Jump to content

Bid Index Update - 3/22/09


Recommended Posts

The rating, nor the ranking for that matter, is not that important.

From the latest bid index, I read two things (and I make the exact same analysis):

- as far as the momentum is concerned, Chicago is losing ground at the moment while the other three are maintaining a steady pace; nothing critical for Chicago at this stage yet but they definitely need to spin their way out of the USOC / IOC revenue split soon

- all the cities are quite close and I think, at this stage, any of the four cities can be out after the first round (I suspect each city will get around 25 votes in the first round, so one vote may make the difference); and yeah, in this context disregarding Madrid would be foolish: if there is one bid that is good at ensuring it has enough votes to survive round #1 it's Madrid. As for Chicago, it has to make sure that not many members will vote for Rio out of sympathy during round#1 thinking voting to Chicago aftwerwards as Chicago could miss the cut (I actually see Chicago as having a 50/50 chance of being either the ultimate winner or being eliminated after the first round)/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rating, nor the ranking for that matter, is not that important.

From the latest bid index, I read two things (and I make the exact same analysis):

- as far as the momentum is concerned, Chicago is losing ground at the moment while the other three are maintaining a steady pace; nothing critical for Chicago at this stage yet but they definitely need to spin their way out of the USOC / IOC revenue split soon

- all the cities are quite close and I think, at this stage, any of the four cities can be out after the first round (I suspect each city will get around 25 votes in the first round, so one vote may make the difference); and yeah, in this context disregarding Madrid would be foolish: if there is one bid that is good at ensuring it has enough votes to survive round #1 it's Madrid. As for Chicago, it has to make sure that not many members will vote for Rio out of sympathy during round#1 thinking voting to Chicago aftwerwards as Chicago could miss the cut (I actually see Chicago as having a 50/50 chance of being either the ultimate winner or being eliminated after the first round)/

Well between the Shakeups in the USOC and the Revenue Issues with the IOC Chicago may indeed lose in the first couple of rounds. Something not mentioned of is that Chicago was awarded in the past thou for the beginning of the 20th century. I don't think I it really weighs on the IOC members minds but also you think of another pattern with repeat cities being Athens 2004 , London 2012 . Could there indeed be a frontier City/Country alternated with a prior host pattern developing. with Sydney 2000, Athens 2004, Beijing 2008, London 2012 there might be a pattern developing . I include Sydney as a first time city . If Rio was to win 2016 then Capetown would be advised to bid on 2024 instead of 2020.

Unless the USOC is able to make a new Deal with the IOC it could very well be Chicago 2020 instead of Chicago 2016. That is why Rio also can have the edge simply Via Location and an excuse that would be plausible of bringing the games to a continent that they have never been hosted with great time zone advantages for US Broadcasters. Rio despite a realistic bid estimate may lose because they have laid that canard out on the table. The IOC may indeed not like that realism that would certainly have every major city thinking of shelving bidding on the Olympics. The IOc may be prepared to take the risk that we could see another London 2012 in Madrid , Chicago or Tokyo with mis estimates for their bids. Either way it is a hell of a problem for the IOC.

The USOC is not going to give a dime to the IOC when they are trying to trim 7 million off the annual budget unless indeed that 7 million a year is meant be part of a settlement with the IOC.

All this is probably why the Bid Index is pretty much a dead heat for a race. I wonder if the Bid Index accounts for the short time that the new athlete IOC members have been brought in ? I think of a Frankie Fredericks, Becky Scott and Saku Koivo among others. On one hand the recent athletes might be a bit more critical for bids or open minded .

Jim Jones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is virutally a dead heat isn't it?

16 points seperated the top bid and the bottom bid at this stage in the 2012 race (Nov 04 - http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/bidindex/1100230501.html) but this time around we've got a spread of barely 3 points.

It's anyone's guess and I'm not sure what to read into this.

