have a referendum on the matter for the South African people. In the end I don't think this is an Olympic bid that the IOC really wants to consider.

Okay, let's take it to a referendum and see if the South Africans support it. The IOC only wants to market these games, and let's face it, that's putting a huge burden on a poor nation. The Olympics aren't just about FIFA stadiums; there's a whole infrastructure that needs to be built, which would certainly result in huge post-game white elephants. The South African economy is weak and has been in a depression for several years. Of course, no one can predict what a country will be like in 10 years' time. But of course, we can take fewer risks by seeking a larger economy, where if everything goes wrong, the Olympic weight won't be so great. An African bid could be viable for the late 2040s, and not necessarily just for South Africa. Other countries like Egypt and Nigeria could be discussed. Furthermore, I highly doubt that the IOC would prefer to risk South Africa at this point. Financial pressure within the IOC is always a factor, and it is likely that a bid from the Middle East or India will have a better chance in 2036. I don't see the point in South Africa bidding for something like the Olympics, if they want to pursue the Rugby World Cup, Cricket World Cup or again with FIFA, that's fine. The cost won't be that great. As mentioned above, the 2010 FIFA World Cup didn't exactly leave a legacy for the people of South Africa, and not even the 2014 FIFA World Cup left a legacy for the Brazilian people that was worth the billions spent. At the time of the bid, the support of the Brazilian people was high, but as a Brazilian I can say that most of our people today don't think that the World Cup or Rio 2016 were a good deal.

A poor country like South Africa should certainly have a ruler with better priorities than spending billions on the Olympics. Are we going to ignore the population's low life expectancy, widespread poverty, poor infrastructure, weak economy, violence and high unemployment? The South African people deserve to have better defined priorities. Furthermore, let's take into account 1916 and 1936 as "candidacy experience"? Serious? We can even take the 2010 FIFA World Cup into account, but what legacy did it leave for the people? white elephants? Now are we going to ignore that it was the same country that abandoned the organization of the 2022 Commonwealth Games? I prefer Turkey or India, before giving South Africa this responsibility in 2036. Although it is regrettable that Spain is not promoting Madrid.