Jump to content

stryker

Members
  • Content Count

    1284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by stryker

  1. So the concern is building a satellite village? I thought the reason for choosing Lake Perris was so the dorms at UC Riverside could be used for housing.
  2. Melbourne has a stadium that fits athletics and the ceremonies. Brisbane is relying on a concept that has thus far proven to be unfeasible in building a small-scale stadium with a large number of temporary seats.
  3. $5.3 billion seems awfully conservative for a SOGs. The report says they'd build one stadium, I assume this would be the Olympic Stadium. Does Brisbane really have a need for a 70,000+ stadium post-Olympics? Doesn't seem so. I'd also assume that most of the venues from the CWGs would be used. The only way Brisbane can pull this off is insisting on smaller capacity venues IMO.
  4. Neither the 2024 Olympics nor the 2028 Olympics are in danger as of right now. In terms of Paris, the threat that a No Olympics movement could arise from the Yellow Vests protests is speculation at best. Right now, the protests are focused on taxation, wages, and cost of living. Most No Olympics movement target what they see as excessive government spending and the Yellow Vests have not taken that angle. If government spending suddenly comes to the forefront, then I could see demands made that Paris give up the Olympics. Yes they have signed a host city contract and the IOC would give Paris as lashing that would make their rhetoric towards Oslo look like a peace offering if they backed out, but the IOC really has no ability to enforce a city keeping the Olympics. All that said, despite the hostility toward Macron's government, I do not believe the Olympics are at risk.
  5. The IOC can advise Milan and Cortina all they want. Would the Swiss even accept using the track at St. Moritz after the overwhelming defeat of the Sion bid at the ballot box? For all the talk about how MIlan and Cortina fit the New Norm and Agenda 2020, there still isn't a budget, which when released is likely going to be a lot higher that predicted. The whole point of including Turin was because they had most of the venues from 2006 that likely only needed a bit of touch up anyway. Turin could've hosted while using the sliding track in Cortina, yet they let pride get involved when MIlan was inserted into the mix which needs a speed skating oval and another ice hockey arena which won't come cheap (I am assuming the Olympic Ice Stadium in Cortina will host short track and figure skating). When the budget comes out, it would not surprise me in the least if a No Olympics movement springs up and we hear talk of a referendum again.
  6. I've brought up the country-wide bid before and while the logistics would be difficult, it would be far easier for a country-wide bid from the likes of Switzerland or Austria if the IOC ever wants to go back to a traditional winter sports heartland in Europe again. Italy's bid was practically the northern part of the country prior to Turin's exit. A country-wide bid on the summer games side is a bit more complicated, though I think given the costs of the Olympics, if the IOC ever wanted to go to Africa it would have to be a country-wide bid (I brought up South Africa in another thread on this subject). The failure of Calgary with disagreements about Vancouver hosting nordic combined and ski jumping plus Turin's withdrawal from the Italian bid show the challenges of getting a regional bid to work. IMO for a regional bid to work it would require to potential parties involved to begin negotiations at the beginning before a bid was launched. It seemed like Calgary launched their bid then decided during the process that events like curling, ice hockey, and ski jumping might have to be farmed out to other locations as Calgary was launched with the assumption the ski jump towers would be renovated and the city and the Flames would come to an agreement on a new arena. For the SOGs. outside of Africa, the country-wide bid would be more a problem but I certainly would not rule out regional bids much like Germany. As for what else needs to be done, the influence of the respective sports federations is a huge issue, one that is seemingly being overlooked. They place a great deal of pressure on host cities to build them sparkling new venues that often become white elephants afterwards and when there is push back from a host city, the federations complain to the IOC who double up the pressure on the host city (see what happened with Tokyo and volleyball and rowing when they proposed using existing facilities for both sports). Lower capacities should be allowed as well. There's absolutely no reason that capacity requirements, especially for indoor events, cannot be the same as the Pan Ams or the CWGs. On the SOG side require hosts to use existing facilities, even if they are in another country, for events like slalom canoeing and track cycling, much as the WOGs have done with sliding tracks.
