Jump to content

Your Predictions


Recommended Posts

To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

This has nothing to do with anti-american feelings, but it makes me wonder how intelligent somepeople are that post here.

New York was a long shot even before its problems surrounding its west side stadium. The Mayors games backfired, saying NY had NO other option if the west side stadium failed. Well we know that was a lie, he was just scaremongering, to make the politicans accept HIS plan.

Atlanta 96, weak public support, mediocre political support, Vancouver 2010... these are all factors that can't be dismissed so easily. And if you do, then you're in denial.

Bringing Ali to Singapore, will only refresh the IOCs minds back to Atlanta 96, which wasn't so long ago, and those games were probably the worst in recent times.

Giving the games to NYC over Paris, is to me... unimaginable. Even if I'd rather have the games in NY than Paris. It just won't happen.

What a kick in the teeth it would be to Paris and to a lesser extent London, if NYC with all its problems and issues, won the vote. The IOC would need to ask themselves some serious questions.

But of course, we all know they do as they please, but this would be a stones throw too far.

Ummm...this just in....Saying that your views aren't that of an Anti-American Terrorist, and then going on to slam the Country makes you an America Hating Hypocrite

I think your hiding Osama in your basement too..Heck, I'll bet you were cheering as those towers fell....And I'll bet your toasting the bubbly each time an American dies in Iraq because we killed your secret oil dealings with Saddam.

You disgust me Frenchie....

If you really wanted to provide insightful analysis instead of your America Hating Bullcrap you would have just said that Paris is the only previous bidder in the race, and that the IOC gave them the highest marks, and that they were screwed over twice in the last 20 years....Once as a personal favor (Albertville-Barcelona debacle) and the other to hand the Games to Beijing.

And by the way flag burner....When it is all said and done, any of the cities on the short list including Moscow are a safer choice then Athens ever was......and will be billions cheaper too.....And that's being nice by not mentioning that Beijing is going to blow more then a few billion on this thing.

Now go back to burning your flags and planning your terrorist attacks and leave the English speaking people alone. Your begging for these posts to be translated to French so you can blah blah blah and sound smart.

Slightly OTT reaction methinks. What's terrorism and flag-burning got to do with all of this?  :oo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 224
  • Created
  • Last Reply
JDPinstripes makes a couple of good points and as a New Yorker who supports NYC's bid I can't ignore them...however, if the selection process was purely based upon a city's candidature files and there excellence thereof, then there would be no need to go any further than abiding by the Evaluation Commission's findings. But it isn't. There findings are important only as a screening process to keep out those cities that are unequivically unable to host an Olympic Games. The initial report found and stated unequivically that Paris, Madrid, London and NYC could all well host a Games and Moscow less so. Since that report London and NYC have improved their chances by strengthening those areas found somewhat suspect by the Commission. All four cities are equally capable of hosting a good Games and to be fair to all four, would undoubtedly. There isn't one that would do any better than another because in reality the imponderables could scuttle any one of them in the preparations and organization. What we now are faced with, in my humble opinion, is parochial politicking: personal preferences between IOC representatives to choose the city based upon their own prejudicial reasons... and the odds, again according to yours truly, are that those prejudices will work in favor of NYC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

This has nothing to do with anti-american feelings, but it makes me wonder how intelligent somepeople are that post here.

New York was a long shot even before its problems surrounding its west side stadium. The Mayors games backfired, saying NY had NO other option if the west side stadium failed. Well we know that was a lie, he was just scaremongering, to make the politicans accept HIS plan.

Atlanta 96, weak public support, mediocre political support, Vancouver 2010... these are all factors that can't be dismissed so easily. And if you do, then you're in denial.

Bringing Ali to Singapore, will only refresh the IOCs minds back to Atlanta 96, which wasn't so long ago, and those games were probably the worst in recent times.

Giving the games to NYC over Paris, is to me... unimaginable. Even if I'd rather have the games in NY than Paris. It just won't happen.

What a kick in the teeth it would be to Paris and to a lesser extent London, if NYC with all its problems and issues, won the vote. The IOC would need to ask themselves some serious questions.

