What "new" region will be first to get the games?

[CalSwimmer]

With the battle underway for 2012 between the US and Europe (again) ....

If you had to bet the family farm, what "new" region of the world would you place your bet as the region with the best shot for landing the summer games first?

    - South America

    - SubSaharan Africa

    - North Africa/Middle East

    - Non-Russian Eastern Europe

    - South/South East Asia

My gut says that emotionally the IOC would love to see it in Cape Town, but the lack of finances needed for infrastructure and so on will prevent this from happening for awhile. Would South Africa put up US$10billion+ to hold a games with the country in an economic and health crisis? I'd say, regretably, not yet.

Rio and Buenos Aries are also attractive, but unstable.

North Africa? No. The Middle East? Istanbul could handle it, but right on the heels of Athens? Dubai could certainly afford it, but I doubt it will go anywhere in the region until terrorism, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, women's inclusion and the general instability of the region improve. These and other issues will keep the games out of the Middle East for the forseeable future.

That leaves Eastern Europe and Southern Asia. If NYC gets 2012 (by some miracle) then the 2016 games will be up for grabs in Europe somewhere --- possibly even in the east, like Prague, but most likely Paris or London.

Likewise if Europe gets 2012, then 2016 would look open to North America ––– NYC, Toronto or even an outside shot like San Francisco.

So I'm gonna bet that ––– although they're not hot on the rader screen right now ––– that in 2016 or 2020 we will see a wild card from southern or southeast asia (like Delhi, Bangkok, Singapore or Kuala Lumpur) become the first "new region" city to get a games.

I'd say that after 2020 (depending on developments in the world), Rio, Cape Town and others will be in the running for real.  

As for the winter games being such a perpetual northern hemispheric choice...

I'd say it's probably a race between Chile or New Zealand to see which becomes the first sourthern hemispheric winter games site. But don't hold your breath!

[Robert Henson]

I'd count Beijing as a "new" region.  

[Sir Rols]

Interesting chain of logic (and also one of the popular subjects of specualtion on these boards!)

It's intersting your thoughts on South-Southeast Asia. I don't think a lot of people give the area much thought, lumping it in with Asia in general. But yes, I could see Delhi, Kuala Lumpur or Bangkok as the next "new frontier" games. Certainly economically, the region is powering ahead. I don't count China as "new frontiers" any more. They've certainly joined the ranks of the credible future multiple hosts.

Assuming a 2016 "Race of the Americas" I could also imagine a NYC-South America (Rio?) showdown. I think NYC would be a stronger bet in such a race, but it could well be Latin America's best earliest chance.

Capetown? I have a feeling South Africa is methodically working up towards a serious 2020s bid. They're getting experience in hosting "big" events _ Rugby, Cricket and Soccer World Cups and a possible Commonwealth Games _ leaving them a realistic platform on which to base a bid for the Big One.

I hope we see a new frontiers hosting soon _ I think the Olympic movement will need it before too long. Too many "safe", predictable hostings are eventually going to leave a lot of the globe feeling disenfranchised when it comes to the games.

[KRATK]

I hope the next "new" region will be Southamerica... Rio, Buenos Aires, Sao Paulo or Santiago...

SE Asia??? Mmmm, maybe 2024... I don't know

[Faster]

The power and money lies in Europe, Japan, North America and Australia. its the fact of life that this regions will host a lot since they can afford it more then other countries.

I think the IOC should put up blocks against countries with high poverty, and other economic depressions since the olympics will only drain much needed money from the country

so China, India, South Africa, Egypt and Argentina would not host for a long time or until there finacise are in order

i also resent the fact that someone called the United Arab Emerites as part of the terrorist region.

UAE is one of the most progressive countries in the Middle-East and is as save as many European countries, this is with no known ties to international, regional, or national terrorism.

The United States as made more terrorist attacks then most Middle-Eastern countries including Jordan, Qatar, Lebenon, Syria, UAE, and Bahrain

[Kenadian]

My bet is the next new ground for the IOC will broken with a South American Olympic Games sometime in the next 20 years.  I think there will always be a tendancy to go to "safe" places because the Games are big and risky business for fragile economies and governments.

Athens was a big risk and we all know it.  Their government slacked in its organization and it is the smallest country to host the Summer Olympics since Finland hosted in 1952.

Beijing is also a bit of a risk, but the risk is political because a number of people, groups and countries have issues with the People's Republic of China - but a lot of companies are drooling to get into that billion strong nation.

Seoul was a risk because of the political situation with North Korea and at the time, the mighty Soviets didn't have relations with the South.

Mexico was a risk because it was the first developing nation to ever host the Olympics and city's combination of high mountain altitude air and pollution was considered a severe risk to athletes.

And to an extent, the glory that was Barcelona was also a bit of a risk because in 1986 Spain was still emerging from the decades old shadow of Franco who had died in the 1970's.

Some of the "safe" bets didn't always pan out so great either - terrorism in Munich & Atlanta, Montreal's debt, the large scale boycotts in Moscow and LA - no wonder Sydney was so revered from start to finish!

[Faster]

Nagano was a risk, PC will be a risk, Rio or Sao Paulo will be too.

But i do not think size and capiblity are connected, look at Atlanta is was a horrible and the USA is the largest developed country in the world.

