Jump to content

Pure facts

Members
  • Posts

    317
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Everything posted by Pure facts

  1. Given that John Coates is not an IOC VP (nor a member of the EB) since 2017 and that he is not on either of the two Future Hosts Commissions, it is safe to assume he is just speaking as a bid leader.
  2. It is a temporary emblem... like every single host city does once it is elected until the final emblem is launched. As for the Paralympic one, it is the first time than an OCOG develop a temporary Paralympic emblem. so yeah Dull but innovative as well. I suspect a final emblem will be launched in the lead up to Tokyo.
  3. No it is not. There are two different topics when it comes to the Coliseum: the planned rennovation by USC (irrespective of the Games) for which a budget of $300 million is foreseen -> this is not included in the bid as -just for like the other venues to be built as well as the expension of UCLA accommodation or the construction of the IBC- it is not bid dependant and therefore not included in the $5.3 billion budget the temporary installation of an athletics track, for about $100 million that is included in the budget.
  4. I fully agree. I don't think LA has done anything that would be considered as cheating as they have done what a lot of companies around the world are doing: generating a lot of followers by putting adds in market with low concurrence. And that's the first point: there is nothing new or innovative about that. Secondly, as Rob pointed out, it is one thing to get some followers, quite another one to get them engaged in your project. For such a large fan base, the amount of activation (be it people liking, sharing or commenting on post) is rather low. I have no doubt LA can do it but so far they have not demonstrated it, whereas it is a key point of their vision. I guess, InsidetheGames puts it best by saying this whole story demonstrates one should be careful before releasing a glowing press release...
  5. Now it is not only French Media anymore: https://apnews.com/951c7857f44c4d218723cf08ca7ce931/LA-Olympics-campaign-gets-lots-of-likes-_-from-Pakistan
  6. IF basically LA is the only Olympic Agenda 2020 compatible city, I fail to understand how a LA 2024 Games will ensure the sustainability of the Olympic Movement: which ciy, besides LA, has everything (but 25% of the Olympic Village, the stadium for the Opening Ceremony, the IBC) built and ready?
  7. The land over which Paris 2024 Village would be built has been identified as a high value piece for housing development in the Seine St-Denis Department: it is to become a central public transport hub in the scope of the new Paris Express Metro and the Local Housing Plan of Plaine Commune (where the village will be located) fixes an objective of 4,200 new housing units a year for the 2026-2021 period alone. Therefore, should Paris not be awarded 2024, the development plan will keep going on and the land won't be availble for 2028, just like the land that had been identified for the Olympic Village for 2012 is now a fully developed new neighbourhood of Paris.
  8. I have absolutely prentented none of these, nor have I questioned the fact that NBC and LA 2024 can deliver the IBC. I merely pointed out that claiming that, when it comes to the specific point of the IBC, Paris is more risky than LA is just not accurate. And before you point out that some areas in Paris are risky: yes Paris plan to build a new Olympic Village carries a more significant risk than LA plans where UCLA only needs to increase its housing capacity by 25% to be ready to host the athletes and officials.
  9. Could you clarify how is the IBC less risky in LA than in Paris? Paris proposes an existing exhibition centre with one hall to be rebuilt (as part of a planned expension project, privately funded) while LA proposes a new IBC (4 new halls to be built as part of planned expension of Universal Studios + 1 temporary hall to be built by LAOCOG).
  10. Here are a few information regarding existing and planned public transport in Paris and the Greater Paris' area: Public transport network in Paris region "Grand Paris Express" : the new Paris transport infrastructure supporting Paris long-term urban develoment plans A few highlights: The existing public transport system currently transports 8.5 millions people a day All competition venues within Paris region are served by public transport with: the "Paris Centre Zone", home to 12 competition venues, the Olympic Family hotel, 2 live sites, is served by 13 train lines, 16 metro lines and 2 tram lines the "Grand Paris Zone", home to 6 competition venues, the Olympic Village, IBC/MPC will be served by 2 train lines, 5 metro lines (2 existing, 3 under construction / expension) with a capacity of 130,000.00 people per hour
  11. Discover "Le Grand Paris", a city on the move : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79ftfoWHIlw
  12. Anyone who has been in the bidding process (irrespective of the business) knows that it is a competitive one and that benchmarking one self against the competition is part of bidding 1-0-1. I admit that Paris would have been smarter to inform LA 2024 of its visit, which would have avoided the whole drama but It is indeed due diligence and it is not against the rules neither in spirit nor formally. And make no mistake, all candidates will visit each other... Some in smarter ways than others... As for the IBC, Paris one is already existing compared to the one in LA that is still to be built: I can hardly see how LA is less risky in this area. Using an existing campus such as UCLA to host the Olympic Village certainly presents some huge assets (quality of accommodation, quality of existing sport facilities...) but might also present some operational challenge. Finally I am confused: is Paris overconfident or under confident?
  13. Had you read Paris candidature file, you would have known that Paris included from the start in its plans the entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity.... As for the colors, they are part of Paris 2024 visual identity... Unveiled before LA 24 launched its logo and tag line.