It is anyone's games to win or lose basically. I think Chicago may be the most wounded by this. We could see indeed history made with Tokyo being the first non European city to be awarded by two bid elections. Two Asian Capital cities in the space of 8 years could be possible just like we have seen Two European Capital Cities in 8 years . We are not going to see Madrid there is no way you will see the games in European Cities 75 percent of the time between 2004 and 2016.

Settling all this with a compromise again is RIO LOL.

Jim jones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

disregarding Madrid would be foolish: if there is one bid that is good at ensuring it has enough votes to survive round #1 it's Madrid.

I've always stated that. Their showing for 2012 shows they still have the power and influence to get the votes.

The closer we get the more interesting and unpredictable its becoming.

My money is on Chicago though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is virutally a dead heat isn't it?

16 points seperated the top bid and the bottom bid at this stage in the 2012 race - but this time around we've got a spread of barely 3 points.

It's anyone's guess and I'm not sure what to read into this.

Obviously it is a very close race at this stage and a lot of IOC minds still to be made up as to where their second preference votes will be cast after the 1st round elimination.Clearly no firm favourite has yet emerged and the closeness of the BidIndex ratings suggests that sentiment is probably going to play a very large part in deciding which of them to go for.

I feel that Rio de Janeiro will win out if sentiment becomes the only way to distinguish between them.Chicago,Tokyo and Madrid will have to do a lot of careful lobbying between now and October to win over IOC members's second preference votes if voting in the 1st round splits evenly 4 ways along the lines of the BidIndex.Rio,for its part,will have to make sure it remains the sentimental favourite and not to do anything to scare off IOC members in the next seven months or be overtaken by some clever lobbying from the other cities.

At this stage,it seems to be all to play for!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do tend to think that momentum is everything in these races, and while I don't think anybody's doing anything particularly wrong at this stage, yeah, if anybody's made any stumbles so far it's been Chicago that's had a few concerns creep in. But it seems everybody's being particularly careful. Actually, if anybody's had any positive momentum lately, I'd say it's been Rio that's been working the rounds quite well of the big sports administration gatherings lately. I would have, and have been, saying that Chicago was clear favourite to now, but the race seems to be developing tighter than most, and pretty well any of the shortlisters I could reasonably see do it at the moment - though I still think either of the Americas bids have the edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone is right that the first round elimination is the key

If Chicago is out first, Madrid goes next and its down to Tokyo and Rio

If its Madrid, Tokyo is next and its down to Chicago and Rio

If its Tokyo, Madrid is next and its down to Chicago and Rio

If its Rio, than all bets are off, Rio going first is the only way I see a Madrid victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do tend to think that momentum is everything in these races, and while I don't think anybody's doing anything particularly wrong at this stage, yeah, if anybody's made any stumbles so far it's been Chicago that's had a few concerns creep in. But it seems everybody's being particularly careful. Actually, if anybody's had any positive momentum lately, I'd say it's been Rio that's been working the rounds quite well of the big sports administration gatherings lately. I would have, and have been, saying that Chicago was clear favourite to now, but the race seems to be developing tighter than most, and pretty well any of the shortlisters I could reasonably see do it at the moment - though I still think either of the Americas bids have the edge.

Well I will agree with you on all you are saving in regards to momentum and I really think Rio's Rise started with actually making the Shortlist over Doha.

We could divine that Doha certainly went outside the bounds of what is required for Scheduling of the Games for the America TV Networks but could it also be that the IOC saw something very dangerous as in the Games really being bought by Qatar. The other body there may of thought could be the IOC making 2016 the year the games go to South America Finally ?

I am actually a bit shocked that the Math for the Bid Index has turned in this result but a United States Candidate City is disadvantaged by History in the case of the summer games. Tokyo I think would be strong no matter what . The Japanese are very through with everything they do. Madrid Well if you can't learn from the last time you lost and lost in a respectable manner then it would be very surprising . Madrid has learned from 2012 but still unrealistic to think the games in the TV age would be in Europe consecutive times and 75 percent of the Hosting from 2004 to 2016 it is not going to happen even with a technically sound bid. Geopolitics and Money will be at play .