But of course, we all know they do as they please, but this would be a stones throw too far.

Ummm...this just in....Saying that your views aren't that of an Anti-American Terrorist, and then going on to slam the Country makes you an America Hating Hypocrite

I think your hiding Osama in your basement too..Heck, I'll bet you were cheering as those towers fell....And I'll bet your toasting the bubbly each time an American dies in Iraq because we killed your secret oil dealings with Saddam.

You disgust me Frenchie....

If you really wanted to provide insightful analysis instead of your America Hating Bullcrap you would have just said that Paris is the only previous bidder in the race, and that the IOC gave them the highest marks, and that they were screwed over twice in the last 20 years....Once as a personal favor (Albertville-Barcelona debacle) and the other to hand the Games to Beijing.

And by the way flag burner....When it is all said and done, any of the cities on the short list including Moscow are a safer choice then Athens ever was......and will be billions cheaper too.....And that's being nice by not mentioning that Beijing is going to blow more then a few billion on this thing.

Now go back to burning your flags and planning your terrorist attacks and leave the English speaking people alone. Your begging for these posts to be translated to French so you can blah blah blah and sound smart.

Slightly OTT reaction methinks. What's terrorism and flag-burning got to do with all of this?  :oo:

It's simple...Frenchie just wants to trash America instead of provide analysis as to why Paris will win on July 6th.

Let me translate into language even a three year old can understand

Me: So who's going to host the 2012 Olympic Games

Frenchie: Paris is...Because America $%^#

Me: But why

Frenchie: Because America $$%^#

Me: But what about Paris's plan is better then the others

Frenchie: (To the tune of Jingle Bells) America #$%% America $%^# They #$%%^ all the way.....Die Bush Die, And France Will Fly, La La La La La HEY!

Me: That's great....do you know anything about the subject

Frenchie: I know that America $%^#@...oh and Atlanta $%#%^ed too

Me: Why did Atlanta $%^#

Frenchie: Because they had a bomb....and because it was in America....And America $%^#$%

Me: That's fantastic...What did you think of Munich

Frenchie: Munich tres bien...That Stadium...Unbelieveable

Me: And what about the terrorist attack there

Frenchie: What attack...No attack happened

Me: The one where the Palestian terrorists killed the Israeli athletes

Frenchie: What are you talking about...No such thing happened.....

Me: I'm sure it didn't....

Frenchie: Though I'm sure that if it did happen...That because America loves Israel...that I wouldn't have a problem with it

Me: (Pause)....so getting back to 2012...What about the bid from Paris is good

Frenchie: VIVE LE FRANCE....VIVE LE FRANCE!

Me: Ummm...okay, and what about New York's bid is bad

Frenchie: Bush #$%^^, America $%^^##, and something about a Stadium

Me: So you know something about the Stadium...what exactly

Frenchie: That they couldn't get it built because Bush doesn't know how to say Stadium

Me: Is that so

Frenchie: America $%^#@, VIVE OSAMA

Me: Vive Osama? Where did that come from

Frenchie: George W. Bush is a terrorist....America must die

Me: Whatever you say.....And you wonder why we hate you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

This has nothing to do with anti-american feelings, but it makes me wonder how intelligent somepeople are that post here.

New York was a long shot even before its problems surrounding its west side stadium. The Mayors games backfired, saying NY had NO other option if the west side stadium failed. Well we know that was a lie, he was just scaremongering, to make the politicans accept HIS plan.

Atlanta 96, weak public support, mediocre political support, Vancouver 2010... these are all factors that can't be dismissed so easily. And if you do, then you're in denial.

Bringing Ali to Singapore, will only refresh the IOCs minds back to Atlanta 96, which wasn't so long ago, and those games were probably the worst in recent times.

Giving the games to NYC over Paris, is to me... unimaginable. Even if I'd rather have the games in NY than Paris. It just won't happen.

What a kick in the teeth it would be to Paris and to a lesser extent London, if NYC with all its problems and issues, won the vote. The IOC would need to ask themselves some serious questions.

But of course, we all know they do as they please, but this would be a stones throw too far.

