jfig24 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 how good would it chances be? With London now hosting the 2012 Olympics, I think it is very unlikely that a European city would be picked to host the 2016 games. I think the same can be said for an Asian country since Beijing is hosting in 2008. I think NYC would probably be a front runner for the 2016 bid. I have read a couple of postings about Toronto possibly putting in another bid for the Summer Games, but with the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, I don't think Canada would pursue a Summer Games bid. I do believe though that if there is a good quality bid from a South American country (Argentina? Brazil? Chile?) or an African country (South Africa? Morocco?), NYC would probably not be the favorite since the IOC would love to bring the games to South America or Africa. I am unhappy that NYC was not picked as the 2012 host, but I am extremely happy for London. What does everyone else think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfig24 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 sorry, just realized I should have posted this in the future bids forum instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahsing888 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 NYC is not automatic for the USA. It still has to beat out other American cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewYork2016 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 NYC is not automatic for the USA. It still has to beat out other American cities. I was trying to listen to a conversation with Mike Moran from the USOC and a reporter yesterday at Rockefeller Center, that if NYC doesn't win, he's not sure if NYC will still be the USOC candidate because the past US Summer Games candidates were 1st try winners. And there was no rule in the USOC books that they have to give them 2 tries. We don't know what'll happen right now but one thing is already sure. They've already announced they'll open the bidding process again for 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 Do you see NYC giving up? I don't. And I still like the Flushing Meadows conglomeration of venues. Mike Moran talks thru his hat. What is he talking about 'first-time bid winners'. That was only Atlanta. LA - 3x; Lake Placid - 2x; Salt Lake - 3x (altho not consecutive). THe USOC stayed with Detroit for 4 tries. Moran should retire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSTOUT1221 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 I think NYC should keep bidding - and I think the USOC should give them one more shot. The momentum all but died when the stadium was voted down IMO. I would prefer a Manhattan stadium personally but who knows if a big project like that will ever happen in NYC again. But I think NYC 2016 has a great chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooter133 Posted July 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 I think that NYC would be the favorite in the 2016 race since London was picked today. However, as others have said, it sounds like the USOC will re-open the bidding process to other American cities. And judging by the timeframes the USOC used for this election, the process for 2016 will begin very soon, if they follow the same timeframe. For example, the candidate cities would be picked by October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooter133 Posted July 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 I think that NYC would be the favorite in the 2016 race since London was picked today. However, as others have said, it sounds like the USOC will re-open the bidding process to other American cities. And judging by the timeframes the USOC used for this election, the process for 2016 will begin very soon, if they follow the same timeframe. For example, the candidate cities would be picked by October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooter133 Posted July 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 I think that NYC would be the favorite in the 2016 race since London was picked today. However, as others have said, it sounds like the USOC will re-open the bidding process to other American cities. And judging by the timeframes the USOC used for this election, the process for 2016 will begin very soon, if they follow the same timeframe. For example, the candidate cities would be picked by October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOlympiadsW Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 I think that NYC would be the favorite in the 2016 race since London was picked today. However, as others have said, it sounds like the USOC will re-open the bidding process to other American cities. And judging by the timeframes the USOC used for this election, the process for 2016 will begin very soon, if they follow the same timeframe. For example, the candidate cities would be picked by October. yea you are right about that...actually by this point back for the 2012 race they already had begun.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 From MSNBC... Peter Ueberroth, president of the U.S. Olympic Committee, said New York — despite its energetic campaign — would not gain any special status if it entered the race to be the U.S. candidate for 2016.“We will have a new process for the next four years,” he said. “We’ll open it up.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewYork2016 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 It's confirmed... We should now put the blame on Silver and Bruno. Moutawakel, the Head of the Evaluation Commission, suggested in an interview with a WABC-7 news reporter, to avoid the uncertainty and the problems that plagued the bid with the NYSCC. Now, if NYC2012 will make sure that their venues won't be a problem for 2016, they'll surely be the frontrunner for the IOC once it's chosen by the USOC again to bid. Follow the IOC's suggestions and stay confident, not arrogant, try to seduce them into biting the apple, and there you go, you'll get your chance to host. Los Angeles, San Francisco and Houston has expressed interest to bid for the USOC nod. But with the experience NYC2012 gained from this process, it will be hard for the USOC to deny the City a 2nd chance. Like what I've said on another post in the NYC2012 thread, it could be really the Americas' turn in 2016. But the USOC must not be arrogant and overconfident and send a message to the IOC that, ok it's our turn, we'll give you Mehoopany, Pennsylvania or Elko, Nevada as our entry. That would just irk the IOC. Choosing NYC in this process will be better for the USOC and the IOC. I just hope NYC2012 will still pursue 2016. They have everything in place. The only problem I think that they'll encounter is the Olympic Village. The solution... move it near the stadium at Willets Point. That will be an instant Olympic Park that neither London2012 nor Paris2012 had proposed. They chose NYC in anticipation of a great bidding competition from the world's greatest cities. NYC's momentum and chances were killed, IMO, when Silver and Bruno rejected the project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 Impeach them!! String 'em up!!! You know where to send your "love" letters!