Jump to content

The Moose

Members
  • Content Count

    400
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About The Moose

  • Rank
    Silver

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Norway
  1. IOC originally demanded the technical manual to be kept restricted. However, that would have been in violation of Norwegian law regarding public access to government documents. In Norway,any citizen can in principle ask for any local or national government document. There are exceptions, of course, like medical records or matters of national security. Although these revelations further tainted the IOC in the public eye they were hardly decisive.
  2. Btw:Many people have commented the bid might have had a better chance if the committee / government had been even more critical to IOC and gotten clear concessions. As we all know, that would most likely have been impossible, however.
  3. To Rob:The IOC's communication since the Oslo decision is indeed curious. It is not true that the case that the Norwegians did not come to IOC meetings, but contrary perhaps to the IOC wishes it was in good Nordic tradition the topical experts, i. e. the ones that can ask the right questions, rather than the high-flying cocktail drinkers. I firmly believe that what we have seen here is a culture clash. The leader of the Oslo city government, a strong supporter of the bid, was lashing out on IOC today saying that he never has met anyone so focused on etiquette and titles. Further, the IOC blame the decision on half truths, but is not able to be specific. In reality, however, nothing of this mattered for the decision. What was important for the conservative party,most likely was the lack of popular support, the costs, and the survival of the national government coalition.
  4. ;-D (although you need to drive 6 hours from Oslo to get a landscape that resembles this. My last post was supposed to answer Baron's "frozen" post...
  5. As said before,I have seen this coming for years, and I fully support the decision. Part of the reason is IOC and its arrogance and the incredibly high costs. At least as important, however, was the arrogance of the Oslo elite, perceived by many having stolen the games from Oslo. Together with the clear no by the other governing party, the progress party, the Oslo 2022 was an impossible political project. High costs on something most people did not want, risking to ruin the government coalition.
  6. What I meant was that Oslo would be no better than a third or fourth best potential candidate from Norway. The Oslo candidacy has at least five main weaknesses IMO: Distances. They call themselves compact games, but the reality is that the distance from Oslo to Kvitfjell is more than 230 km, or three hours of driving and usually even more by train. Within the so-called Lillehammer cluster the distances are 50 km / 45 minutes from the sliding events to downhill at Kvitfjell. Potential other Norwegian candidates (Tromsø, Trondheim, even Trondheim - Åre, or the more speculative Drammen and Bergen / Ålesund) are significantly more compact. Fog. Three out of four WC in Nordic skiing that has taken place in Oslo has been marked by dense fog. In two WCs, like in 1982 below, the winner of the ski jumping competitions could not be seen, as this image from 1982 illustrates...http://gfx.nrk.no//cvn6v6kAZjaytSFX8Ha82Qe8TV9RCVGq6U-KB_vhd0QA At least neither Trondheim or Tromsø have similar problems. Some will argue that there is not a fog problem in February. This is very wrong. The fog was also discussed here: http://www.gamesbids.com/forums/topic/21127-oslo-2022/page-13 Snow cover: Oslo has the least reliable snow cover of the three candidates (Oslo, Tromsø, Trondheim) in the 2018 bid. With global warming, this will not improve. I am sure they will be able to stage the snow events as planned using underfrozen tracks and artificial snow, but the landscape around as well as the city will be glum. Landscape: Oslo is located in the least scenic region of Norway, and the Lillehammer region / Kvitfjell is not much better. Logistics: The recent 2011 WC in Nordic Skiing was a logistic nightmare, where people were stuck in hours without reaching the events they had paid for. This was in quite stark contrast to the 1997 WC in Trondheim which in fact had even more spectators. Now, this can probably be improved, but the negative experience will still be in Oslo's disfavour in any bid. Regarding the costs, the costs numbers of Oslo (34 billion NOK) are already significant higher than Tromsø's (28.9 billion), even if the Oslo bid has not yet gone through a quality assurance process which in Tromsø's case raised the bill from 15.5 billion NOK. Hence, a state guarantee of around 50 billion NOK / 10 billion USD may be expected. In the current budget, only about 15 % will go to public investments. The rest of the costs are for planning and operations of the games, as well as for support to private entrepeneurs for media centers and participants villages etc.. Less than 5 % are for transport infrastructure, while the remaining 10 % or so are for sport infrastructure. Regarding the size of the public investments, the experience from public projects almost always become higher in the capital area than in other places of the country, just compare the costs of theatres, concert halls, museums, and, more relevant, world championships. In the Tromsø candidacy, which I did not support, btw, they planned using a lot of temporary venues. This may seem like a vaste, but is considerably cheaper, and lets face it: venues built to Olympic specifications has very little value after the games. When it comes to sport venues for the ordinary man and women, we can get far more, for far less, without an olympics. An often heard argument for olympics is that it will improve the image of Norway abroad, and hence spur increased tourist traffic and bussiness in other parts of the society. This is where I am most concerned about an Oslo WOG. My fear is that a foggy, snowless WOG in a dreary forested landscape would repel more tourist than it will attract. Tourists don't come to Norway to see Oslo, they come to see fjords and mountains, and if anything, an Oslo WOG can spoil this image. I do not think 50 billion for 3 weeks of fun, with very little left in terms of long term benefits, is not something any sane government will take on easily, especially if they now that such a move will enrage a large part of their constituencies. The lack of sense of reality from some of the profilic Oslo 2022 agitators do not really help their case, like Inge Andersen managing to say that the government now should follow the will of the people (when in fact, only a single digit percentage of Norwegian voters had been asked), or hotel owner Petter Stordalen claiming that "this is what we should make our income on after the oil". Your comment about "unsustainable infrastructure investments" outside Oslo I am tempted to put in the same class. It does not seem like you know the rest of your country very well.....
