FYI

Absolutely amazing how the IOC still loves to play hard-to-get in their desperate days.

Another Guanabara Bay media hysteria, perhaps?

FIFA Got Absolutely Roasted by Soccer Fans After 2026 World Cup Logo Release https://www.si.com/.amp/extra-mustard/2023/05/18/fifa-absolutely-roasted-fans-after-2026-world-cup-logo-release

“If anything that the individual logos look even worse…look at the NY one, does it say about NY/the U.S./Football?” Well, no. Why would it, when “football” here is totally something else.

^^^^^^

Makes London 2012 logo look like a masterpiece!

Clearly, you're not even talking into equation the delicate political balance that has to be played here. Obviously, Drut sees it (for the most part anyway), & even Rob tweeted as such that Paris 2024 is pretty much a "priority" right now, so "#France 2030?" It's also not a matter of Paris having hosted it "so soon". It's a matter of what does that mean to the average French citizen to have two Olympics that close together funded by THEM, when in recent weeks, there's been MASSIVE protests in France about changes to their pension act (& yeah, L.A. 2028/SLC 2030 could play out, but even there, you still have the USOC PREFERRING 2034 as to not to spread out the sponsorship money too thin. Go figure). Like Rob also said in his tweet, it's fun to speculate about some of these project, but then you have to factor in the realities & hurdles that can hinder these projects. In a time when the most average of citizens are getting hit with massive inflation & debt, I'm sure they're the one's who can give a "flying F" over who the IOC's 'knight in shining armor' can be. But hey, there's always Trojena!

Drut, of all people, you would think would know better, especially when their own NOC is not even working on such a project at the moment. Their full attention right now is on Paris 2024, & rightly so. Plus, does the IOC really want to announce another French (winter) Olympics on the eve of Paris 2024? Not so sure how that would go over for the French public in general (especially when you consider the recent protests there over the gov't position to lengthen their retirement age). For the IOC, though, considering they're so desperate anyway, who knows. Maybe that's where Drut is going with this, come to think of it. Cause "small chance" would be an understatement, IMO. And Chamonix has already stated that they're not interested when it came to that "super Alps bid" earlier in the year. Can't see their position has changed that much since then.

I've mentioned before that France has their hands quite full already, in trying to deliver a successful 2024 Summer Olympics, than to try & even contemplate another (winter) Olympics so soon. And I can't see even glory trumping anything in this case. Not when you recently had those massive protests in France over their retirement age, for the gov't to just come in & finance yet another big Olympic party & when they're telling their citizens that you must work longer. I don't think Macron's gov't could survive such a scenario. As it is, the balance with internal French politics & Paris 2024 must be quite delicate right now to try & burden it even more when it's not necessary at the moment. Again, 2034 is another story, though.

I'm glad that we have someone's perspective on this that's actually on-the-ground instead of just relying on lofty headlines (which is usually the case in many of these instances). No amount of journalism can ever replace what the actual citizens & politicians of a certain locale have to say, even if in the end, sometimes their words might not be adhered to. Yeah, can't imagine a song contest being anywhere near the equivalent (at least in terms of cost) to a (winter) Olympic Games anyway. So in that sense, it's a no-brainer as to which is better to support.

^^^^^

^Exactly, I don’t think that SLC/USOC is “rooting” for Stockholm 2030 just so Sapporo can come in & snag the ‘34 Winter Games. There must be something more to it there. Besides, Sapporo has been much too ambivalent anyway, for various reasons, so why not just go for a much more sure thing for ‘34, & then see where Sapporo stands for ‘38 instead.

^Correction, it's a "crowded field of 'interested' parties"!!

Thank you for that fascinating observation SportLi.. Oh, wait..

Yep, that's nothing new either. The elephant-in-the-room topic for India which they conveniently never address when talking about an Olympic bid there.

Old news.

Well, I count nine if we include the current 2030 attempt; 1984 Goteburg 1988 Falun 1992 Falun 1994 Ostersund 1998 Ostersund 2002 Ostersund 2022 Stockholm 2026 Stockholm 2030 Stockholm So maybe he misspoke, or perhaps he's mistakenly also including Stockholm's 2004 Summer bid as a winter bid.

Lol, the only kind of reimbursement the IOC enjoys, is the kind to their own Swiss bank accounts (& pockets).

Because in their warped mind, they think that they are providing some kind of "public service". But in reality, though, they're performing a DISservice around here with all their constant spamming.

That’s not surprising at all. London 2012 & Rio 2016 security costs were both over a Billion dollars each. Granted that they were summer Games, which are bigger, so more involved security, but still the cost for that necessary segment of the Olympics is now staggering, & which yes, always gets conveniently glossed over when talking about Olympic “budgets”. The 1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics security costs were a paltry $100 million, compared to the astronomical projected costs of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics of $2 Billion. But of course an L.A. Olympics is always sold as “cost-effective” when not conveniently including security costs, that is. I’m sure the 2030/34 SLC Winter Olympics security will at least be $750 million, if not close to a Billion dollars by that time.

But on the USA side, I heard that Nashville was one of the host cities!

Like I just mentioned in the GB's newswire section about this very topic - the public is more or less onboard if no new facilities are to be built. But would they also still be onboard if the city made the financial guarantees required? Cause that was the main problem the last time (with basically the exact same plan), & I'm sure that very question was not asked in these latest SOK 'polls'.

So the people would be okay if no new stadiums are built. But would they also be okay if the city made the financial guarantees required? Cause that was the main problem the last time, & something I'm sure was not asked in these latest SOK 'polls'.