Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


aluz last won the day on May 5 2011

aluz had the most liked content!

About aluz

  • Birthday 05/09/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Cannes, France

aluz's Achievements


Gold (5/16)



  1. It was actually Peter I of Brazil who declared the indepedence. He did it with the support of the local elite, who did not enjoy much the request from the Portuguese liberals to return Brazil to a colonial status. The declaration of independence was seen by some historians as a ploy to later restablish a unified Portuguese empire. Since Peter was the rightful heir of the Portuguese throne, he could claim it once his father died. According to this historians, his father engineered this ploy, which would be an evidence that John VI was not the idiotic figure normally portrayed in history books. The problem was that Peter turned his back on the local elite and his brother Michael, insulflated by his mother Carlota Joaquina, promoted a coup d´etat in Portugal and was crowned king. When Peter lost the support of the local elite he ended up resigning from his Brazilian crown and fleeing to Portugal to fight his brother and became King Peter IV of Portugal. After his death his son Peter, became Emperor Peter II of Brazil and his daughter Maria became the Queen of Portugal. From then on, the Bragança dynasty had split lines of succession in Brazil and Portugal, ruining the original plan to unify the former Portuguese empire.
  2. I don't argue with the fact that Ronaldo mught not be the best choice, but saying he was not an olympic athlete is a big fat lie anyway.
  3. Who told you that Ronaldo was not an olympian? He played in the national team in 1996 Games in Atlanta and left with a bronze medal. Not only he is an olympic athlete, but also an olympic medalist.
  4. No way. The Mexicans organization of Guadalajara 2011 was a flop. They had several issues, including selling tickets for the press area at the Closing Cerimony. The only reason why Raña said it was the best PanAm ever was because he is Mexican and was behinf the Games the whole time.
  5. Yes, exactly! And the best example of that issue is that the leader of the bid is usually somoeone from outside the Olympic movement, whereas in Rio it was Nuzman and in London Seb Coe. As Baron said, the USOC has been behind the last bids. What I mean is that they should be in front of them. It is a matter of setting the rules in that way. Mainly the USOC has to commit ti such a strategy and stay with it. The rest will end up aligning with it naturally. After all, as you've said yourself, there were people in Chicago rooting for NYC to lose. This probably has kept NYC away from some potential investors, which had already been hooked to Chicago. It's not entirelly true that the last countries which nailed the SOGs had a clear prominent city. China could have easily chosen Shanghai or Guagzhou, Brazil could have chosen São Paulo and has a few other options once you consider that Durban is viable, Australia has hosted with Melbourne and Sydney and both remain viable candidates. Italy can choose between Rome and Milan as Spain has hosted with Barcelona and is attempting now with Madrid. Soth Africa can also choose from, at least, 3 options. Either way, those countries chose a preferred city to bid and the NOC committed to it. The reality is that chosing a city in advance makes it easier to build a well thought bid, to adapt the bid after successive losses and to design a proposal that is aligned to the city long-term plans, with the legacy that the IOC likes to see. London could have bid again with a similar proposal and even could have started the development of its Olympic Park even if they didn't win the SOGs. That's basically what Istanbul did. I will come back later and write a thorough explanation about why I think that committing to a city will arrange the issues you see in an easier way than you think. Everything, from the technical plan to the financial aspects would adapt to the new reality producing better results in future bidding cycles.
  6. Well, you have really misrepresented me in this one. You have taken the sentence when I mention a possible solution for the US to encourage cities to bid repetitively and presents it as a statement about the US chances to win. Really bad interpretation. As my first sentence mentioned, the best (not the only) way to win is to have repetitive bids. The problem is how to finance it. Then you make bad comparisons which indeed strengthen rather than weaken my arguments. Except for London, the remaining bidders were running agaist lame ducks or other non repeting bidders. - Barcelona faced Paris, which was not bidding time after time. - Sydney ran against Beijing (first-timer) and 3 European cities which were weaker in terms of continental rotation. - Atlanta main competition was Athens, who was not a repetitive bidder as well. - Seoul ran against Nagoya, which was also a first-timer. London was the only first-timer which has beaten by a very narrow margin a repetitive bidder. Besides, recent campaigns have shown that repetitive bids help the city get momentum to evetually win. But returning to the main point in my post, what you don't seem to grasp is that the way the American bids are structured makes it difficult for building up strength from the lost bids. The NY 2012 experience didn't seem to have added anything to the Chicago bid. Running against weaker competitors, it actually did worse. That happens mainly because the city seems to be the one really pushing the bid, instead of the NOC. Mainly, what needs to change in the way the Americans run olympic campaigns is to understand that the USOC must have a leading role in the process, raher than just choose a city and support the bid during the campaign. When I say the USOC should lead the campaign it means mostly going after money to finance the enterprise and building relationship with the IOC to influence the votes. We are living a time when a successful bid campaign is a long term effort, not a single-cycle attempt. Besides, there are also other aspects of the technical part of the process that can benefit a prospective olympic city which plans to bid time after time.
  7. I agree with the ones that think that repetitve bids is the best way for securing an SOG for the US. However, the way bids are currently funded in the US makes it almost impossible to happen. IMO, the only option is for the USOC to run a domestic process and choose a city that would bid until it wins. By doing that, it would be easier to get money from different sponsors as an nation-wide effort, instead of a city effort, like today. The way it works now, makes second attempts for the SOGs highly unlikely.
