Jump to content

phandrosis

Members
  • Posts

    767
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Posts posted by phandrosis

  1. Just found this article: http://newsonjapan.com/html/newsdesk/article/108356.php

    It's stuff we already know, but the last line caught my attention...

    "Liquid crystal displays will be mounted on the back of the spectators' seats and are expected to relay information about events being held in the stadium or show live broadcasts of events held at other venues".

    So each spectator gets a lil tv? Sound pretty expensive and risky given the kind of things a seat goes through over various events...

  2. This is a little old but still good to read.

    http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympics/summer-olympics/2020/1023431-tokyo-2020-chief-worried-by-national-olympic-stadium-demolition-delays

    PM Mori (who is President of Japan's Ruby Union or something along with Tokyo 2020) is worried cause deconstruction is starting in December instead of October when it was supposed to start. I guess he doesn't want the world to see Tokyo's and really Japan's preparations like we saw Rio's. He's kind of vague but you can infer that he wants to keep the reputation of Japanese efficiency that always leads to success.

  3. If PyeongChang is an economic success then maybe they'll want to host a summer games again down the road. There is the 2020 vision thing too so maybe the IOC will be like, "hey Korea, you have sports things. Wanna host?". I would definitely not expect it soon, though. Busan did show some interest in 2024 if Tokyo lost, and now have stated (I don't have a source, just trusting wiki) that 2028 is a viable option. However, if the IOC continues to have the idea of moving away from a continent just for the sake of change, given that Asia will have hosted three times in a row from 2018 to 2020, then I really don't see it happening for a while until we've had a break from Asia for a bit.

  4. Workers move a half-century memory Granite slabs memorializing the gold medalists from the 1964 Tokyo Olympics were removed Tuesday from the facade of National Stadium, which will be torn down and replaced for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics. The slabs, engraved with names of all 319 champions along with the heading “TOKYO 1964,” were set up above the stadium’s main entrance in 1965 as a lasting tribute to the Games. Along with the foreign champions, the honor roll included Takashi Ono, now 83, who won a gold in the men’s gymnastics team competition, and the much-heralded women’s volleyball team, known popularly as the “Witches of the Orient.” The plates will be kept in storage until a museum, which will be attached to the new stadium, is completed in 2019. They will then become part of the museum’s collection.

    Yomiuri Shimbun

    http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0001624831

    http://www.bdonline.co.uk/news/arup-lands-key-role-on-tokyo-olympics/5071333.article

    this article is how some company named Arup is going to help Tokyo with the process of venue design and construction, along with legacy after the games and junk. They were part of Beijing and London's legacy, so it's not like they don't know what they're doing.

  5. It's about time.

    http://tokyo2020.jp/en/emblem/

    They explain in very poetic terms that the logo shouldn't be restricted to Japanese culture as to make no sense/conenctions to the rest of the world, but shoudl still have, "..the essence of Japanese culture, and seek to rediscover its subtle splendors. The design should also integrate an affinity with technology, and its future functions".

    The artists themselves have to submit designs for both the Olympic and Paralympic games, so we'll still have that connection between the two like in London's and those after.

    Submissions start the 4th of November and end the 11th, but that's plenty of time to throw something together that will be refined over the following months until whenever the reveal is (2020 days to go???). The shortlisted applicants will be contacted in late December of this year.

    Unfortunately, those who may participate are a bit more restricted than, say Nanjing's medal contest. As they say, "Applicants must be designers, graphic designers or art directors who have received at least two of the following awards: The Tokyo ADC Prize, the TDC Prize, the JAGDA Newcomers Award, the Yusaku Kamekura Award, the New York ADC Prize, the D&AD Award and the ONE SHOW DESIGN Award".

    Basically, the majority of designers will be Japanese, with a few Americans and Europeans here and there.

    So yeah that's cool i guess B)

  6. Remove those redundant taekwando, judo-type sports. Who cares if China or Malaysia will lose one of their sure-fire medal sports?

    people will probably call the IOC racist if they specifically target asian dominated sports, so I think that's not something they want to do...

  7. I wouldn't be surprised if that was something that happened, but if you look at the Japanese economy at the time you can see why there is next to no evidence of a bid. An asset bubble (housing and stocks) burst while the government attempted to keep inflation under control and while bailing out failed banks that had ties to the government. It began in 1991, so I can see why they would have stopped anything to deal with bidding up until the end of this economic slump which ended in around 2010, giving Tokyo to come back in 2011 to bid for 2020.

  8. I think the "balance" between public and private funding is totally irrelevant. The degree to which the Games are or are not not publicly funded should correspond to the will of the people. As long as the bills are paid, I have no problem with 100% private funding and the IOC shouldn't either.

    There is absolutely no reason why governments should be required to invest financially in Olympic Games unless that is the only way the bidder in question is able to fund the project.

    My only issue is that the games would become completely corporate if that happened. You would have Coca Cola on the back of every athlete and the medals would have the Nike symbol on them. Unless a company is truly charitable towards the games (which logically is not gonna happen), you're going to see product placement everywhere that'll ruin the atmosphere previous games have had.

    An example being Atlanta, where they relied heavily on corporate sponsorship for funding, but were criticized by the European IOC members as having "a general atmosphere of commercialism" that undermined IOC sponsorship in favor of their (Atlanta) own so they could pay for the games. Sure, the government only gave them so much so they had to rely on corporate sponsorship and ticket sales, but the results show that sometimes this isn't the best plan of action.

