Jump to content

FYI

Members
  • Content count

    9607
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    140

FYI last won the day on October 19

FYI had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1139 Excellent

1 Follower

About FYI

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

30668 profile views
  1. Stockholm/Åre 2026

    Yeah, until the local & national governments endorse it, anything else that’s going on with the SOK & it’s “stakeholders” means diddly squat. At this point, it’s all just wishful thinking on their part, bcuz no government support in the end mean no bid.
  2. Kinda looks like the Cape Town 2004 bid logo! Will this be another Tokyo 2020 bid logo plagiarism deal!
  3. Georgia Dome Destroyed!!

    ^^Are they sure that a MARTA bus just didn't block their view!!
  4. Ooooo, but a couple of supposed Southern California 'open-minded' liberals around here would beg to differ.
  5. Calgary 2026

    These are totally separate issues though from your initial point of - "cities who have to pay upfront to even submit an application". And of course the IOC makes money off sponsorship deals. The IOC is also a business in addition to being a sporting organization. Still see no relation to that from your initial argument. This really isn't accurate. For years the IOC had the process of winnowing out the cities (like Havana, Baku, Doha, Leipzig, Seville, Lille, etc) that actually had no business bidding in the first place by a process called the "short-list". So at that point, those cities were told, - "look, you really have no shot at this. So before you spend anymore money on your campaign, you really need to pack it up & go home". And even now, the IOC has introduced a Dialouge Phase, where cities can actually talk to the IOC first to gauge whether even submitting an application is in the best interest of both parties, that'll save those cities even more money now. So if the IOC was really about just taking all of these cities monies, then they would've done that all along, but they didn't. The spending for Beijing & Sochi was grandiose, but at the same token, was that really all the IOC's fault? Ever heard of the saying "it takes two to tango". China & Russia thought they had to prove something to the World, & pulled out all the stops to do so & didn't care about the expense it took. But for Athens (& really for Rio, too), it was a lot more of a gray-area. Athens had squandered away a lot of their lead-time in preps for the 2004 Games, & by the time the IOC gave the Greeks a stern warning that they needed to get their as$es in gear or else, that's where their problems began. Squeezing all that work around-the-clock in only three years to meet all the deadlines in time & the result was overspending on all fronts. So was that the IOC's fault? No, it wasn't. It was the Greeks. The Olympics are not in a bad place in terms of viewership interest, broadcast revenue & atheletes holding the Olympics in a high regard as the pinnacle of their careers. What the IOC is on shaky grounds about now is cities (particularly in Western Europe) not lining-up anymore as they once did to host their mega-event. Is the IOC perfect? No, far from it (but one would also have to be pretty naive to swallow all the doom & gloom the media paints on the subject these days, bcuz it's just easy to jump on that bandwagon, especially when there's no real context most of the time behind it). But tell me what organization in the world is perfect. Is the IOC in denial? Yes, I think that they have their head in the sand a lot. But again, name an organization out there that doesn't. And apparently, the IOC can't be all that evil if both Paris & Los Angeles still wanted to get into bed with the IOC to host 2024 & 2028 respectively, & Salt Lake (of all places due to the bribery scandal) "overwhelming" supports another Winter Olympics there in 2026 or 2030. Go figure.
  6. Calgary 2026

    A lot of that money, though, is spent on the evaluation visits & evaluation reports conducted by the IOC themselves. Where else do you think that money for those operations comes from otherwise? Seriously doubt that there's a lot left over from that for the IOC coffers once all of that is said & done. I still don't see, though, how your initial point (from above), has to do with the 'big examples of the excess'. When again, hindsight is 20/20, & each one of those bids had their own compelling reasons as to why they initially got chosen at the time.
  7. Calgary 2026

    The IOC is guilty of a lot of things, but 'fleecing' bidders? Beijing, Rio & Sochi did it cuz they wanted too. And in Rio's case, it was more of a *the Brazilians bit off more than they could chew* (hosting two-mega international events within two years time). It's easy in hindsight to say that those cities are the culprit. But in 2001 when Beijing was bidding for 2008, the case of - *it's finallly time to bring the Olympics to the world's most populous nation* was incredibly strong. And for 2022, it was really about *which bad bid of two would be the better bet*. As for Sochi, their initial budget was $12 Billion. I don't think even the IOC at the time forsaw that the Russian's costs would ballon to an over-exaggerated $51 Billion (which a lot of it was wasted on graft & typical Russian corruption, not the IOC's pockets, per se). Can the IOC improve more on the costs? Sure they can. I think the Norwegians were right when they balked at all of the IOC's perks & "must haves" to be treated like royalty. OTOH, though, the IOC is now starting to give some money towards the operational costs. But then again, I sometimes see that as them perhaps just starting to pay for some of their own perks. But how much should the IOC really 'offset' for the Games? Should they really be flipping all of the bill for infrastructure improvements that a city might need or want. In the sense of avoiding white elephants, I'm all for that. But if a Beijing or Sochi want to build an Olympic Park from scratch, then that's there business I suppose. I just feel sorry for the average Chinese & Russians who would have no say in the matter regardless. But also as the saying goes around here, if ya can't really afford to bid, then you shouldn't be bidding ITFP.
  8. Calgary 2026

    So what's the deal? The Calgary city council was suppose to vote today on whether or not they were going to provide more money to continue on preperations for a bid. Doesn't seem good if nothing has come out yet.
  9. Calgary 2026