Ummm...this just in....Saying that your views aren't that of an Anti-American Terrorist, and then going on to slam the Country makes you an America Hating Hypocrite

I think your hiding Osama in your basement too..Heck, I'll bet you were cheering as those towers fell....And I'll bet your toasting the bubbly each time an American dies in Iraq because we killed your secret oil dealings with Saddam.

You disgust me Frenchie....

If you really wanted to provide insightful analysis instead of your America Hating Bullcrap you would have just said that Paris is the only previous bidder in the race, and that the IOC gave them the highest marks, and that they were screwed over twice in the last 20 years....Once as a personal favor (Albertville-Barcelona debacle) and the other to hand the Games to Beijing.

And by the way flag burner....When it is all said and done, any of the cities on the short list including Moscow are a safer choice then Athens ever was......and will be billions cheaper too.....And that's being nice by not mentioning that Beijing is going to blow more then a few billion on this thing.

Now go back to burning your flags and planning your terrorist attacks and leave the English speaking people alone. Your begging for these posts to be translated to French so you can blah blah blah and sound smart.

Slightly OTT reaction methinks. What's terrorism and flag-burning got to do with all of this?  :oo:

It's simple...Frenchie just wants to trash America instead of provide analysis as to why Paris will win on July 6th.

Let me translate into language even a three year old can understand

Me: So who's going to host the 2012 Olympic Games

Frenchie: Paris is...Because America $%^#

Me: But why

Frenchie: Because America $$%^#

Me: But what about Paris's plan is better then the others

Frenchie: (To the tune of Jingle Bells) America #$%% America $%^# They #$%%^ all the way.....Die Bush Die, And France Will Fly, La La La La La HEY!

Me: That's great....do you know anything about the subject

Frenchie: I know that America $%^#@...oh and Atlanta $%#%^ed too

Me: Why did Atlanta $%^#

Frenchie: Because they had a bomb....and because it was in America....And America $%^#$%

Me: That's fantastic...What did you think of Munich

Frenchie: Munich tres bien...That Stadium...Unbelieveable

Me: And what about the terrorist attack there

Frenchie: What attack...No attack happened

Me: The one where the Palestian terrorists killed the Israeli athletes

Frenchie: What are you talking about...No such thing happened.....

Me: I'm sure it didn't....

Frenchie: Though I'm sure that if it did happen...That because America loves Israel...that I wouldn't have a problem with it

Me: (Pause)....so getting back to 2012...What about the bid from Paris is good

Frenchie: VIVE LE FRANCE....VIVE LE FRANCE!

Me: Ummm...okay, and what about New York's bid is bad

Frenchie: Bush #$%^^, America $%^^##, and something about a Stadium

Me: So you know something about the Stadium...what exactly

Frenchie: That they couldn't get it built because Bush doesn't know how to say Stadium

Me: Is that so

Frenchie: America $%^#@, VIVE OSAMA

Me: Vive Osama? Where did that come from

Frenchie: George W. Bush is a terrorist....America must die

Me: Whatever you say.....And you wonder why we hate you.

right..can you give me a link to that converation?  :P   :oo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michelle Tradeau,June 21 2005,14:24]To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

O.K. - that's your version of a disgrace.  Here's mine.

Giving the games to a city that doesn't even have an Olympic Stadium started, with no clear explanation of how it is going to be funded afterwards (outside of a small grant from the marathon association) for maintenance after the Games are over except to say that it will be an "Olympic Legacy?"  C'mon - Athens has an Olympic Legacy themselves now - that will take 30 years of taxpayer dollars if they are lucky to pay for it. .

Perhaps your being Belgian doesn't make it as big an issue as those who are British and actually have to pay for the thing.

London's Olympic Stadium will be a 25,000 seat track stadium after the games competing against the gorgeous new multi-use Wembley Stadium for events. Face it - the proposed Olympic Stadium is going to sit there most of the year with nothing happening and not paying for itself.  

I like how you have no issue with spending taxpayer dollars beyond a "shortfall(s) beyond $250 million... "  We try to avoid that in the United States (except Seattle but that's another story).

