Jump to content

stryker

Members
  • Content Count

    1284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by stryker

  1. They dropped the wrong city. Should've dropped Milan. Milan has one sports arena the FilaForum in nearby Assago. They will need to build a speed skating oval and two more ice arenas which will get quite pricey. Torino had the ice arenas and they could use the Cortina track
  2. I agree. It seems like Calgary which was preaching for months they could host an Olympics with one 10,000+ arena in the Saddledome suddenly got cold feet and backtracked. This is where pressure from the IOC and the respective sports federations come in. There's a tremendous amount of pressure on host cities to build regardless of what the IOC says about Agenda 2020 only now the IOC seems to tow a line of "use existing facilities when necessary but if a new one can be built at a lower cost we'd like that too." i thought Calgary would put forth a venue plan that included Rogers Centre in Edomonton and a smaller secondary ice hockey arena somewhere in Alberta. I can't remember where i saw the article (it might have been on Gamesbids) either early this year or late last year that an assessment was done saying Calgary would need two 10,000+ plus arenas to host. IMO, the bid leaders banked on the city and the Flames coming to a new agreement on a new arena. They didn't and so there was a scramble in the last couple of months (wasn't the bid plan supposed to be released a couple months ago?) The compromise was building the fieldhouse and the mid-sized arena. Given the rate prospective candidates are dropping like flies, I would've thought Calgary could've put forth a venue plan that included neither a fieldhouse or mid-sized arena and said take it or leave it.
  3. Not sure how this will work with the political and economic embargo of Qatar by the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain. Currently there's no air transport links between Qatar and the latter and while there's still 4 years till the WC, this situation shows no signs of getting fixed, if anything, both sides are digging in even more. If this really is the plan for accomodation, fans will have to fly to either Kuwait or Oman from Bahrain, UAE, or Saudi Arabia before connecting onward to Qatar.
  4. I brought up the issue of the mid-size arena in a different thread with the question of what regular use it would have after the Olympics. So far the press release from Calgary 2026 is calling it a "need for a community center." That's translation they don't have a set legacy for it after the Olympics (Rio did this with the OTC arenas which they sid would be the core of a national sports complex). I suppose the mid-size arena could be a placesetter for eventually getting a new NHL arena. Where I disagree is the assessment that it's unlikely for the Flames to leave. I think the possibility is greater than one realizes given how far apart the two sides are in negoitations. At one point they weren't even talking to each other, and if someone such as Seattle or Houston come calling with a sparkling new arena (Seattle) or a relatively new one (Toyota Arena) that will be a hard offer to pass up. I also suspect that the IIHF might have had the ears of some of the Calgary 2026 members telling them outsourcing games to Edmonton and perhaps another city was unacceptable.
  5. The Sweden bid is on borrowed time. My guess is they are waiting until after the national elections to see if Stockholm gets a new mayor, one who's more partial to a bid. The Italian bid has local opposition in all three cities and I'd wager it won't be long before a No Olympics movement emerges there. At this point, I think the IOC is hitching their wagons to Calgary, banking the PR blitz will be enough to pull a yes vote over the finish line in November. I've brought this up before, but October is a key date in this race when the IOC officially invites bidders to become official candidates. This would be the off-ramp for getting rid of Erzurum. If they do, and the IOC is left with no bidders standing, then I suppose they get serious about reaching out to Salt Lake and possibly Sapporo. If they leave Erzurum on the list after October, then a double award is likely out and the IOC would have no choice but to give the 2026 WOGs to Turkey if the other candidates falter.
  6. A couple of thoughts. No surprise about Whistler and Canmore being included and of course no new NHL arena. The fieldhouse which was originally part of the failed CalgaryNEXT project for short track and figure skating then I assume the fieldhousewould be turned over to the University of Calgary. The real surprise is the md-size arena. Who would use that? The Calgary Hitmen maybe? As for the Calgary Flames, I could see them raising the issue that if Calgary can find the money for a mid-sized arena and a fieldhouse, then they will use that as leverage in negotiations for a new arena. Of course I think's it reasonably possible that the Flames relocate by 2026 as well. And putting money into the Saddledome isn't going to make it an NHL caliber arena. Worse case scenario the Flames leave, Calgary does not build a new arena, and the Saddledome is demolished post-Olympics.
