Time Zones?

[SJD88]

I'm new at this whole thin so i'm not sure about what the IOC takes into consideration. It seems unlikely that they would go for the same continent for two games in a row. But what about time zones? Would a North American bid hurt a South American bid in 2020 or vise versa. Or the same thing for Europe and Africa?

[baron-pierreIV]

welcome, sjd88. I don't think that anyone amongst the IOC voters actually sits there, calculator in hand, and computes the differences in time zones between the cities, past, present or running. But it is a valid question.

Let's go back to say the 1910's and the '20s when at least the Summer Games were mostly confined to Europe. So, 1908 - London, 1912 - Stockholm, 1920 - A.Twerp, 1924 - Paris, 1928 - Amsterdam. Not much difference time-wise. It would just seem that time differences come into play because they now try to ROTATE the Games in distant parts of the world.

Now, would a 2016 North or South American win preclude a 2020 North or South American win? Probably. I think in the minds of many IOC'ers, because of the image of those 5 rings, they might still classify the Americas as one zone -- thus a Chicago or Rio win for 2016 might eliminate another Amercas win for 2020. I guess it also depends on the quality of the cities bidding.

Now if an Americas person (say, moi) got the IOC presidency, say, in the intervening years, (I) might be able to ordain a 1-2 Americas win.

[olympiaki-agones]

welcome, sjd88. I don't think that anyone amongst the IOC voters actually sits there, calculator in hand, and computes the differences in time zones between the cities, past, present or running. But it is a valid question.

Let's go back to say the 1910's and the '20s when at least the Summer Games were mostly confined to Europe. So, 1908 - London, 1912 - Stockholm, 1920 - A.Twerp, 1924 - Paris, 1928 - Amsterdam. Not much difference time-wise. It would just seem that time differences come into play because they now try to ROTATE the Games in distant parts of the world.

Now, would a 2016 North or South American win preclude a 2020 North or South American win? Probably. I think in the minds of many IOC'ers, because of the image of those 5 rings, they might still classify the Americas as one zone -- thus a Chicago or Rio win for 2016 might eliminate another Amercas win for 2020. I guess it also depends on the quality of the cities bidding.

Now if an Americas person (say, moi) got the IOC presidency, say, in the intervening years, (I) might be able to ordain a 1-2 Americas win.

Aren't you a Filipino originally?

[baron-pierreIV]

Yeah. But my present citizenship is US. So?

[thorbr]

Yeah. But my present citizenship is US. So?

Oh you are not even from the US originally... God... you said things concerning third world countries here more than 1000 times, and you are from one! Geez...

By the way, I would like to ask what you guys think about the possibility of the same thing that is happening with beijing's torch happen if Chicago wins for 2016.... I mean, people all over the world would complain about past US bad experiences concerning international law, human rights, etc.... I do think the IOC shouldn't take this risk!

[baron-pierreIV]

Oh you are not even from the US originally... God... you said things concerning third world countries here more than 1000 times, and you are from one! Geez...

By the way, I would like to ask what you guys think about the possibility of the same thing that is happening with beijing's torch happen if Chicago wins for 2016.... I mean, people all over the world would complain about past US bad experiences concerning international law, human rights, etc.... I do think the IOC shouldn't take this risk!

They're not asking you.

[olympiaki-agones]

They're not asking you.

Ooops! Sorry Baron for exposing your real origins.

Anyway, I think the IOC is learning a lesson after Beijing 2008. When they choose cities for hosting the games they have to take care also about the policital reputation of the bidding country. I can imagine the same thing in 2012 and 2014. I think the voters will think twice before deciding which city offers more money. After all the IOC reputation is already questionable after the elections of Atlanta, Salt Lake City and even Turin.

[thorbr]

Ooops! Sorry Baron for exposing your real origins.

Anyway, I think the IOC is learning a lesson after Beijing 2008. When they choose cities for hosting the games they have to take care also about the policital reputation of the bidding country. I can imagine the same thing in 2012 and 2014. I think the voters will think twice before deciding which city offers more money. After all the IOC reputation is already questionable after the elections of Atlanta, Salt Lake City and even Turin.

Exactly... and this will hurt the phillipine's guy bid city....

[baron-pierreIV]

Exactly... and this will hurt the phillipine's guy bid city....