New York, however, like Atlanta, has a plan that will allow for constant revenues to be generated at the conclusion of the games.  Something the IOC is going to be especially interested in after Athens.

Say what you will about Atlanta - some of it true - but in the end, they came out on top.    

Yes, New York has some major problems with their main stadium (and ONLY their main stadium btw).  And I do hope that London wears the crown if New York doesn't.  But there are flaws in the London bid that need to be admitted to before calling a potential New York win "a disgrace of the highest order."

*whew*  That felt good.  

Anywho - the conception for London's Stadium are very nice.  It reminds me of Mexico City with all the vibrant colors

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michelle Tradeau,June 21 2005,14:24]To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

O.K. - that's your version of a disgrace.  Here's mine.

Giving the games to a city that doesn't even have an Olympic Stadium started, with no clear explanation of how it is going to be funded afterwards (outside of a small grant from the marathon association) for maintenance after the Games are over except to say that it will be an "Olympic Legacy?"  C'mon - Athens has an Olympic Legacy themselves now - that will take 30 years of taxpayer dollars if they are lucky to pay for it. .

Perhaps your being Belgian doesn't make it as big an issue as those who are British and actually have to pay for the thing.

London's Olympic Stadium will be a 25,000 seat track stadium after the games competing against the gorgeous new multi-use Wembley Stadium for events. Face it - the proposed Olympic Stadium is going to sit there most of the year with nothing happening and not paying for itself.  

I like how you have no issue with spending taxpayer dollars beyond a "shortfall(s) beyond $250 million... "  We try to avoid that in the United States (except Seattle but that's another story).

New York, however, like Atlanta, has a plan that will allow for constant revenues to be generated at the conclusion of the games.  Something the IOC is going to be especially interested in after Athens.

Say what you will about Atlanta - some of it true - but in the end, they came out on top.    

Yes, New York has some major problems with their main stadium (and ONLY their main stadium btw).  And I do hope that London wears the crown if New York doesn't.  But there are flaws in the London bid that need to be admitted to before calling a potential New York win "a disgrace of the highest order."

*whew*  That felt good.  

Anywho - the conception for London's Stadium are very nice.  It reminds me of Mexico City with all the vibrant colors

Mayor's £10m pledge for venues

Ken Livingstone has pledged £10 million a year to ensure London's Olympic venues enjoy maximum usage in the years after the Games.

The Mayor of London said it was vital that the state-of-the-art facilities were enjoyed by both elite and community athletes after 2012.

And his backing would also help the facilities to host major international events long after the Olympics themselves were over.

"It would be an absolute scandal if we created these things and then saw them dismantled and not used," he said.

"They have to be available to the people of the city and of the deprived areas these Games are intended to regenerate.

"The other benefit of ensuring they stay open and in use is that it will help us bid for and stage a succession of world-class sporting events that will make London a major sporting capital."

The Mayor, speaking as London 2012 addressed the media at Athens' Main Press Centre, added: "With sports complexes of this kind, you always need a degree of subsidy. And the funding we are talking about is a thousandth of my budget.

"Compared to what it will bring to London, in terms of a constant rolling programme of major international events coming to what has been one of the most deprived areas of the country, it is a contribution to making sure the venues keep going and I believe it to be well worthwhile."

-----

Whether subsidy is the correct way of managing this is a debate we could have another day but the venues won't be white elephants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love when idiots talk out of their ass.

First of all, when do I type French on this board? I always type in English, since most of the people here speak and understand only that language.

Secondly, when did I start supporting Paris 2012?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Mexico will vote for NYC, the central american countries (I don't know who of them have a vote), like Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, etc will also vote for NYC because they prefer their money... :glare: But the south american countries (Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, etc) will vote for sure for Madrid. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Mexico will vote for NYC, the central american countries (I don't know who of them have a vote), like Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, etc will also vote for NYC because they prefer their money... :glare: But the south american countries (Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, etc) will vote for sure for Madrid. :)

Even with those votes, Madrid will suely be out in Round#2 :unclesam:  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

This has nothing to do with anti-american feelings, but it makes me wonder how intelligent somepeople are that post here.