  14. There is a last football game this week or next week at Maracanna so I think this is most likely a picture of a concert set up (there seems to be a stage on the right).
  15. Here is what Optimouv is doing (sorry it is only in French but with the infographics, one should get the idea) : https://www.facebook.com/199414186798337/videos/968870643186017/ How is that similar to the system for LA 84?
  16. Optimouv has nothing to do with an automated traffic surveillance and control system... Optimouv is a system designed to miminimize the transport impact of a sport event: based on a set of parameters such as competition format, potential venues, forecasted attendance, point of origin of the competitors... the system evaluates various scenarios to help design the concept (choice of venues) and competition schedule that will minimize the transport impact of the event.
  17. It is the Future Arena (next to the Carioca Arenas) that will be dismantled and converted into equipment for schools after the Games.
  18. According to IOC website: TO FOLLOW THE GAMES: To follow the action live and on VOD: There will be live online coverage of Nanjing 2014 as well as 480 hours of VOD. This can be viewed on several platforms, including www.Olympic.org, www.Olympic.tv,www.youtube.com/Olympics and via the Olympic TV App, and in China with CNTV and CCTV apps. For the latest updates on the Games, press releases, photo and video postings and media logistics information, please follow us on twitter at www.twitter.com/iocmedia. For all other content follow: Twitter.com/youtholympics Facebook.com/youtholympicgames Instagram.com/youtholympics Youtube.com/olympics This means that, irrespective of what the RHBs will chose to broadcast, the youtube channels and Olympic.tv won't be geoblocked.
  19. It is obvious that the topic of benefits of hosting the Games is a complex one and the topic of "ROI of hosting the Games" is one of the most debated by academics. For every study showing some positive impact resulting from hosting the Games, you will find at least two showing that it is not the case and that money could have been better spent otherwise. Several factors explain this challenge in objectively assessing the impact of hosting the Games: As has already pointed out, there is not one single model to assess impact of the Games: each host city is seeking each own specific objectives by hosting the Games, the context is completely different from one Games edition to another (from local context and challenges to more global geopolitical and economical context), the amount and source of investment are completely different (from almost exclusively private investment in the case of Atlanta, to massive public investment in the case of Beijing and mix of public and private fundings as in London) Some aspects of the impact of the Games can be assessed immediately whilst others will take year to assess. It is very difficult to pint point the impact of the Games Vs the role of the Games in a broader trend (e.g. it is obvious the hosting the Olympics helped Barcelona become what it is today but the Olympics is probably only one of the elements that explained Barcelona incredible development) Objectively assessing some impacts is almost impossible: tourism is a good example. If one look at London, yes during the Games themselves the Olympic Games have indeed reduced the number of visitors to London but in 2013, London had more tourists than ever before: who can tell the Olympics is responsible for 0%, 10% or more of this increase? There is no real point at asking whether the money spent on the Games could have been better spent otherwise as there is no way to no the answer. Would the money have been there to start with without the Games? Although they are doing an incredible poor job at explaining and communicating about it, the IOC acknowledges the complexity of the topic. Judging what the IOC does based on one single press release is very misleading. Just a few exemples regarding what is publicly available from the IOC. 2022 Candidature Questionnaire: In its introduction, the Questionnaire introduces the notion of Legacy and Engagement, pointing out the great potential of the Olympics as a catalyst for positive change but also clearly pointing out that it won't happened by itself. Legacy Legacy has to be central to each Games’ vision. Through its scope and profile, an Olympic Games can provide a unique opportunity for positive change and significant, sustainable legacies. However, legacy does not happen by itself. It must be carefully planned, regularly nurtured and it is always the result of a joint, coordinated effort between temporary and permanent bodies involved in the preparation and hosting of the Games. Legacies can be tangible and visible such as improvements to the city infrastructure (transport, IT, water, energy, waste, etc.), new venues or enhanced sport practice. However, legacies can also be less tangible and measurable such as improved image and reputation, pride in hosting the world or enhanced knowledge and skills. Engagement In order for the Games to translate into a successful, inspiring and inclusive festival of sport and youth, and to meet their full potential as a catalyst for sustainable change, it is essential that Games organisers engage the entire host nation and beyond. A systematic and consistent engagement strategy should aim at various forms of participation and is an invitation for everyone -not just sports fans- to join in. A successful engagement strategy will support the Games vision and will use a number of initiatives and events, using the full power of the brand to reach out and share the Games with everyone If one looks at the questions related to Legacy under Theme 1 of the questionnaire, it is quite clear that the cities are encouraged to think about legacy beyond the venues and economical impact. LEGACY Q 1.4 LEGACY OF THE BID What will be the benefits of bidding for the Olympic Winter Games for your city/region, irrespective of the outcome of the bid (infrastructure projects, sport practice, youth programmes, etc.)? Q 1.5 LEGACY OF HOSTING THE GAMES Provide details of your key Olympic legacy initiatives and how these are linked with your city’s/region’s long-term planning and objectives. Provide details of how the above key initiatives will be supported, financed, monitored and measured by all relevant stakeholders prior to, during and post- Games. Q 1.6 LEGACY USE OF VENUES For new venues to be built (including venues to be relocated, if any), please briefly describe for each venue: · The intended post-Games use of the venues and the funding model for the long-term sustainability of the venue. · The post-Games owner responsible for operating and maintaining the venues after the Games. Q 1.7 LEGACY FOR SPORT What will be the legacy for sport in your city/region? Describe the measures you intend to take to promote and develop Olympic sports, in particular those that are less popular in your country in the lead-up to the Olympic Games. Q 1.8 LEGACY FOR THE OLYMPIC MOVEMENT How can hosting the Olympic Winter Games in your city contribute to the Olympic Movement? Q 1.9 LEGACY OF THE PARALYMPIC GAMES Please describe how organising the Paralympic Winter Games can contribute to your overall vision and legacy. Other means of communication about the various legacies from hosting the Olympic Games include: Beyond the finish line 30mn film about the legacies in various post host cities from tangible ones to less tangible ones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4b1Ny2pKYA IOC Sustainability Compass, including many case studies of sustainable development and legacy initiatives: http://extrassets.olympic.org/OGKM/2013/Sustainability/index.html Of course, there is no denying that there are also many examples of poor / bad legacies and yes Sochi 2014 is a huge question mark at this point. But I don't think anyone is minimising the complexity of getting it right, nor focusing only on the economical legacy.