  8. emre, The same reaction was seen in Brazil during the 2016 campaign. Most of the people did not believe that Rio would win until it actually happened. Several supposedly well informed journalists had to swallow their words after saying that the bid committee was wasting US$ 50 million. You are nor alone, but like what the Rio state governor said during the bid final presentation, the most important legacy is psychological. After the games the people of Rio will feel that they can achieve this. The feeling of pride.
  9. I doesn't need. It will just need to remove some seats to make space for the media stands. That's standard for major sport events.
  10. Turkey is an European country as far as IOC politics are concerned. Besides Istanbul is for sure in Europe. Istanbul will have an impact both on European and Asian (islamic) votes. Not to mention their good rapport with the islamic nations of Africa.
  11. Well, I will update with the developments so far from my previous list. Transports: -> BRT Transcarioca (called T5 in the bid book) -> Targeted for 4Q13 - 1st section (Barra - Penha) - Construction on-going. Main sites are in Campinho, Barra da Tijuca and Madureira where underground roads and highways are being built. -> 2nd section (Penha - Rio Intl Airport) - Demolistions have started -> BRT Transoeste (covers part of the former Barra-Zona Sul BRT) -> Targeted for 3Q12 - Construction under way. - Main bridge over Av. Salvador Allende has been completed. - Bridge over Canal do Rio Morto underway - Grota Funda tunnel has been fully excavated. - Duplication of Av. das Américas in Guaratiba and Recreio is advanced. - Some of the stations are under construction. -> BRT Transolimpica (called C-Link in the bid book) -> Targeted for 2015 - Project finalized. - Tender published. -> Subway Line 4 (Barra- Gávea, covers part of the former Barra- Zona Sul BRT) -> Targeted for 2015 - Under construction. - More than 1km of tunnels has been excavated from Barra to São Conrado (entrance of the tunnel is visible in Barra). - Jardim Oceânico station in Barra is under construction. - São Conrado station has been started together with the excavation of the tunnel to Gávea should start soon. -> Subway Line 1 (Ipanema- Gávea, covers part of the former Barra- Zona Sul BRT) -> Targeted for 2015 - Construction underway. - Service tunnel is being excavated to create a 2nd platform in General Osório station in Ipanema. - Excavations for the line will start in 2013, after a TBM is installed on site. - The other stations will be built in parallel. -> Duplication of Avenida Niemeyer - Not started. -> Renovation of the surroundings of the JH Stadium. - Demolitions on-going. Venues: -> Maracanã refurbishment -> Targeted for 4Q2012 - Demolition of both rings finalized. - Demolition of the ceiling is advanced. - Foundations of the lower ring and the external entrances have been installed. -> OTC and Olympic park construction (includes Aquatic Center, Field Hokey Center, Tennis Center, the OTC 4 halls, the MPC and the IBC) - International competition to design the facilities was launched. REsult should be published this month. - The new auto-racing track project is being finalized. (A requirement for the start of the OTC construction is that the current racing track is replaced by a new one). -> Riocentro Hall 6 construction - No news -> Athletes park construction - Opened this weekend. -> X Park construction - No news -> JH Stadium upgrade -> Targeted for 3Q2015 - Planned to start on 2013 after the delivery of Maracanã. Accommodation: -> Olympic Village - Construction started. - The land is being moved. Foundations should be start to be laid out next year. -> Media Village (Barra) - No news -> Media Village (Port) - Conceptual project approved. -> Hotels - Several hotel groups have initiated projects in the city, including Accor and Hilton. - 2 major hotels are being restored (Gloria and Hotel Nacional) - Former Méridien hotel has been reopened. - Several hotel groups are in the process of acquiring land to build new hotels, including Hyatt and Four Seasons. - Expectation now is to reach 34.000 hotel rooms by 2016, instead of the 28.000 proposed in the bid book. -> Port - No news if the renovations of the docks was inside the tender for the Port District PPP. Urbanization: -> PPP was assigned to carry the renovation of the Port District, including the creation of new Light Rail lines, expansion of the road network and the demolition of a highway to be replaced by an underground tunnel. => Works are under way. - Urban project for the areas of the Port which will be used for the Olympics has been chosen through a competition.
  12. Sicne it is residences for the military they can actually kick them out for a short period. BTW, this is not going to be THE referee's village, but one of them. There is at least another one in the Port.
  13. Not confirmed. Until Vasco da Gama formally pulls out, São Januário is the official rugby venue. By the way, São Januário falls within the 4 cluster concept, while Moça Bonita would require special logistics to host the Games.
  14. This is a never ending discussion. The fact is that football tickets are going to become much more expensive or Brazilian teams are going to remain raising talents to European clubs. It is a ridiculous point made by people who can't concatenate their thoughts. They wan't the best players to stay, the clubs to be strong, the stadia to be comfortable and safe and the tickets to be cheap. I wonder who is going to pay the high cost of doing everything they wish with such low prices. Besides, unlike what the article says, it is not the price of the ticket that gets supporters away, it is the opposite. Going to a football stadium in Brazil means going to a dirty, unsafe, uncomfortable venue with the worst infrastructure you can think of. Just stay away from the rest rooms, arrive 2h before the match and run away at the first sight of a fight and it will be fine. It is ridiculous. The reason why people don't go more often is obvious: it is uncomfortable and unsafe. The second reason is that most teams lack attractive players, so the quality of the game is not what a Brazilian would expect. There are a lot of people who would pay much more than the current ticket prices if they had higher security and comfort standards. That would mean more money for the clubs, which would mean better players and which would mean better football. This will make the machine move making prices higher and having less poor people at the stadium. But that's exactly what happened in Europe from the mid 80's on. There is no escape. BTW, I don't see the NYT commenting on the professional leagues in the US, which are far from being an every person show. They should do the math. Maracanã will fit around 80.000 people, while the population of Rio metro area is around 12 million. So, it doesn't fit a lot of people. The ones who pay the most are going to be able to watch, the others are going to watch through the TV. That is sport as a business.
  • Create New...