  7. Budapest awarded the 2023 IAAF World Championships. They will build a 40,000 seat stadium that will be scaled down to 15,000 and serve as a national athletics stadium after the event with the option the temporary seating could be restored (a future Budapest bid perhaps?) Eugene's expanded Hayward Field is only 30,000. I am a bit surprised the IAAF did not insist on Budapest have a larger capacity, which leads me to wonder again, if this can be a solution for the SOGs.
  8. What is unusual though is the Stockholm bid leaders aren't giving this up which is leading me to wonder if they are going to try and pull what Las Vegas did did in the 2020 race, launch a rogue bid, the difference being Sweden's national olympic committee is behind it. It's a long shot but I could see the strategy being Stockholm wins the right to hosts the 2026 WOGs then immediately turns to the government and tries to force their hand with funding for costs like security. Of course the government could turn right around and put it to a referendum which a negative result that would cripple Sweden's Olympic Committee and probably their chances of even bidding for another Olympics for a generation.
  9. https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1072808/bach-reveals-city-centre-opening-ceremony-dream-and-encourages-paris-2024-to-consider-concept More pipe dreaming by Bach? Seems to me this would be a logistical nightmare from a security standpoint.
  10. I agree that the "intercontinental rejection" began with Boston. The IOC needs to change but their two major problems IMO are they seem to believe the New Norm and Agenda 2020 have fixed everything and that they have a horrible PR department. On the first point, the landscape as to how citizens of western democracies view government spending has shifted remarkably since the Great Recession. More and more citizens are concerned about how their taxpayer money is being spent. In the case of Calgary, this was a city that thought the CalgaryNEXT and a new arena for the Flames was too expensive, so how are they going to convince the public to support an Olympics? It was a catch-22. I still think back when the bid began there was hope the Flames and the city would reach an agreement on a new arena and they could slide that into the bid plan. Instead the Calgary bid committee put forth the idea of the fieldhouse (half of the CalgaryNEXT plan) and the ridiculous "community arena" - a small scale ice arena with no permanent tenant that would likely become a white elephant. Let's not forget the bid couldn't even agree on a venue for curling. Frankly, Calgary's bid was one of the most poorly managed since the Boston fiasco from the venue plan to when it came crunch time for more money they actually said they found savings in games security of all places. Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the cost of security steadily gone up at every Olympics since 9/11? The IOC has a PR problem. They continue to claim New Norm and Agenda 2020 are great successes but there has yet to be an Olympics where they have shown to keep costs down without the dreaded cost overruns. It's not looking good for Tokyo right now either. Part of this is the sports federations in their demands for sparkling new venues (I wonder if the IIHF got in the ears of the Calgary committee and said they would not accept ice hockey being farmed out to Edmonton) Even worse, the IOC claims Pyeongchang is the first example of success of the New Norm when Pyeongchang is saddled with ice arenas with no permanent tenants, a sliding track that's a white elephant, and even the Alpine venue is facing financial problems that could force it to close down, not exactly Sochi-style spending but not exactly a ringing endorsement of cost controls either. Let's not forget, Rio's final financial numbers have yet to be released probably because the costs and losses could equal that of Sochi and put a potential nail in the coffin to the SOGs that is nearly facing the WOGs. Even worse on the PR front is Christophe Dubi. This guy opens his mouth and spews toxicity like when he told the citizens of Calgary, "the Games will come at no cost to you." Wrong choice of words. Then there's the delusion on the part of Thomas Bach. Remember the whole "their are fewer WOGs hosts because of climate change?" story. The IOC needs major change but until they come to their senses that the taxpaying public isn't buying what their selling, the number of bidders will continue to get fewer and fewer.
  11. If I remember correctly, Australia does not have a mountain with required 800m vertical drop. As for New Zealand, much like Argentina and Chile, I don't think there's enough of a winter sports market locally to sustain any venues long-term, not to mention if New Zealand thinks the CWGs are too expensive, then the WOGs are a nonstarter.