  7. Yes Calgary 2026 has taken a huge gamble. They've released their own figures for the cost of the 2026 Olympics should Calgary host. They are projecting a cost of $5.8 million. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/olympics-bid-council-plebiscite-2026-1.4813831 Breaking down the numbers this is what they've come up with. $2.5 billion for running the Olympic and Paralympic Games. $1.1 billion for new facilities and upgrading existing facilities. $1 billion for security. $1 billion for housing. $200 million for an endowment to maintain Olympic facilities into the future. If they are right on this, then I say the bid might have a shot at securing the 50+ percent needed in the referendum. If they are off, the bid is cooked. Looking at the figures, I am judging they are not counting on a new arena for the Flames or even a new fieldhouse. Where I find sketicism is in the $1 billion for security. That seems a bit low.
  8. Well it didn't take long for the IOC and the POCOG to go into full damage control mode. First the IOC claims that there will still be a surplus despite the news of mounting debts in Gangwon province. That's still a head scratcher to me unless the IOC is working with Pyeongchang to cook the books. And there's no firm plans as far as legacy for the troubled venues. I predict the main ice hockey arena, speed skating oval, and the sliding track will eventually be demolished while trees are replanted at the alpine venue. https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1069533/ioc-confirm-pyeongchang-2018-surplus-still-predicted-despite-reports-gangwon-province-left-with-debts
  9. And Christophe Dubi claims Pyeongchang turned a surplus? If those numbers are released then I'd say the books have been cooked. https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1069420/gangwon-province-left-with-massive-debts-after-pyeongchang-2018-report-claims I wouldn't call it a Sochi type disaster but the legacy at least venue wise is not going to help the 2026 race. And it's not just the Alpine venue (which was in financial trouble before the race) that's facing demolition. Apparently the sliding track, speed skating oval, and one of the hockey arenas are all facing demolition. A while back there was actually a ridiculous proposal to turn the speed skating oval into an industrial size refrigerator for local fishermen.
  10. Just what the IOC needs, the opportunity to hand the Olympics back to a totalitarian dictatorship that will excessively spend on venues and run up huge debts at a time when they are struggling to attract bidders
  11. Interesting article. As for the IOC talking up the positives of the Olympics, it's a great start but in the post-2008 financial crisis climate, the average citizen in a western democracy is likely to say "Great, now how much is this going to cost?" I cannot recall a time when citizens have so concerned about how their taxpayer dollars are spent and it's very easy for politicians to criticize the Olympics as wasteful spending. I disagree with Abrahamson's assertion that the IOC has learned from their mistakes as well. See Tokyo's ballooning budget, Rio which still hasn't released its final costs, and the uncertain legacy over Pyeonghcang's coastal venues. And it's not just the IOC. It's the sports federations that insist on sparkling new venues that become tax wasting white elephants (the UCI demanded Rio build a new velodrome to their specifications despite the fact that Rio already had constructed the Barra Velodrome for the Pan Ams and it was used once them demolished). As for his quote that "people can be really forgiving if you say mistakes were made and they won’t happen again" well just look at the referendum results in Sion where nearly 60% voted against bidding after Christophe Dubi begged the Swiss to forgive them and insisted the IOC had changed.