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahsing888 Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 NYC will not be a favorite for 2016. The IOC is not very fond of the USA, and NYC is very very USA. Americans will have to understand there are anti-American feelings out there. It's been made worse by the Salt lake City scandal involving embarassment to the IOC. Anti-American feelings in the IOC will take 1 or 2 generations to fade away, if nothing else goes wrong. 1 or 2 generations in the IOC is about 10 years, at least. San Francisco, being "less obtrusively American" than NYC, may have a slim chance in 10 years. Even American haters have a good feeling towards San Francisco. (Technically L.A. is the most logical American site, hardly anything needs to be built, the ultimate frugal Olympics. But LA will never get it's 3rd Olympics.) Rio failed to make top 5 in 2012. They should make top 5 easily next time. The first game in South America will be very very special. The IOC is already drooling over that continent, if Brazil can technically pull it off. Just like Beijing is very very special (although it's really not a great place for the games). NYC will not be very very special to the world, it'll be just a more crowded Atlanta. Even if it's worth billions more for east coast prime time TV. New Yorkers will continue to think the brute force American way, and will continue to fail. Think "world". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 6, 2005 Report Share Posted July 6, 2005 NYC will not be a favorite for 2016. The IOC is not very fond of the USA, and NYC is very very USA. Americans will have to understand there are anti-American feelings out there. It's been made worse by the Salt lake City scandal involving embarassment to the IOC. Anti-American feelings in the IOC will take 1 or 2 generations to fade away, if nothing else goes wrong. 1 or 2 generations in the IOC is about 10 years, at least. San Francisco, being "less obtrusively American" than NYC, may have a slim chance in 10 years. Even American haters have a good feeling towards San Francisco. (Technically L.A. is the most logical American site, hardly anything needs to be built, the ultimate frugal Olympics. But LA will never get it's 3rd Olympics.) Rio failed to make top 5 in 2012. They should make top 5 easily next time. The first game in South America will be very very special. The IOC is already drooling over that continent, if Brazil can technically pull it off. Just like Beijing is very very special (although it's really not a great place for the games). NYC will not be very very special to the world, it'll be just a more crowded Atlanta. Even if it's worth billions more for east coast prime time TV. New Yorkers will continue to think the brute force American way, and will continue to fail. Think "world". Sorry to disagree with you, Ahsing888. You're quite WRONG. So, really, you think you know more than the collective leadership of the USOC which has been at this for 80 years or so? It was just Europe's time this year. I mean you're entitled to your views. But they're somewhat off. I have many European friends and others. They say San Francisco is "beautiful" (and all the more so because I live in the Bay Area now, but that's another story...) :laugh: but New York has that certain energy. Well, I feel sorry for you that you seem to focus on 'negative aspects.' I guess you view your life as a 'half-empty' glass rather than a 'half-full' one. I don't believe you have more wisdom than a whole committee of over 130 people (the USOC) which voted NYC over SF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan in Montréal Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 Impeach them!! String 'em up!!! You know where to send your "love" letters!! Ahh - you should all be thankful! Look at the developing financial mess in Vancouver... They're already 40% over budget and are now talking of cutting back on some of the venues. And we're only half-way through 2005! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 If NYC does go after 2016, it would be going in as a very firm favourite after last night's vote. As has been pointed out, 2016 won't be going to Europe, Asia is unlikely, and any other new frontiers bid might be four years too early. But thyere is one important lesson from last night for NYC _ just because it will go in as a favourite, it can't take it for granted or get arrogant and complacent that it will win. It will have to fight hard, no matter what or how easy the competition appears to be, otherwise it could risk becoming another Athens 96, Beijing 2000 or Paris 2012! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 If NYC does go after 2016, it would be going in as a very firm favourite after last night's vote. As has been pointed out, 2016 won't be going to Europe, Asia is unlikely, and any other new frontiers bid might be four years too early. But thyere is one important lesson from last night for NYC _ just because it will go in as a favourite, it can't take it for granted or get arrogant and complacent that it will win. It will have to fight hard, no matter what or how easy the competition appears to be, otherwise it could risk becoming another Athens 96, Beijing 2000 or Paris 2012! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.x Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 NYC will for sure be up high in the 2016 list if it does bid, but I'm not so sure whether or not it will be the frontrunner. We still don't know the list of cities bidding and 2016 won't be decided until 2009, that's almost exactly 4 years from now. Ahh - you should all be thankful! Look at the developing financial mess in Vancouver... They're already 40% over budget and are now talking of cutting back on some of the venues. And we're only half-way through 2005! If only the construction economy wasn't booming so much in B.C. It's driving up the cost of labour and materials sky high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahsing888 Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 The USOC thinks "American". There's no right or wrong. The IOC does not think "American". The rest of the world may be even anti-American. The USOC's choice, NYC2012, barely better than hapless Moscow . . . . so much for the wisdom of USOC American thinking. May be, SFO could have at least beaten out Madrid . . . . . . The IOC will not give it to NYC within 10 years, no matter how good New Yorkers think of NYC and that "certain energy". Who wants another Atlanta. Obviously it's my opinion and a prediction, we'll know in 10 years. Some even think Salt Lake will be the last American Olympics . . . . . although I don't agree. SFO's chances are not that good either, but I think it's the only hope for the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 Wrong. Very wrong. Disagree highly. You're reading the wrong cup of tea leaves, Ahsing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewYork2016 Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 Ok, where shall I begin... NYC will not be a favorite for 2016. The IOC is not very fond of the USA, and NYC is very very USA. Americans will have to understand there are anti-American feelings out there. It's been made worse by the Salt lake City scandal involving embarassment to the IOC.First of all, I do admit, there is anti-American feelings out there. But do these people hate you if you're going to pour in your money to them? Definitely not! 2016 TV Rights is up for grabs. 2012 received bids from the CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox. Just imagine just how the TV rights for 2016 would be a cash cow for the IOC if NYC is in the race. Take out NYC or even the USA, then the money from the US is out too. Salt Lake City is far and away already. They should've forgotten it by now. San Francisco, being "less obtrusively American" than NYC, may have a slim chance in 10 years. Even American haters have a good feeling towards San Francisco. (Technically L.A. is the most logical American site, hardly anything needs to be built, the ultimate frugal Olympics. But LA will never get it's 3rd Olympics.) San Francisco "less obtrusively American" than NYC? I totally disagree with this. The ambience on some SF neighborhoods might be a little European but all in all, SF is so American. Just look at the traffic. It's more American than NYC. NYC has the largest public transportation in the USA, and public transportation like trains and buses is the chosen mode of transportation by Europeans. Though most of the landmarks here are iconic American structures, politics and New Yorkers lifestyle are unique to the common American lifestyle everywhere in the nation. Rio failed to make top 5 in 2012. They should make top 5 easily next time. The first game in South America will be very very special. The IOC is already drooling over that continent, if Brazil can technically pull it off. Just like Beijing is very very special (although it's really not a great place for the games).The IOC is all about its image. And it wants Cities to compete for them and pursue them. Rio and an African City will make the cut in order for them to make it interesting.NYC will not be very very special to the world, it'll be just a more crowded Atlanta. Even if it's worth billions more for east coast prime time TV.New Yorkers will continue to think the brute force American way, and will continue to fail. Think "world". All the more reason that the USOC should choose NYC because it has the experience now and will entice the IOC to choose the USA. The USOC can't sleep nor be too complacent that they'll get 2016 because the IOC didn't Paris2012 arrogance and complacency. The USOC should go to its best bet, and right now, NYC is in a great position to topple what it did in Singapore. Just as long as it'll polish and iron out kinks on the plan, NYC will get the USOC nod. It gave Anchorage 2 tries before giving up, why not give up on the largest media market and the largest potential cash cow for the USOC and IOC when they have a chance to do it? Los Angeles hosted twice already. It'll be hard to convince the IOC to give it to them. Although London did it, it fought hard to get it. San Francisco would be too sprawled, even with a 49ers Stadium in the City. NYC had presented a great plan, with only 3 venues outside the City. NYC is the best bet for the USOC to grab the IOC's nod. And I do hope that NYC2012 would still continue onto 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.x Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 The war in Iraq and other stuff like that certainly created "anti-American" feelings and for some or many IOC members, it definetely was a factor BUT it was not a decisive factor. But add in to the other flaws NYC had, things did add up to a lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 And it was just too soon to have another Games in the U.S. I mean there was just one 3 years ago -- which by the way, I heard on a number of the MSNBC reports made $100 million. So the last 3 Olympics in the US have been in the black for $333,000,000!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOlympiadsW Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 The USOC thinks "American". There's no right or wrong. The IOC does not think "American". The rest of the world may be even anti-American. The USOC's choice, NYC2012, barely better than hapless Moscow . . . . so much for the wisdom of USOC American thinking.May be, SFO could have at least beaten out Madrid . . . . . . The IOC will not give it to NYC within 10 years, no matter how good New Yorkers think of NYC and that "certain energy". Who wants another Atlanta. Obviously it's my opinion and a prediction, we'll know in 10 years. Some even think Salt Lake will be the last American Olympics . . . . . although I don't agree. SFO's chances are not that good either, but I think it's the only hope for the U.S. wow you are a clueless and ingorant individidual...you are very wrong, and are only proving you know nothing about the IOC and Olympic bids...please stop posting your incorrect garbage fool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.