Philippine bid? How stupid can u be? They aren't even bidding. Otario.

[baron-pierreIV]

Ooops! Sorry Baron for exposing your real origins.

You did no such thing. If I didn't want to, I simply didn't have to answer your question. I have nothing to hide; I like to keep people guessing and my (very interesting) background has really no bearing on the discussion of what goes on here. And some half-literate, boring Brazilians can't seem to make that out. And I think you're also a Portuguese immigrant to Luxembourg, aren't you?

[thorbr]

You did no such thing. If I didn't want to, I simply didn't have to answer your question. I have nothing to hide; I like to keep people guessing and my (very interesting) background has really no bearing on the discussion of what goes on here. And some half-literate, boring Brazilians can't seem to make that out. And I think you're also a Portuguese immigrant to Luxembourg, aren't you?

Yes, it has to do......... you are always talking bad about developing countries... and u come from one! get real!

[baron-pierreIV]

I see your mentality hasn't moved out of one, dipstick. If it comes to something like an Olympics, it would be an irresponsible, almost criminal act for a developing country to even attempt it if there are children there who will go to bed hungry at night. All for some vainglorious idiots like you whose cortex isn't thick enough to comprehend the sheer lunacy of your ambitions, jumento.

And I don't have to justify anything to you of myself or of my views. I don't owe you anything, you piece of sh*t.

[olympiaki-agones]

No Baron, I 'm not a Portuguese immigrant or from any other place. I'm one of the few native people from Luxembourg. And don't get angry when people tell you what they think about you or your must-of-the-time offensive comments. Take it easy and show a little respect here. Otherwise, if you want to insult someone, do it privately as you did it some time ago to me.

[LA84]

Oh you are not even from the US originally... God... you said things concerning third world countries here more than 1000 times, and you are from one! Geez...

I mean, people all over the world would complain about past US bad experiences concerning international law, human rights, etc.... I do think the IOC shouldn't take this risk!

So based on this, I giess then that you also agree that the IOC shouldn't take a risk with Brazil as well, don't you agree? Continued police brutality, corruption, torture and summary executions by civil and military police and prison authorities. Not to mention the 1992 Carandiru Massacre, considered a major violation of the human rights in Brazil.

[jim jones]

I'm new at this whole thin so i'm not sure about what the IOC takes into consideration. It seems unlikely that they would go for the same continent for two games in a row. But what about time zones? Would a North American bid hurt a South American bid in 2020 or vise versa. Or the same thing for Europe and Africa?

well SJD88. Beyond the Barons rantings (which I enjoy by the way Baron ) as he states time zones where not important of course before TV and hence the huge amount of time the games spent in Europe at the beginning of the 20th century . TV has become a factor really since 1984 when the LA games brought huge TV interest especially in America. The rights deals were peanuts prior to 1984. Squaw Valley 1960 CBS paid a mere $ 50000 dollars for. For Moscow 1980 NBC paid 87 million and that was nearly four times the amount American Tv paid for the Montreal 1976 games. The total montreal tv rights worldwide was about 125 million US. A far dry from the nearly 2 billion it cost to host the games in 1976. Montreal actually made more on Stamps, Coins and the new national lottery which all told took in over 365 million dollar US.

LA you had professional athletes come into the games finally and big sponsorship deals for both the local organizing committees and the IOC. Pro athletes and corporations were greatly resisted until The IOC basically had no choice. It was either Ueberroth's Capitalism or probably no Olympics.

Ironically it was Avery Brundage the only non-European or America IOC president that resisted the most. The Fee for LA 84 Us tv rights was 225 million. Seoul 1988 was over 300 million but Calgary because it was in the Americas in decent time zones for prime in eastern time soured to 396 million paid by ABC(of America not Australia). this was due to the huge success of the LA games and renewed interest in the Games.

With the involvement of multinational companies for Olympic Partners The IOC has a built in list now of sponsor sells for NBC or any network in America. Since there is no field or venue Advertisements yet with the Olympics the TV screen is the media to satisfy IOC sponsors and the Local Organizing Committee Sponsors. The winter games for 1980 in Lake Placid was a mere 40 million for the Us market. Atlanta 1996 the US Tv rights came in at $456 million with Additional monies to both the IOC and NBC for the Massive Sales of Tv ads because Atlanta of course is Eastern Time Zone. A comparison of the next largest tv market Continental for TV rights in 1996 was 250 million us dollars for the entire European continent COMBINED or only about 50 percent of what American Tv paid. That yardstick has remained.