  12. The idea of Santiago or Buenos Aires is ridiculous. The IOC would go back to Sochi (which I think could happen if SLC and the USOC say no) before considering that. Besides the much-discussed southern hemisphere timing, there is virtually no winter sports infrastructure outside of the mountains for the alpine events. Constructing the needed facilities would be expensive and lead to a host of white elephants.
  13. Toronto had their best shot in 2008 unfortunately there was no chance in Beijing being denied that year. Unfortunately now, I thought Toronto would take a shot at 2024 fresh off the success of the Pan Ams, but I think in the end, they simply determined a SOG is just too big and too expensive right now. If Toronto could put forth their plan largely along the lines of the Pan Ams, it could work, but that still leaves them without a plan for a stadium. Toronto's not getting an Olympic-sized stadium unless the NFL moves there.
  14. I can't wait to see how the IOC reacts to this. They've practically hitched and gassed up the wagons for Calgary. Now it's practically done. I'm expecting a firey tongue lashing similar to what Oslo got after they dropped out of the 2018 race, only I think this time, it could be much worse.
  15. A couple of thoughts here. If the USOC does decide to bail out the IOC in 2026 it will be with Salt Lake City. Only thing the bid would need would be a secondary ice hockey arena (they could go to Denver or Boise for that) and an Olympic Village (new housing at Utah or BYU?). Even so, it's not going to be fixed with a simple phone call. Lots of strings are going to have to be pulled for it to work for reasons already mentioned like competing with Los Angeles for sponsorship money. While we're speculating here, let me throw another wrench into the mix. What if no amount of convincing can get the USOC to put forth Salt Lake in 2026? Where does the IOC go to then? It won't be Almaty. Dare I say it, but . . . could Vladimir Putin be eyeing this thing from afar and thinking Sochi 2026? I wouldn't put it past him to do it. I could see talks between the IOC and USOC collapsing and Putin coming out of the woodwork saying Sochi has everything ready. Sure it was an expensive venture the first time around, but everything's in place for a low cost Olympics. The IOC might not have any choice. In terms of the future of the WOGs, unless there are major changes then there will not be a WOGs in western Europe for the foreseeable future. And it's more than just the bidding process. The IOC has to be prepared for nation-wide hosting such as in Switzerland or Austria. To take it even further, the IOC needs to encourage bids from nations that don't necessarily have all the winter sports venues, and I'm talking beyond using another country's sliding track or ski jump. I'm referring to something along the lines of London hosting the ice events with snowboarding and freestyle skiing in Scotland and alpine, sliding, and nordic combined in Lillehammer. Or Helsinki with Are and Latvia (Helsinki had something similar in the 2006 race when they proposed the alpine events being held at Lillehammer). I'd even say Amsterdam with skiing in Switzerland or Germany. If the WOGs are spread enough using existing venues then perhaps the need for a costly Olympic Village is eliminated. And the IOC has to be willing to accept smaller capacity venues (eliminate the required two 10,000 plus seat arenas).
  16. I spent a few days in Sarajevo this past summer and I agree it's a fascinating city. The residents are some of the most welcoming I have come across. Unfortunately, while I think a return to Sarajevo would be amazing (it would show Bosnia has come full circle from where it once was) it is sadly unlikely. Their only shot would be to partner with someone else in the former Yugoslavia, maybe Croatia. Speaking of infrastructure, there were plans a couple years back to rebuild the ski jumps but it fell through. Most recently there's been discussion of demolishing the Juan Antonio Samaranch Hall (formerly Olympic Zetra) to build a new stadium for FK Sarajevo.
  17. IMO, all these support numbers are inflated especially the Italian bid (I suspect this was done to try to nudge the government into providing the needed financial support). It reminds me of when the Democrats and Republicans conduct internal polling. It always results in over-inflated numbers. And yes I think once the numbers start coming out on how much more expensive the Milan-Cortina bid will be compared to what the costs could have been with Turin in the race, that you will see public support drop. I really don't see how Milan-Cortina can get this bid funded without money from Rome.