Have Rio 2016 put together a winner ? Well maybe .

Jim jones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If its Rio, than all bets are off, Rio going first is the only way I see a Madrid victory.

Which is NOT going to happen. Very unlikely that Madrid will win it.

Yeah, Tokyo technically sound...but we've all seen that before...

This early momentum for Rio is great. Then, of course, you will have the G8 meeting this summer where Obama will be the new kid and star on the block. how much he campaigns for Chicago is what will spell Chicago's success. That and the meeting between the USOC and the IOC next week re USOC's shares of monies earned from US sponsors and networks. If those 2 fall into place, nothing the other cities do will help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is NOT going to happen. Very unlikely that Madrid will win it.

Yeah, Tokyo technically sound...but we've all seen that before...

This early momentum for Rio is great. Then, of course, you will have the G8 meeting this summer where Obama will be the new kid and star on the block. how much he campaigns for Chicago is what will spell Chicago's success. That and the meeting between the USOC and the IOC next week re USOC's shares of monies earned from US sponsors and networks. If those 2 fall into place, nothing the other cities do will help.

Also Barron lets Face it if Obama by Mid summer is not having a positive effect on the Global Economy with the spending measures and it gets worse then he will certainly be the lightning rod at the G8. The G8 summit has very little to do with the IOC normally but these are far from normal times . If the USOC and IOC resolve the issue of American Share then I think they raise their chances but the thing that really is the Chicago weakness is the lack of 100 percent government guarantee.

That is as important to the IOC as the Sponsor and Tv rights shares they are battling over with the USOC. Considering that Vancouver 2010 hit a wall with Federal Government Commitment a few years back and the city is having its credit rating downgraded over the Athletes Village fiasco the IOC would probably want to avoid that type of new in the future as it is negative for the games. A deja vu of Montreal to a small degree.

Jim jones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wishful thinking cslopes.

This doesn't suggest "people don't believe in Chicago's bid" at all; you're reading far too much into it. If I were you I'd take those rose tinted glasses off. If your favoured city's bid team has the same attitude towards a strong competitor like Chicago, they'll certainly lose the vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wishful thinking cslopes.

This doesn't suggest "people don't believe in Chicago's bid" at all; you're reading far too much into it. If I were you I'd take those rose tinted glasses off. If your favoured city's bid team has the same attitude towards a strong competitor like Chicago, they'll certainly lose the vote.

Not always the strongest bid wins, look what happened with the 2014 Winter Games. Sochi surely wasn't the best bid but in spite of this it won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not always the strongest bid wins, look what happened with the 2014 Winter Games. Sochi surely wasn't the best bid but in spite of this it won.

Your point being? I didn't say anything which contradicted that did I? I was just saying that cslopes notion that "people don't believe in Chicago's bid" is silly and wishful thinking on his part.

Well thats been true for 2014, 2012, 2010, 2008, 2006 and 2004. The last best bid to win was SLC

Once again, the word 'best' becomes a synonym for 'technically safest'. I happen to think the best bid in the true sense of the word did win in 2012. :) BUt it's hardly worth going over the 2012 arguments again.

Just a reminder that 'best' does not = least risky. Too often it's taken that way on these forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and right now I don't believe Chicago has the "strongest" or "best" bid per se. I think all of the bids have their strengths and weaknesses, but I do believe some here underestimate Chicago's ability to host a fantastic Games - definitely better than Atlanta, and could be better than LA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not any worse than Seoul did. And everything is consensual. You can't have copulation without 2 bodies.

The bad apples in the IOC gladly partook of what was being offered -- and some ACTUALLY ASKED!!

And let's not forget that most of the bad apples in the IOC were expelled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...