  12. Is Bach taking his cues from Donald Trump now? So the media is responsible for the negative view of the IOC. I guess all the stuff about bribery and doping scandals is fake news. Ok Bach is half right. It is about the money but the IOC is still in this delusional world that Agenda 2020 and the New norm have fixed everything when there's no evidence of the sort. I am still highly skeptical of the claim that Pyeongchang turned a profit. The evidence of Rio, Athens, Sochi, Beijing, and yes Pyeongchang have the shown the IOC that people don't want to pay for the party anymore in an era post recession where the public is much more concious about their tax dollars. It sounded like he even assigned blame to the Swiss for not xommunicating the benefits of the Olympics enough. While the emotional attachment is nice it is not enough in today's economic climate to win over skeptical voters.
  13. The Asian Games Stadium in Incheon was designed by Populous, the same firm that constructed London's Olympic Stadium with the same purpose in mind, to reduce capacity after the conclusion of the games to a a small athletics stadium as Inheon already a 50,000 plus football stadium with an athletics track nonetheless in Muhak Stadium. In the case of Incheon, the entire eastern stand was designed to be dismounted with only the western stand to be permanent. Post-games capacity would've been 30,000. After the Asian Games ended, it was determined to be costly to actually implement so now Incheon has a money draining stadium when they could've easily used Muhak Stadium instead. The idea was there the execution was not. I'd agree that part of London's problems were due to political decisions (the ongoing feud over the stadium between West Ham and Tottenham) but I do wonder if the plan to ultimately turn the stadium over for use to a football club had to do with whether or not scaling the stadium down from 80,000 to 20,000 was a feasible idea. As for Toronto, they are in the same boat that New York is in that none of their major sports franchises need a new stadium right now which is a huge impediment to any Olympic bid. The Blue Jays are in the process of seeking a major renovation of Rogers Centre so I don't think they leave anytime soon for a new field and anyways when that time comes, I highly doubt they move into a new stadium that lacks a retractable roof given the weather. It'd be a tall order to design a stadium with a retractable roof for baseball that could also fit an athletics track. In terms of the IOC, I think all host cities (minus those run by the likes of Putin and Xi) would like to keep costs down, but there just doesn't seem to be a viable way to do that right now with the large athletics stadium.
  14. I won't deny that temporary seating for an athletics stadium can work on a small scale basis but on a large scale such as stadiums in London and Incheon it failure
  15. Agree on the business end. On the flipside though, there's still no viable solution that allows a city hosting the Olympics to build a 60,000-80,000 seat stadium that doesn't turn into a cash bleeding white elephant unless there's a permanent tenant ready to step in and take it over (of course this doesn't apply to dictatorships who could care less as Beijing and Sochi proved). Given the hostility towards the IOC over rising costs, the requirements really limit the number of potential hosts IMO. When the Boston bid collapsed, Los Angeles was really the only other option given that it had a stadium ready to go with the Coliseum. Even though it needed the platform track, it has that oval shape that readily adapts to it. There aren't many stadiums like that anymore, at least in the U.S. Most American football and football franchises that build new stadiums insist on a rectangular design for sight lines purposes. I've been to games at the Cotton Bowl and AT&T Stadium for both sports and I can say the sight lines are much better at AT&T Stadium. Australia's been a hot topic on the forums about their next prospective SOG bid but let's face it, the only stadium they have that's ready to go is the MCG given that Sydney is now rebuilding its main stadium in a rectangular format. No other Australian city really needs an 80,000 seat stadium at the moment (someone correct me on this if I am mistaken as I don't follow the Australian leagues closely). Toronto is in the same boat. Unless the NFL decides to go there, there won't be a big stadium built anytime soon. And until someone comes up with an idea to make the temporary stadium a viable solution which it has not shown it can be (Qatar says most of their stadiums will be demountable but look at the designs and it's hard to see how) this is going to continue to be a problem with finding cities that are willing to spend upwards of a billion dollars on a stadium for the Olympics that has no regular use afterwards.