New York was a long shot even before its problems surrounding its west side stadium. The Mayors games backfired, saying NY had NO other option if the west side stadium failed. Well we know that was a lie, he was just scaremongering, to make the politicans accept HIS plan.

Atlanta 96, weak public support, mediocre political support, Vancouver 2010... these are all factors that can't be dismissed so easily. And if you do, then you're in denial.

Bringing Ali to Singapore, will only refresh the IOCs minds back to Atlanta 96, which wasn't so long ago, and those games were probably the worst in recent times.

Giving the games to NYC over Paris, is to me... unimaginable. Even if I'd rather have the games in NY than Paris. It just won't happen.

What a kick in the teeth it would be to Paris and to a lesser extent London, if NYC with all its problems and issues, won the vote. The IOC would need to ask themselves some serious questions.

But of course, we all know they do as they please, but this would be a stones throw too far.

Ummm...this just in....Saying that your views aren't that of an Anti-American Terrorist, and then going on to slam the Country makes you an America Hating Hypocrite

I think your hiding Osama in your basement too..Heck, I'll bet you were cheering as those towers fell....And I'll bet your toasting the bubbly each time an American dies in Iraq because we killed your secret oil dealings with Saddam.

You disgust me Frenchie....

If you really wanted to provide insightful analysis instead of your America Hating Bullcrap you would have just said that Paris is the only previous bidder in the race, and that the IOC gave them the highest marks, and that they were screwed over twice in the last 20 years....Once as a personal favor (Albertville-Barcelona debacle) and the other to hand the Games to Beijing.

And by the way flag burner....When it is all said and done, any of the cities on the short list including Moscow are a safer choice then Athens ever was......and will be billions cheaper too.....And that's being nice by not mentioning that Beijing is going to blow more then a few billion on this thing.

Now go back to burning your flags and planning your terrorist attacks and leave the English speaking people alone. Your begging for these posts to be translated to French so you can blah blah blah and sound smart.

As far as I know Michelle is not french , don't support Paris and you have a very serious problem to solve...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michelle Tradeau,June 21 2005,14:24]To those of you saying NYC will win...

If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards.

Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce.

O.K. - that's your version of a disgrace.  Here's mine.

Giving the games to a city that doesn't even have an Olympic Stadium started, with no clear explanation of how it is going to be funded afterwards (outside of a small grant from the marathon association) for maintenance after the Games are over except to say that it will be an "Olympic Legacy?"  C'mon - Athens has an Olympic Legacy themselves now - that will take 30 years of taxpayer dollars if they are lucky to pay for it. .

Perhaps your being Belgian doesn't make it as big an issue as those who are British and actually have to pay for the thing.

London's Olympic Stadium will be a 25,000 seat track stadium after the games competing against the gorgeous new multi-use Wembley Stadium for events. Face it - the proposed Olympic Stadium is going to sit there most of the year with nothing happening and not paying for itself.  

I like how you have no issue with spending taxpayer dollars beyond a "shortfall(s) beyond $250 million... "  We try to avoid that in the United States (except Seattle but that's another story).

New York, however, like Atlanta, has a plan that will allow for constant revenues to be generated at the conclusion of the games.  Something the IOC is going to be especially interested in after Athens.

Say what you will about Atlanta - some of it true - but in the end, they came out on top.    

Yes, New York has some major problems with their main stadium (and ONLY their main stadium btw).  And I do hope that London wears the crown if New York doesn't.  But there are flaws in the London bid that need to be admitted to before calling a potential New York win "a disgrace of the highest order."

*whew*  That felt good.  

Anywho - the conception for London's Stadium are very nice.  It reminds me of Mexico City with all the vibrant colors

Mayor's £10m pledge for venues

Ken Livingstone has pledged £10 million a year to ensure London's Olympic venues enjoy maximum usage in the years after the Games.

The Mayor of London said it was vital that the state-of-the-art facilities were enjoyed by both elite and community athletes after 2012.

And his backing would also help the facilities to host major international events long after the Olympics themselves were over.

"It would be an absolute scandal if we created these things and then saw them dismantled and not used," he said.