  18. Some further tweaks to the venue plan this week. The second Paris Arena, called Bercy II which was to host basketball, judo, and wrestling has been scrapped. Judo and wrestling will now be held on the Champs-Elysses in the temporary exhibition hall being used by the Grand Palais while it undergoes renovation. All basketball games, men's and women's, will be held at the AccorHotels Arena. Badminton will be moved to Porte de la Chappelle near Stade De France though the specific sports arena for it was not named. The temporary aquatics center will now host all aquatics events so I assume this mean the downsized permanent facility that was supposed to hold water polo has now been scrapped. Volleyball will still be at a temporary arena in Le Bourget though I predict eventually they'll scrap this due to cost concerns and move it to the Paris Expo Hall.
  19. This is starting to resemble the rogue Las Vegas bid from a few years back although that lacked even the support of the USOC. Still can't see this working out without government support and they can wax on all they want about 40 percent of the GDP going through Lombardy and Veneto. The federal government still has to pay for security among other things.
  20. Just as I predicted. The government isn't giving the financial backing needed and I cannot see this going forward with provincial funding only. With the October deadline for candidate cities coming up, now with what's essentially only three cities left, will the IOC accept all for the official candidature stage? At this point I think the answer will be yes which means it's going to be up to Calgary's referendum to keep the Olympics from Erzurum. Forget about the Stockholm bid as it's on borrowed time without government support as well. Or does the IOC take the chance of dropping Erzurum risking Calgary losing the referendum and then try to negotiate (Salt Lake?) for a 2026 host. The IOC has a bigger problem. Europe has soundly rejected hosting the WOGs and unless the IOC decides to make major changes beyond the New Norm we will not see a WOGs at least in a democratic European nation again for the forseeable
  21. Milan's biggest sports franchise after the two football teams is their basketball team which plays at the Mediolanum Forum. Milan has no professional ice hockey team and has no need for a speed skating oval or additional arena. The Forum has experience hosting ice hockey competitions. It co-hosted the IIHF Continental Cup with Lugano, Switzerland. https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1070131/italy-pursuing-new-two-way-bid-for-2026-winter-olympics-but-claim-door-still-open-for-turin-after-withdrawal This is an interesting development. The door is being left open for Turin to return which leads me to think the bid is on borrowed time in terms of government support which is uncertain with just Milan and Cortina. IMO if Turin doesn't rejoin the bid, the government will decline to fund it and it will fold prior to the candidate selection by the IOC in October.
  22. Definitely think you'd see a more united front with Milan and Cortina but the downside is the need to build one or possibly two new ice arenas plus a speed skating oval. That was the benefit of having Torino in the bid. No major venues needed to be built. Milan has the Mediolanum Forum. That's it. They would need another 10,000+ arena and a speed skating oval. Even then they'd still need a secondary hockey arena though I suppose they could use the one in Bolzano. Costs could add up quickly which probably wouldn't go over well with the public.
  23. I saw this as well but I believe this option is contingent on government support which as of now is not guaranteed
  24. I highly doubt the IOC approaches Stockholm. The only reason that bid is hanging around is because the bid organizers are hoping the current mayor who opposes the bid gets ousted in the upcoming elections. That's not likely to happen. In terms of regional bids I still think that's the future if the IOC ever wants the WOGs to return to Europe. It does place a risk in terms of in fighting as seen with Italy. There's also the prospect of referendums over a larger populace but it offers the best chance in terms of a bid using as much existing infrastructure as possible.
  25. I can't see government support being given to a Milan-Cortina bid. The IOC now likely hitches its wagon on the Calgary referendum unless of course they take a risk and leave Erzurum on the official candidate list in October. If that ends up being the case then Erdogan can start celebrating.
×
×
  • Create New...