  16. I think for that to happen there'd have to be some significant discussions held by the USOC between L.A. and Salt Lake, even that not might be enough to convince Salt Lake to jump into the ring for 2026. The idea is still very much a longshot bearing what happens in October when the IOC officiailly invites (I should say whoever's left) to become candidates. If Erzururm is on that list, then SLC is out for 2026 even if Erzurum is the only one left standing. I can't see the IOC risking the political backlash over accepting Erzurum as a candidate and then trying to negotiate something with SLC. Now if the IOC makes the decision to drop Erzurum in October and they are left with Sapporo, who wants 2030 anyway, then maybe there's some negoitating with Sapporo, SLC, and the USOC over how to make it work. Again though, the only way there's even a chance of this is for Erzurum to be dropped in October.
  17. Stockholm's mayor staunchly opposes the bid. Without local government support it will be impossible for this to go forward. Even if the Swedish national elections produce a coalition in favor of a bid, it would be political suicide to try and twist the arm of local politicians over an Olympic bid.
  18. So if I understand this correctly, CONI is putting up all three as a joint bid despite the fact Milan and Torino said no to the idea. This is getting odder by the minute.
  19. Any chance that CONI tries to go forward with only Torino at this point? That's what their mayor wanted anyway. Or CONI doesn't see Torino as feasible alone and the bid is dropped entirely.
  20. Most likely he did make things worse. He did the same thing with Sion right before the referendum there and it lead to a crushing defeat
  21. As expected, the athletics world championships are going to be held in Budapest in a brand new stadium that has yet to be built. Now eyes for the 2025 edition are on Africa but interestingly, yesterday the IAAF said that Kenya and Ethiopia are the two countries most likely to dope under new IAAF regulations. Surprising considering Kenya is widely mentioned at the top of the list as a candidate to host the first IAAF World Championships in Africa.
  22. One of my former colleagues who nows works in Qatar has said that during the WC, hotel bars will not be permitted to serve alcohol. it won't be available anywhere in Doha or any other city and this includes the Qatar DIstribution Center which is the lone retail store that can sell alcoholic beverages in the entire country. So the only way for fans to have a cold one will be the "fan zones" which are literally going to be in the middle of the desert and likely only accessible by private car or shuttle bus. I'm sure FIFA will be giving Budwesier a nice check for this whole fiasco as they are one of FIFA's biggest sponsors.
  23. While I think that host cities bear some responsibility in the costs of venues and infrastructure that become white elephants post-Olympics, I think the blame is equally shared by the IOC and the sports federations. For example take the Olympics in Rio, Rio built the Barra Velodrome for the Pan Ams and the thing wasn't even five years old before the UCI told Rio organizers that the velodrome was unacceptable and it was torn town and replaced with another new velodrome that now sits rotting. Rio built a new golf course which is now overgrown by weeds. Can't remember who it was that said it (might have been the mayor of Rio) was asked about the need for a new golf course in a country where it's not exactly the most popular sport and he said something along the lines of "this is necessary to host an Olympics whether we want to build it or not." FINA was also none too pleased that capacity at Rio's temporary aquatics centre (still standing) was to be slightly reduced when it became clear costs were getting out of control. Then there's Tokyo. Tokyo Governor Yuriko Koike took office promising to cut the rising costs of the Tokyo Olympics (and they're still getting out of control) by using exisiting venues for aquatics, rowing, and volleyball. All three respective sports federations were outraged. In the end, all three sports are getting shiny new venues while the IOC touts "savings" of a couple hundred million to show "proof" that Agenda 2020 is working. Koike could've easily taken a stand and said no, but she ultimately folded and I think when it's all said and done it might cost her her political career.
  24. So Fiac is officially moving to a temporary exhibition hall in the Champ de Mars Gardens near the Eiffel Tower while the Grand Palais undergoes renovations. I am assuming that this is also the proposed new venue for badminton in 2024. While I realize Wikipedia is not the most reliable source, the Paris 2024 page shows volleyball being moved from Le Bourget to Halle Georges Carpentier (too small) with finals being held at Roland Garros and boxing being held at the Suzanne Lenglen Court with a temporary roof.
×
×
  • Create New...