Jump to content

FYI

Members
  • Content Count

    10309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    159

Everything posted by FYI

  1. Look, Q! He said “Scandie”, too!! But I so “110%” agree with that assessment entirely!
  2. I never said that their history was going to be so black-&-white if they bid again, though. That is where you’re ‘mispresenting’ my position on the subject, as usual.
  3. Right, cuz you never misrepresent any of my positions. See, here’s the thing; you didn’t get anything “right” whereas everyone else got it “wong” (especially on an a totally unpredictable organization like the IOC). But that right there, it totally the definition of someone ‘thinking’ that they know everything. Look who’s talking?! And then you follow that with more of your redundant, argumentative rhetoric. Go figure. Lmfao - talk about more pot/kettle accusations! Yet you still enjoy coming on here on a daily basis. Go f’n figure. “My advice to you” is to don’t do that if you’re all too smart for the rest of us. So I tell you to get over youself, & your comeback to me is to get over myself. “How original” & argumentative. And I don’t need to “goad” you into anything, since you always love to put in your cheap two cents into anything, anyone ever says around here, regardless of how “wrong” they are & how “right” you are. “Remember that”.
  4. Lol here we go with the “memes” again. I was wondering how long it was gonna take for you to do that lmfao
  5. Oh geez, of course it’s not word for word, but that was exactly the gist of it. Just cuz Almaty got 40 votes for ‘22, to not have assumed it would’ve performed the same way (or better) for ‘26. Yes, Stockholm would be a much better alternative than an Almaty, but without all the crucial support elements that are needed to win a bid, it’s not going to do much better than the 34 votes it got on Monday without them. I didn’t get “caught up”!in anything. I was looking at it how I was always looking at it even “before” the vote, & which you always “poked fun” at me over. I never really believed in a Swedish bid precisely for the reasons that brought it down on Monday. Their constant lukewarm attitude & indifference (much like how you argue with about New York) about the Olympics is what did them in. Does that make them any less of a winter sporting nation bcuz of it, though? Like New York, no it does not. But does that mean that the Olympics would be a perfect fit for them bcuz of it? Again, like New York, not necessarily. Actually, that thread was pretty much in-line with the vote. Even your “head” said Milan, not Stockholm.
  6. Lmfao - this reminds me of when you like to “poke fun” at me about saying - “I never said that it was definitely going to happen”.. now here you are dramatically saying what you’ve never claimed to have said otherwise. Go figure lol. Uh huh. The potential circumstances were given. But as usual, you know everything, & heaven help any of us who don’t necessarily agree with your almighty opinion. Is it the definition of, like that (once upon a time) newbie said to you, being argumentative for the same of being argumentative. But wow, can you be anymore full of yourself, Q?? But I know, I know, “you have not and have never permanently shot down that a double could ever happen again”, right? How convenient of you now that the Charter has been changed to allow for that kind of scenario to happen again.
  7. Lol might as well go back about Gothenburg/Lillehammer then.
  8. Oh no, but what would a certain other poster do if there is no more GB’s!!
  9. I realize that. But the idea still seems iffy in this case, even with the new changes to the charter. With a Montreal/Lake Placid deal, there’s no other real alternative nearby at play that could overshadow it. With Gothenburg/Lillehammer, there’s Oslo that would make the effort in that region much more convienient (for everyone involved), if not much also doesn’t have to be built. These changes to the Charter aren’t seemingly being made just to allow bids to come out of the woodwork just for the sake of having such bids on the table. It’s mainly being done to help cut down on costs, & to allow other cities/countries which normally wouldn’t be able to host an Olympics on their own, can now still do so with an aide of partner, or if the logistics still make sense in such an instance.
  10. ^Right, but with the confirmation of the changes to the Olympic Charter this week in regards to future bids, who to says then (besides you of course ) that it can’t be implemented again? Just cuz the “circumstances” weren’t right this time around, like they were for 24/28, doesn’t automatically mean that there can’t/won’t be another instance where they could be.
  11. Uh huh. And weren’t you the one who was telling others four years ago not to get too excited about Almaty’s 40 votes if they were to come back for 2026 (which speaking of a bid that didn’t come back at all despite their surprising strong second finish)? So why can’t that same analogy be applied to Sweden here? Yeah, we didn’t know that on Sunday, but it wasn’t ‘til very late in the game that it was perhaps starting to look good for Stockholm. Even you didn’t think that until the vote was right around the corner. You know what, I’m not so sure of that now after Monday. If 2022 was going to be such a half-backed show, like 2026 was for them, while the Chinese was going to move heaven & earth for the IOC (like they did for 2008), who knows. But then again, the IOC had another European alternative this time that was willing to give them pretty much what they wanted. So as usual, that’s what the members went with. It wasn’t the only problem, but it was a big problem nonetheless. Had they had that, plus a large citizenry support, I think we coulda had a different outcome on Monday. There were also a few other things, but the rest of those were all rather trivial in the grand scheme of things. It’s not like Italy’s plan is all that compact, either. It’s also pretty spread out.
  12. This sounds like almost as much of a logistical problem to Stockholm/Are. Sure it’s a shorter distance, but why not just go with Oslo at this point? It would only be a third of the distance to Lillehammer than Gothenburg would be. Not to mention that you would also have to work with two NOC’s with that option instead of one. Still sounds pretty problematic just for the sake of having a first-ever Swedish Winter Olympics.