Since 1996 it US Tv rights has grown with NBC paying $793 million for the 2004 Games, $613 million for 2006 and $894 million for 2008. NBC is paying both Vancouver 2010 and London 2012 1.1 billion the American rights to the games . That 1.1 billion is split with the IOC the United States Olympic Committee and the Local Organizing Committee. The Kicker for the IOC is if NBC sells more ads then their costs to buy the rights then the IOC and NBC go 50 /50 split on additional AD revenues.

The increases came with renewed interest in America with a very successful hosting in Los Angeles. You compare the ABC Tv rights for Calgary 1988 to the Capital costs for Moscow 1980 games and the TV right of 1988 overtakes the official Capital costs of the Moscow 1980 summer olympics. Those games were pegged at 350 million for construction or capital costs.

The best possible case for maximum TV rights are Olympics held closest to the Eastern time zone of the Americas. Simply American TV on its own pays nearly two to one over any other entire continent for Olympics TV rights. It is the AD buys that US business will do in that eastern time zone that makes for the high revenues. To max the ratings having events timed for viewing in prime time for the eastern time zone is key . US TV is biggest private funder of the Olympics Period end of story. Seven out of the ten IOC worldwide partners are North American Headquartered Companies and that provides American Tv with a good Call list for Games Ads.

The IOC and US TV reap the ad bonanza beyond the costs if ratings exceed NBC's cost. The local organizing committee gets nothing additional or very little additional. That door was closed after Calgary 1988.

Of course if the Games go flat for the ratings in the US Advertisers are compensated with Ad credits and that cuts into NBC's bottom line. That happened in the case with Torino 2006 and the IOC did not make addition monies. Highlight packages are especially not going to cut it in the 2000's because of the 24 hour news cycle , Cable sports and news channels reporting results and instant internet reporting. Fox Tv in America beat the crap out of the Torino Games

with American Idol while The United States stunk up the games with bad results for medals.

Live in front of Prime time Eastern time 8pm to 11pm is the high priced ads for American TV in the heaviest populated markets that actually pay.

Beijing 2008 actually has some highly viewed events for the America Audiences at morning times in Beijing (much to the athletes groans) to catch US prime time on the eastern sea board.

Ideally you would want to have your quarter finals and semi finals running up from about 4 pm to 7pm Eastern Time in the US and then finals running thru the prime time slots. The more events you can have in that golden zone or prior the better. The IOC and their main partner US TV are about maximizing revenues. The way they do that of course is to know what time 8pm EST is for local time Beijing, London or Athens. In recent years The IOC actually charters to that eastern time zone. NBC provides the lions share of the money that is not from a national treasury and both the IOC and the future Local Organizing Committee depend on that increasing as it has recently. They hope inflation of what US tv spends keeps pace with cost of the Games . London 2012 would like that to be Zimbabwe rates of inflation LOL.

keeping your largest customer happy, feed and making something form their generous investment is Key.

This however does not drive the IOc to have hosting in the America's until they are in need of a boost. When the IOC staggered winter and summer hostings

it took strain off sponsors to both the TV AD side and sponsorship. It also spread the risk and kept the needed attention span between Games shorter.

Sports events like the olympics, Super bowl and world series help set up promotion for the general entertainment section of the network as well. It is said that NBC uses the games as a loss leader to a degree but that is a fine degree at best.

Anyone here who thinks the IOC is not wide awake on these factors and does not think about them probably lives in a cave next to Bin laden. If

Beijing Tanks on the ratings for NBC this summer you can make a short list for 2016 of a number TWO. RIO and Chicago with the probable winner being Chicago depending on how badly it goes.

NBc is about the only network to be hooked up with the IOC with the increasing rights package from America over the long haul . NBC stakes its name on the Games. All Networks basically take a loss on the games it is a lose leader to promote the coming season of shows usually.

Fox or CBS well they are on to better things that have great ad revenues year in and out like NFL , NCAA college sports, Major League Baseball, National Basketball Association and Nascar Stock car racing. ABC/Espn well they pick up the scraps of Mickey Mouse Ears.