  9. http://online.wsj.com/articles/tokyo-hopes-new-olympic-stadium-is-golden-opportunity-but-some-see-red-1412287117

    Good article that shows the two different sides of the argument about building the stadium. Apparently after delays deconstruction will actually start in December, but construction of the new stadium will begin on time in October of next year. Some people seem to fear the the stadium and its 80,000 (give or take a few hundred given the retractable seating on the bottom tier) capacity will be a white elephant, but the JSC argued that there are plenty of events that will aid in an overall revenue of 3.3 million USD after operational costs.

    It also mentions a possible use for a future World Cup, so that's something to look forward to.

  10. Kazakhstan ranks like 144 (& 13 spots behind Russia) outta some 177 countries in the global corruption index. And that's what the IOC should really be staying away from. And not bcuz China would have to build up their alpine resort venue (which could provide a legacy for many Chinese winter sports enthusiasts anyway). Plus, Beijjng would reuse a lot of their 2008 venues as well. So money would be saved there. Not to mention that on a political stability nature, China is already well established. While the IOC would be taking quite a gamble with Kazahkstan.

    Both sides really have issues. Beijing is going to use a lot of 2008 venues, but they need to build almost all of the snow venues, which actually costs a lot. Kazakhstan is hella corrupt, even more so than China apparently. But I really don't have any other events that took place there to base my opinion on, so I just give them the benefit of the doubt that they would be able to handle it. All I know is that the country spent over 1.4 billion on the Asian Games (source: wikipedia eyoo) which is actually more than Vancouver spent on their Olympic Games, but not nearly close to Sochi.

    uhhh edit apparently Vancouver spent more like 1.8 million but I'm comparing Asian Games to Olympic Games so it's going to be more regardless...

  11. For who and over what period of time? That's not as simple a question as it seems and could hamstring worthwhile developments. Governments shouldn't be banned or even discouraged from piggybacking investment onto their nations' Olympic bids. In fact, done well, such investment is a great thing because you often end up with 20 year projects accelerated into 5 short years.

    I'm really of the opinion that there's no one one-size-fits-all blue print of what a good Olympic bid looks like. What a good bid looks like is a HARD question and varies from city to city. But the IOC ought to be able to discern bad bids - ones that will damage their reputation and do no real good for the people of the host city - and reject them outright.

    I guess what I was trying to say is that the games shouldn't leave a city in extreme debt that takes decades to recover from like in 1976. I agree that governments should invest in their own games, but not to a point where the deficit will be greater than any profit from tourism, ticket sales, whatever. Games should have a good balance between public and private investments so that the taxpayers don't have to struggle with the entire load, just a part of it.

    Also I guess I was also trying to say what you said about the IOC being able to differentiate between doomed to fail bids and "good" bids that will benefit both the IOC's reputation as a successful organization and the city in the long run. That's the lesson I hope they learn from this experience.

  12. I think the summer games should return to Korea. Seoul has really evolved since 1988 and Pyeongchang will really help show that and may influence a sort of national pride that will push a bid out in the future.

    If we want something really new, maybe another Scandinavian summer games? We haven't seen that since the 50's but it could be really cool.

    The Canadians should really get another chance to host a not awful summer games too...

    Maybe Barcelona will host if Catalonia becomes it's own country (I have no idea what's going on there politically but it looks like people want it).

    Finally I think a New York games or any profitable USA host should come around sometime soon (Boston 2024 turn up). I mean after people saw the profit of LA '84 cities from around the world jumped on the opportunity to bid (you know, except for 1988 but whatever). You went from literally one bid in 1984 to six in 1992. Maybe they could have the same effect.

    Maybe there's some sort of equation of when cities start to host again after one city messes up. Not so good games + 16 years = Pretty good games.

  13. I guess you can call the 2022 race a sort of buffer zone between the old way of bidding and the new 2020 stuff. It's going to be rough throughout, and given the selection these games might be one of those we just forget over time.

    Also it's strikingly similar how Beijing and Istanbul both had government-based riots during their bidding periods. Seeing how that turned out for Istanbul, I can already predict that it wont help Beijing win over the IOC.

  14. I hope the IOC can learn a lesson from all of this. When voting for a host city, make sure that their planned expenditures and legacy are truly profitable, given the inevitable rise in costs after election. Other cities got turned away when Sochi up and spend about 50 billion USD building venues and roads that corruption heavily ingrained itself in.

    I mean, that's why I think Almaty will eventually win if they don't allow a sort of Hail Mary to jump in. Almaty is sure to spend less than Beijing. Hell, Beijing will spend more on ceremonies than Almaty will spend on constructing a new venue. In fact, it'll almost look like the IOC is supporting extreme spending if they decide on Beijing again. Just my opinion, but it'll look that way.

    As for a hail mary for 2022, it probably wont happen, but if it does they should just throw it at some city with almost all the venues from a previous games. Like... I don't know Innsbruck could probably handle them a technical 4th time (including YOG). If they were really desperate they could throw them to the US or even Japan. It would be weird for sure hosting in the same nation twice in a row but Japan has hosted Asian Winter Games (3 times and one more in 2017) and Olympic Winter Games (twice!) so it's not like they couldn't handle it either.

×
×
  • Create New...