"They have to be available to the people of the city and of the deprived areas these Games are intended to regenerate.

"The other benefit of ensuring they stay open and in use is that it will help us bid for and stage a succession of world-class sporting events that will make London a major sporting capital."

The Mayor, speaking as London 2012 addressed the media at Athens' Main Press Centre, added: "With sports complexes of this kind, you always need a degree of subsidy. And the funding we are talking about is a thousandth of my budget.

"Compared to what it will bring to London, in terms of a constant rolling programme of major international events coming to what has been one of the most deprived areas of the country, it is a contribution to making sure the venues keep going and I believe it to be well worthwhile."

-----

Whether subsidy is the correct way of managing this is a debate we could have another day but the venues won't be white elephants.

Nice post, but where is the money comining from?

The taxpayers, but Ken doesn't want to say that out loud.  Perhaps he should flash up pictures of what Montreal and Sydney and Athen's Stadiums look like so he can illustrate the "subsidys" that London's "legacy" might enjoy over the next 40 years.  

Look, I don't want to get into a debate with London supporters who aren't seeing the big picture.  Why don't we agree to disagree about each other's bids but be supportive of each others bids one way or the other?

I SUPPORT LONDON IF NEW YORK DOESN'T MAKE IT TO THE FINALS BUT PLEASE DON'T PISS ME OFF IN THE INTERIM.

Thank you.

Cheers. :kungfu:

*takes prozac*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice post, but where is the money comining from?

The taxpayers, but Ken doesn't want to say that out loud.

Look, I don't want to get into a debate with London supporters who aren't seeing the big picture.  Why don't we agree to disagree about each other's bids but be supportive of each others bids one way or the other?

Cheers!

I find the comment about London supporters not seeing the bigger picture highly condescending.

Why I do wish the New York bid every success comments by certain of its supporters whom seem to have a superiority complex detract from my overall feelings in this regard.

Why do you consider yourself the only one capable of seeing the 'Bigger Picture' as you call it?

Of course the money would come from tax payers doesn't everything in the end. But as has been pointed out it is a miniscule part of that budget and money that would probably be spent on similar ventures to help local communities in any case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice post, but where is the money comining from?

The taxpayers, but Ken doesn't want to say that out loud.

Look, I don't want to get into a debate with London supporters who aren't seeing the big picture.  Why don't we agree to disagree about each other's bids but be supportive of each others bids one way or the other?

Cheers!

I find the comment about London supporters not seeing the bigger picture highly condescending.

Why I do wish the New York bid every success comments by certain of its supporters whom seem to have a superiority complex detract from my overall feelings in this regard.

Why do you consider yourself the only one capable of seeing the 'Bigger Picture' as you call it?

Of course the money would come from tax payers doesn't everything in the end. But as has been pointed out it is a miniscule part of that budget and money that would probably be spent on similar ventures to help local communities in any case.

I don't get it. What is condescending?  London supporters have been quick over several months in pointing out New York's shortcomings - I am mererly doing the same about London's  

And nobody has addressed the issues over London's bid becoming a mirror of Montreal/Sydney/Athens . . .except Robert who quoted Kenny who essentially said that the taxpayers are going to be stuck with the bill.

Atlanta walked away with no debt thanks to the Olympics.  Will London be able to say the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice post, but where is the money comining from?

The taxpayers, but Ken doesn't want to say that out loud.

Look, I don't want to get into a debate with London supporters who aren't seeing the big picture.  Why don't we agree to disagree about each other's bids but be supportive of each others bids one way or the other?

Cheers!

I find the comment about London supporters not seeing the bigger picture highly condescending.

Why I do wish the New York bid every success comments by certain of its supporters whom seem to have a superiority complex detract from my overall feelings in this regard.

Why do you consider yourself the only one capable of seeing the 'Bigger Picture' as you call it?

Of course the money would come from tax payers doesn't everything in the end. But as has been pointed out it is a miniscule part of that budget and money that would probably be spent on similar ventures to help local communities in any case.