  20. You are confusing stating facts and defending the IOC. Golf was added at the same Session as the one where Rio was elected. All four 2016 bid cities were consulted during the bid process about the possibility for them to host Rugby and Golf all agreed proposing to use existing venues. Rio's mayor chose to build a new golf course for the Games as he wanted to have a public golf course as a legacy for Rio's population rather than the private one already existing. I am not defending the IOC as indeed they have a lot of things to fix. For example why they didn't address the Norwegian requests is beyond me. Why they don't make the Technical Manuals public is beyond me. Why they are incapable of communicating about the cost of the Games in a clear and transparent way is beyond me.
  21. The thing is... IOC, like all Olympic Clients except people staying at the Olympic Village, is paying its own accommodation bill. No sport can be added later than 7 years prior to the Games. Discipline events can be added up to 3 years to the Games but in consultation with OCOG and with potential financial compensation IOC does encourage use of temporary venues when no legacy needs are identified.
  22. Well, back when Athens was bidding, in 1996/97, Athens had a sport precinct (OAKA was already existing) and more than decent sport organisation experience including: Mediterranean Games in Athens in 1991 IAAF World Championships in Athens in 1997 European Championships (1987) World Junior Championships (1995) in Basketball Track World Cup in cycling in 1995 in 1996 Fencing World Championship in 1994 European Artistic Gymnastics Championships in 1990 and World Rythmic Gymnastics Championships in 1991 European Judo Championships in 1993 European Championships in Swimming in 1991 and World Cup in 1993 Volleyball World Championships in 1994... So quite significant hosting experience.
  23. LA proposes what at first sight will be a quite attractive proposal for 2024 (especially if they manage to guarantee the transportation time that they do). http://www.sccog.org/webapp/images/stories/2024/2024.pdf
  24. If anything this article proves that the IOC has a great deal of communication / education effort to do as it proves that the Norwegian parliament (and indeed a very large number of people of this forum) have no idea about the IOC requirements for the Games. Accommodation: IOC, as well as all other client groups -except athletes and team officials accommodated in the Olympic Village-, pay for their accommodation. What the IOC requests is a guaranteed room rate. No new sport can be added after Games - 7 years (i.e. at the same time of the host city election). Events can be added in the lead up to the Games but the OCOG is always part of the consultation process. The IOC made recently the decision not to add any event to the Olympic Programme for Rio (to the disappointment of some IFs) The decision to use existing facilities or build new ones is entirely up to the local organisers. The IOC does encourage the use of existing venues or temporary ones if there is no legacy need (refer to 2022 Candidature Acceptance Process - Guidelines for choice of venues page 50) The rights of workers - The local legislation applies to the workers working on construction of venues (in this case the Norwegian law should Oslo be elected). The IOC can be blamed for not taking into account this factor when selecting a host city (i.e. there is a much greater risk of workers rights not be enforced in a country like Russia or China than in the UK or Canada) but again, should Oslo be elected, the IOC would certainly not pressure the Norwegian authorities not to enforce workers rights. Again this point is entirely within the Norwegians' hands not in the IOC Athletes at the centre of everything: it seems that the last three Games (Vancouver, London and Sochi) offered top conditions to the athletes. Cooperation with the Lillehammer 2016 YOG organisers: given that the Norwegian NOC and National Winter Federations are key players in both projects, this shouldn't be difficult. In other words, none of the requirements is either new or contradictory to the IOC's requirements: there is nothing preventing the Norwegians to propose a bid fulfilling the parliament's requirements. BTW regarding Olympic Lanes: these lanes are not only used by IOC members but also by athletes, NOC and IF officials, media...
×
×
  • Create New...