Jim jones

[baron-pierreIV]

Whew! That must hold the record as the single longest pure text message (I have yet) encountered on this board.

Always glad to be of service, jimbo.

[SJD88]

WOW that was really informative. So what your saying or at least i think this would be on there minds. They would have a Rio 16 and a Chicago 20 (or the other way around) and make bank on NBC. But it would be less likely for them to do a Europe Africa back to back because it would be harder for them to get sports in prime time in America

[jim jones]

WOW that was really informative. So what your saying or at least i think this would be on there minds. They would have a Rio 16 and a Chicago 20 (or the other way around) and make bank on NBC. But it would be less likely for them to do a Europe Africa back to back because it would be harder for them to get sports in prime time in America

precisely. Greenwich Mean time is not bad being 4 hours ahead of New York. But if you have a series of hosts that are not near golden zone then the interest will naturally decrease over time in the United States. The other Tv networks are switching to annual events on the North America continent and winning loyalty over the Olympics. Western Pacific is of course the worst being about 12 hours difference.

Sydney 2000 followed by Athens 2004 followed by Beijing 2008 followed by London 2012 you have a difficult situation. The thing that happens with a US hosting is that it generates local interest with other networks news departments leading the charge. The contraction of News departments worldwide for Network TV is going to have a greater impact as well.

Salt Lake City 2002 and Vancouver 2010 helps the situation in North America but the nature of when the Winter Games is placed is in the middle winter Tv season with brand new shows is a very difficult dynamic. Going head to head with the other networks brand new offerings in mid-winter is not the same as the summer games broadcasts promoting the upcoming schedule for NBC while the other networks are in Reruns. The Summer games you get a boost naturally because of what is going on TV normally with in the Northern Hemisphere as people are greatly detached from TV in June, July and August.

I am pretty sure that after a North American hosting the ratings for the next games gets a good boost. That even probably carries over from winter to summer games.

The bottom line is with Time Zone and the importance of NBC and the Eastern Time Zone you will probably not see a decade without at least one Hosting in the Americas from now on. The first decade of the 2000's and since 1960 you have had no decade not having at least two Olympic games in the Americas except the 1990's . The Americas since 1960 have had 1960 winter, 1968 summer, 1972 (Denver was awarded but did not host) Winter, Montreal 1976, Lake Placid 1980 , Los Angeles 1984, Calgary 1988 , Atlanta 1996 , Salt Lake City 2002, Vancouver 2010. Timezone importance for America TV has created the influence over time.

You will never see a return to the first part of the 20th century where this was really a travelling road show around European Cities.

Rio has a great advantage at this time with A. the absence of the games for 20 years in the Americas and B. Rio is in the Atlantic Time Zone a Mere one hour before Eastern time. That makes for great scheduling for the Athletes that is not out of sorts with performance and means American TV gets many more live events that can be arranged to fit an NBC for Maximum AD sales and ratings. The IOC loves that extra AD money that American TV provides.

If it was Rio Biding as the lone Americas host with the recent past RIO would win hands down simply on the economic bonanza the IOC would get from their timezone placement int he world. The IOC members are very aware of economics and where the bulk of the funding comes from. Who knows Iraq could get worse and not be a factor keeping Chicago from winning

jim jones

Getting Back to the Americas is key to the growth of the Games for a real economic standpoint. IMO

[jim jones]

WOW that was really informative. So what your saying or at least i think this would be on there minds. They would have a Rio 16 and a Chicago 20 (or the other way around) and make bank on NBC. But it would be less likely for them to do a Europe Africa back to back because it would be harder for them to get sports in prime time in America

As a side note Even the Failed bid for the 2014 Commonwealth Games by Abuja, Nigeria had Finals scheduling that would place sports of the greatest interest to the largest rights payer of those games. Netball , Basketball , Rugby Sevens and Aquatics finals were all scheduled in the bid to have those events timed for Prime Time TV Sydney, Australia.

If a Nigerian Commonwealth Games committee is aware of the Benefits of partnering with the biggest source of Foreign money to those games then the Olympic movement is certainly of the same thinking.

The Olympics of course does this on a much larger Scale. Partnering with the sponsors and TV right big players is key to economic survival and growth of any games.

Jim Jones