    It's not a simplistic argument when it's actually a dialogue that the IOC is at least having. If you want to simply dismiss that with "good for them" or whatever other Quaker-ism you have, then 'good for you'. But that still doesn't change the fact that there is such dialogue taking place in Lausaunne like that Gamesbids article was alluding to. And I think Europe or no (winter) Europe, the IOC will be discussing it either way. And how many of those budget concerns are also for works for urban improvements, just like L.A., but a lot of the headlines get muddled bcuz it's just the 'in thing' nowadays to simply blame the Olympics. If Sapporo & the JOC want to bid, I seriously doubt that the IOC will be "oh, no, don't! You still haven't even hosted Tokyo 2020 yet!" I'm not planning ahead on anything. Merely calling it like I see it. What you think is worth the IOC taking a chance & what they actually do in the end are two different things. I don't think it would cost them down the road. Many said the same about the 2024/2028 deal. But the IOC is already feeling out 2032 suitors, go figure. If the IOC wants to see how a Games plays out first before making their next move, it's probably Paris & not Tokyo, since it's Europe where the IOC is seeing most of their headaches. That's not to be confused though that they wouldn't jump on a (decent) 2026 Euro candidate, but that's if there isn't one decent Euro bid afterall. Ditto.
  10. Calgary 2026

    Well, thanks for digging up stuff & then try to interpret them with what you THINK I actually meant by them. As you like to say a lot of the time - "this is still the IOC we're talking about here". And while those are my words, they still reflect a lot on how the IOC has acted over the last several years on several levels. And whether that's a smart strategy or not (& obviously the IOC would never say it that way anyway) this is still the same IOC that told Switzerland to fu@k off & chose Turin as 2006 host instead over Sion, when the Swiss at the time had the far superior bid, & all bcuz of the Salt Lake City bribery scandal they blamed the Swiss for. So can we really say that the IOC is really above & beyond all that type of stuff now & not pulling something like that again when they're still in (somewhat) denial that they're in quite a pickle these days? I'd have to venture to say, probably not, especially after the scolding they gave the Norwegians when they pulled out of 2022. How is it on the heels of Tokyo 2020 when 2026 or 2030 would be six or ten years after? And how is it any different when 2026 or 2030 would actually be on the heels of L.A. 2028 with either just two years before or after? Japan would have plenty of time to sort things out, comparatively speaking. I didn't mean that in the way that turd used it. But merely in the sense that you're a reigning star on here when it comes to playing, yes, Devil's advocate. Though I apologize to you, nonetheless, if you took it in the context of the former. Well, this just sounds like an awful lot of projection here, cuz I literally can just cut-&-paste this & then address it to you. You want to dismiss things with "good for you's & good for them, etc" (as if that actually were to mean something) & then go off on a diatribe which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter in an attempt to try & make somekind of nonsensical point. Well, be my guest I suppose, but it's really getting rather tedious now. Isn't that what you do when trying to argue your POV? Talking about the "what we do know". So why the double standard now. Yeah, sure. All the IOC needs is just one (decent) European city to take on 2026 like they got with Paris 2024. But quite frankly, they got extremely lucky in getting Paris on the table to start with last time out. Something that I don't easily see happening this time around. The Innsbruck referendum failure last month was the start of another European downward spiral. And I doubt, again all things considered, that Sion's will pass next summer either. So I suspect after that the IOC will likely act accordingly to try & save themselves. But let's finally agree to disagree at this point, shall we.
  11. Euro 2024

    And can you actually imagine if Madrid had actually gotten 2020? Oy vey!
  12. Calgary 2026

    I never said that Sapporo is the ideal solution. But again, when comparing them to less than desirable locales or no locales at all, Sapporo then starts to look pretty damn good. Well, isn't this pretty fu@king rich coming from the Queen who just loves to play the Devil's advocate "crap" around here simply bcuz you think by doing so, one also has to acknowledge the possibility of whatever the heck you're trying to argue about. How do you know that they're not? You don't know that anymore than I know the opposite. That doesn't mean though that it's not possible that they aren't talking to them in the same context bcuz it's also plausible, all things considered, that they are. Again, & what "decent" European city might that be (bcuz nearly all of those to date have said a big fat no)? Because you merely saying so doesn't really make it so, & actually it sounds an awful lot like the 'logic' (since you brought him up) of a certain so-called journalist who simplistically claimed that if L.A. got 2024, then Europe would just be "lining-up" for 2028. And most of us know how full of it he was. And to also "quote" you again - "if it's your opinion that a 'decent' European city 'may' still be out there, then I'll counter with my opinion that a decent European city 'may not' be out there (at least in the near-term, all things considered). And how would we know that. "
  13. Calgary 2026

    What about if Sapporo doesn't come back for 2030? And with no Europe too, then what? Go back to North America? Some despot? Would that be desirable? Some people were quick to say a few weeks ago that a Salt Lake/Calgary combo was doable. Would those two cities instead "justify" a double--award, IYO? Gamesbids had an article a few weeks ago that (surprisenly) mentioned that Bach & some of his members were already working on a double-allocation when Budapest was still in the picture alongside Paris & L.A. How do we know that Bach & Co. aren't at work again in trying to replicate that scenario? How do we know that they're not talking to the Japanese in that same context as the USOC? The IOC may be in denial about a lot of things, but in this case, I think that they realize that they're really in trouble unless they try to keep the boat from rocking too much, & that is perhaps locking-in good credible winter bids when the opportunity arises.
  14. Calgary 2026

    To "quote" a certain someone on these boards - "I'll believe in a (Swiss bid) when I finally see one"! With Innsbruck having just said -no- to a 2026 bid, which was also at a much lower cost than Sion's proposal (& which also has increased by 20% already) then it's 'pretty unlikely' that theirs will eventually go through either. If Sion 2026 is still hanging around come July 2018, then I'll agree with the above. But until then, I hold reservation & the IOC can't get too picky here.
×