  7. Yes, and although Oslo2012 won the local referendum after a massive campaign, the Oslo bid is still very controversial around the country. Spending 10 b$ on a sport event in the capital will alienate far more voters for the political parties than it will win, particularly after the dodgy process since the 2018 bid, which has embittered many people around the country. One of the major parties on the victorious right side of the national election has made a clear position against any government guarantee, the other parties have no official stance yet, but I would be very surprised if Oslo2012 get the go once the final price tag is announced. As stated in before many years ago now, I think Oslo is the third or fourth best option for Norway, and although I am a very interested in winter sports, I do not think Oslo2012 is something to spend national funds on. That I'm also increasingly skeptical to the IOC concept overall is a different story.
  8. But the Kiwi economy is minute compared to the Australian, can they really pull it off? Honestly, I do not think we would see another Olympics in Oceania soon, but I doubt that IOC will regard Auckland any more "world class" than Brisbane.
  9. The European economies have been developoing very differently lately. Many of the potential winter hosts, like Germany, Norway, and I believe Switzerland, are doing quite well. The same countries are however also traditionally been quite stingy when it comes to public spending on show-offs...
  10. I could (and have) named a few other: Huge distances Fog Public support Decreasingly reliable snow conditions in Oslo Small market compared with e.g. Germany
  11. Welcome Blacksheep! (not to be confused with the obscure far northern Norway group I have always wondered whether the spelling error is deliberate or not...) Strange, and which candidate would supposedly be any stronger? I can't think of any.
  12. Notice the extremely careful wording even the bid-book of 2018 had to resort to "February is the WINTER MONTH with the lowest incident of fog". That does not really help when fog is an issue throughout the winter. An regarding weather statistics, I have actually been trying quite hard to obtain these, and even looked through the public databases of the Norwegian Meteorological Institutite, but either hard official fog statistics do no exist, or they are keeping them a secret. The only measurement I have found seems to have been performed from a private person, who takes pictures every 44 seconds in Voksenlia not far from Holmenkollen: http://voksenlia.net/met/skiflyging/. In the years between 1998 and 2005 his conclusion was that January was most foggy, with February being second and March third, i.e. no indication that the fog "suddenly" appears in March. Holmenkollen is likely to follow a very similar pattern, although local topography probably makes it a bit more foggy there. What we do know, is that fog is an issue to larger (Holmenkollen) and smaller degree for the whole Oslo area, so important, that it was decisive when a location for the new airport was chosen far north of Oslo. According to the largest Norwegian encyclopedia, Tryvann, very close to Holmenkollen, has fog 20 % of the time (year-round), and that most of the fog appears in the winter. Again, no clue where they got these "facts" from. BTW, I do not contest that telecommunications and TV cameras work even if it is foggy, but it does not help, when the judges cannot see the ski jumpers, the biathlonists cannot see what they are aiming at, and the viewers get images like this: (webcam from Holmenkollen). More webcams from ski areas in Oslo can be found here:http://www.catalyzer.no/ Images like this would make a WOG a catastrophy for Norway's winter wonderland image and tourist industry, which is sad because fog is not really an issue in most of the country.
  13. But Hamar is in the current plans (Icehockey). Fog also create serious problems for biathlon, btw, here from another cancelled event, the relay in the 2004 biathlon world championships: And the current weather can be seen here...http://www.catalyzer.no/ ...fog again!
  14. Sorry, I meant that they already are taking their chances by having the ice events in Oslo instead of HAMAR (where there already is an indoor speed skating rink) ^^ Regarding the fog, I simply do not agree. The fog was for me a truly depressing aspect of living in Oslo, and it would not have been the case if it only lasts for one month. If you, hypothetically, were right, however, you should really worry as the winters are getting warmer.
  15. Heiberg knows very well that the distances (Kvitfjell - Oslo is 220 km. Drammen is another 43 km in the other direction from Oslo), will be an issue with an Oslo - Lillehammer bid. However, he is also a master of real politics. They are already taking their chances when they want to have the ice events in Oslo instead of Drammen, requiring a new roofed speed skating oval. Speed skating is, after all, a mini-sport in Norway. However, the sliding sport is a micro-sport. Trying to get the sliding events would transform a politically difficult task (to get Oslo 2022 financed by the government) truly impossible. Again, this is not my experience from the years I lived in the Oslo area. Unfortunately, statistics for fog is not easy at hand. It is does not seem to be a parameter measured directly from the Norwegian weather stations. The closes I have gotten is this private measuring station in Voksenlia, close by, but about 50 m lower altitude. http://voksenlia.net/met/skiflyging/ According to the fog data here, the amount of fog was decreasing from January through March, i.e. the opposite of what you are claiming,
×
×
  • Create New...