  13. Yeah, even senior Canadian IOC member Dick Pound said that he couldn’t understand why Salt Lake went to such extremes, cuz technically speaking, they had the best bid of the 2002 bid lot. He went on to say, that perhaps SLC just got too nervous since they were trying & trying for decades, with either trying to win the U.S. nomination in some years, to actually trying to win the international phase of the contest.
  14. It was more than just a bad experience. It was a sh!tshow. Those group of people ultimately don’t matter anyway, though. What matters is FULL government support, cuz without it, you don’t have a bid ITFP. Or as we just saw earlier this week with Stockholm, your bid is still ‘dead in the water’ even with ho-hum gov’t support. Stockholm 2026 still had their IOC member’s & NOC’s full backing. What was lacking was that all-inclusive government guarantee, cuz without it, you don’t have a winning bid, no matter how many IOC members & NOC’s you have on your side. Meh, that’s just splitting hairs at this point. When I say their history, it’s being all-inclusive. From their lack of political & citizenry support, to their pragmatism & prudence. It’s not just exclusive to their bids, since all of that is tangible & interconnected in the end anyway.
  15. ^That may be so, but the SOK was all too eager to oblige the IOC as well.
  16. Now there’s a bargaining chip. Would the Swiss even care, though. Something tells me that they wouldn’t, & just tell the IOC to move to Sochi for all they cared.
  17. You keep saying that, but it’s basically the Norwegian IOC member & their NOC that are ‘considering’ 2030, not the gov’t. They also considered 2026, but it didn’t happen in the end. Like it’s been mentioned before, the Scandinavians are a very pragmatic bunch, & are quite prudent as to how they want to spend their money. That was evident in their 2004 bid, which is primarily why they lost that one. And they reminded us of that again this past week, too, in their press release. So unless the IOC really starts to practice what they preach, we’re very likely not gonna be seeing anything from the Scandies, at least the next five to ten years, as history has also shown us. And there was a recent for that, cuz in the end, it was dead in the water. More than 40% is still losing. What matters is winning, which the Swedes did not. Heck, even Almaty got more votes for ‘22 than what Stockholm got! Go figure. Is this another one of those instances where “we mostly agree but we’re just looking at it differently”? Cuz yes, I agree, that decision is going to be made down the line. Five to ten years down the line at least I say, again, considering their bid history.
  18. One thing is still very clear, though, that when the IOC has a choice, they will continue to do whatever they want & let the politics continue to rule, (or in this case, where will it be more “FUN”?!) - “Agenda 2020” or not.
  19. Oh wow! I think the sky is gonna start falling! A post from Quaker that I can ‘mostly’ agree with! But like I also mentioned yesterday, the Executive Board *approved* both Milan & Stockholm to the final ballot. Even the 2026 Final Evaluation Report gave a lot of praise to Milan’s plan. So each city deserved to be voted upon accordingly. They got rid of the fodder early on known as Erzurum. So that was it. As with every other bid race, there’s always going to be supporters of the losing city who are going to be sadly disappointed & call the IOC out (although they do deserve it sometimes). It’s a given. It would’ve been very nice to see a new nation host the Winter Games, but it didn’t pan out that way this time. Just like it didn’t pan out that way for South Africa or Istanbul, either. It’s just the nature of the game.
  20. I guess I could take a “Q” from the Big Q time-machine, playbook, & go through the archives & drudge that up to post it, but I just don’t have the time or the patience for that kind of school kid stuff like you do. Says the guy who takes notice on how long between my visits! Bcuz like I also said from a few hours ago, between attempts 7 & 8 it was a span of 22 years. And if we just count between the last winter bid (& no, 2022 hardly counts), then it was 24 years. So yeah, it doesn’t look good after this last run, at least for the near-term (again, I’ve never said they wouldn’t be back). And especially if the IOC starts to make these changes they’re talking about, where it seems they’re basically going to be assinging bid cities instead of actually voting for them from here on out, which it already looks like code for SLC & Sapporo. So that’s two cycles right there. And that’s always been the problem. That was the problem with their 2022 bid & why they pulled out. And that was also the problem for their 2004 bid, too. And this 2026 attempt was really a half-backed one. Sweden just didn’t want 2026 bad enough, only coming around very late in the game & the IOC grew leery of that. And that seems to be the crux of the matter when it comes to the Swedes, & always has been. No, but Sweden (& I’m not talking about Gunilla, which she made that comment before the vote, not after losing) did lash out at the IOC with their press release yesterday. So obviously they do remember something they didn’t necessarily liked.
  21. That’s why I don’t envision a(nother) Scandinavian Winter Olympics anytime soon (not to mention a Swiss or Austrian, either).
  22. Yes, it’s been noted that Brisbane’s main (& really only) plus is their weather during the Summer Games-time window. But that alone doesn’t justify the means to make it happen. Yes, Melbourne would be the smarter, much more Agenda 2020 compatible city, but there seems to be internal politics working against them, since John Coates is all too gung-ho for Brisbane for whatever his reasons. And of course don’t say that in the Brisbane thread, cuz there’s a certain element over there that is a lot like a certain you-know-who was about L.A. in the L.A. thread!
  23. IDK, PyeongChang won on it’s third, consecutive try (I don’t see Sweden doing that now). Plus, Sweden has already tried eight different times over many decades & has gotten zilch. That’s enough to turn anyone off from trying yet again. It’s like Sweden has now become the new Madrid/Istanbul. Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.
×
×
  • Create New...