I don't get it. What is condescending?  London supporters have been quick over several months in pointing out New York's shortcomings - I am mererly doing the same about London's  

And nobody has addressed the issues over London's bid becoming a mirror of Montreal/Sydney/Athens . . .except Robert who quoted Kenny who essentially said that the taxpayers are going to be stuck with the bill.

Atlanta walked away with no debt thanks to the Olympics.  Will London be able to say the same?

LA haven't you got the memo?

If you dare speak out against London you are bombarded by a million supporters and accused of irrelevant things like "condesecending"

If you insult Paris, they just bash your country

If you inslut the Madrid bid you are personally insulted

(Note this just applies to the rude supporters from each group...not everyone...and yes...NYC has their share too)......oh well look at it this way these radical supporters will be crushed in 10 days anyway...and god help us if Moscow, NYC, or London are chosen...I think they'll be some sort of revolution....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The French hosted Albertville in just 1992, It's London's turn to win. They actually are TRYING HARD to win through intense lobbying.

IOC member in disguise me thinks ;P

You aren't allowed to think.....Because when you do..it's usually happy thoughts about horrible things happening to Americans.

As for the noted post....this just in...everybody except for you knows the story behind Albertville 92, and why it was Albertville 92 instead of Paris 92.

That's actually a Parisean advantage.....they should have hosted in 92, and they had one of the two best bids in 2008 (Toronto being the other)

Why the OC there didn't throw London in instead of Manchester in the 96? or was it 2000? race just is absurd when you think about it now. It's really going to cost London because Paris has lost twice...and both times throw a legit bid out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think those who think the Europeans with ambitions of hosting themselves someday are going to flock to New York in later rounds are a bit misguided.  Voting New York in 2012 actually hurts them because it leaves London and Paris in the race for 2016, and unless you are French or British, you really don't want that.  London's bid is getting stronger and stronger by the minute and the Paris bid is at its zenith right now.  You give NYC 2012, you're giving one of them 2016 and putting yourself off another 8 to 12 years beyond that.  You send 2012 to Paris or London, give 2016 to the USA and bump your chances for 2020 or 2024.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first ballot is always the interesting one for me. I hope that it will be live, in terms on the precedings on each ballot. For example, if the winner has been determined or, more likely, the first announcement of a city that has lost and another ballot will be made.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice post, but where is the money comining from?

The taxpayers, but Ken doesn't want to say that out loud.

Look, I don't want to get into a debate with London supporters who aren't seeing the big picture.  Why don't we agree to disagree about each other's bids but be supportive of each others bids one way or the other?

Cheers!

I find the comment about London supporters not seeing the bigger picture highly condescending.

Why I do wish the New York bid every success comments by certain of its supporters whom seem to have a superiority complex detract from my overall feelings in this regard.

Why do you consider yourself the only one capable of seeing the 'Bigger Picture' as you call it?

Of course the money would come from tax payers doesn't everything in the end. But as has been pointed out it is a miniscule part of that budget and money that would probably be spent on similar ventures to help local communities in any case.

I don't get it. What is condescending?  London supporters have been quick over several months in pointing out New York's shortcomings - I am mererly doing the same about London's  

And nobody has addressed the issues over London's bid becoming a mirror of Montreal/Sydney/Athens . . .except Robert who quoted Kenny who essentially said that the taxpayers are going to be stuck with the bill.

Atlanta walked away with no debt thanks to the Olympics.  Will London be able to say the same?

I was not making a general comment about being condescending only saying that to say 'London supporters did not get the big picture' was condescending as it implied that ALL London supporters were in some way ignorant compared with New York ones?

As to paying for them, you were making a comment about the funding of the legacy not the games which is a different matter altogether.

I believe London will make a profit and all the forecasts are pointing this way.

Were I will admit I am a bit aggrieved is that as a London taxpayer I will be paying for them to certain extent for years to come but that none of the potential profit is being set aside to offset this.

While I don't mind paying, I do feel that if they made the projected profits some, if not all of this money should be offset against what Londoners like myself are being asked to pay.

SOlympiadsW I challenge you to find a post of mine anywhere on these boards where I have made detrimental remarks about the New York bid. In fact I have always been very supportive of their bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...