I am sure countries like Portugal, Sweden, Thailand, Belgium, Netherlands and others could pull off successful olympics out of the new regions i think that Rio, Santiago, Bangkok, Dubai, Cape Town, and Cairo could pull of great Olympics give ten years and the determination of Sydney

i think the IOC should push back the prep time to eight years, and have a mandate that all major projects would have to be done two years before the games begin like Sydneys were

Sydney was the best Olympic games is history when it comes to the bottom line, and timing i think other cities looking at the olympcis should look at hiring the Sydney staff especially developing countries

[Sir Rols]

I really don't think you could call Sweden, Belgium or The Netherlands new frontiers when it comes to the games. Apart from all having already hosted SOGs (admittedly, in the dim-dark past), they are all prosperous western European countries.

Similarly, I don't think Nagano was a risk. Indeed, when they were awarded, I'm sure the IOC considered them in good, safe, prosperous Japanese hands.

One point, though. It seems that ever since the 2012 short list came out, just because nearly all the remaining bidders were big, "safe" cities, the idea has taken hold that the IOC are only going to be interested in such cities from now on. Even if Paris, London and NYC were all awarded games in the next few  hostings, and even the two or three other world cities in the same big league as them got games as well, what is the IOC going to do after that. Just keep on re-awarding them to the same hosts for time ever after. I don't think it was as much a matter of playing "safe" this time as not being able to ignore such huge, glamorous candidates. The wheel will turn eventually and the IOC will take "risks" in the future.

And anyway, as has been pointed out, a lot of the "safe" options of the past few decades haven't exactly lived up to their reputation.

[Faster]

my comment about Sweden, Belgium and others was referring to size not new cities

fifty years ago no one would have tought to give the olympics to say Beijing or Sydney but over time they have become safe cities to have the olympics in so more and mroe cities will be added to the safe list so this idea that they will continue to give the olympics to traditional safe cities is stupid

[Sir Rols]

my comment about Sweden, Belgium and others was referring to size not new cities

fifty years ago no one would have tought to give the olympics to say Beijing or Sydney but over time they have become safe cities to have the olympics in so more and mroe cities will be added to the safe list so this idea that they will continue to give the olympics to traditional safe cities is stupid

That's exactly the point I was trying to put _ It's ridiculous to think that the IOC has reverted to an eternal "safe, mega-cities only" policy. Some bidding campaigns, like 2012, are going to favour the biggies. Others, for a host of geopolitical, timing, economic and emotional reasons, are going to favour the chances of  new frontier candidates.

I'd also dispute that Sydney, even 50 years ago, would have been seen as an unlikely host. More than 50 years ago Melbourne was given them to host, and it is totally comparable to Sydney. Sydney hosted the Empire Games (the forerunner of the Commonwealth Games) in 1938. In the 2000 race, Sydney probably won because it was seen as the (politically) "safe" option over Beijing. And remember, when Melbourne won its bid, it did so by only ONE vote over Buenos Aires.

I also don't think that awarding the games to Stockholm, Amsterdam or Brussels tomorrow would be seen as a bold risk by the IOC. If anything, they'd also be probably considered as "safe" bidders now. Size is not the only criteria _ facilities, economy, infrastructure etc are probably more important than sheer size.

[Faster]

just to point it out the NOC, netherlands wants Rotterdam to be there next host

[I Love Minneapolis]

Like I said in another topic, cities like NYC and Toronto, alond with Manchester, Milan, etc. are not new frontiers. They are "new" hosts in an old environment. The only way you get new frontiers is going to places like Middle East, South America and Africa, of which S. America, IMO, will be the first to host.

[Faster]

Moscow, LA, Seoul, Atlanta, and Athens have or will lose billions of dollars combined, the ioc wants to go to countries that are stable, so countries that aren't will not get the olympics this is a determining factor in when and were new areas will host.

Five of the last six games have lost money, its time that the ioc takes change and only gives the olympics to cities like sydney for the summer and calgary/salt lake for the the winter, these cities have made money and they should be the way an olympics is run and heald, if a new area can do this great, but only cities that can do this have any right to host the games.

[Rogerioandrade]

I think that Southeast Asia or South America. In my POV, Southeast Asia (Kuala Lumpur, Cingapore) has a better chance than South America (Rio, Buenos Aires, Santiago)

[PatchMan]

Five of the last six games have lost money

It's easy to say an Olympics has lost money, but when all the tourist revenue and associated benefits eg. pride, feel-good, business interest and regeneration are factored in, most recent Olympics have been priceless.

[proudly SA]

Nagano was a risk, PC will be a risk, Rio or Sao Paulo will be too.

But i do not think size and capiblity are connected, look at Atlanta is was a horrible and the USA is the largest developed country in the world.

I am sure countries like Portugal, Sweden, Thailand, Belgium, Netherlands and others could pull off successful olympics out of the new regions i think that Rio, Santiago, Bangkok, Dubai, Cape Town, and Cairo could pull of great Olympics give ten years and the determination of Sydney

i think the IOC should push back the prep time to eight years, and have a mandate that all major projects would have to be done two years before the games begin like Sydneys were

Sydney was the best Olympic games is history when it comes to the bottom line, and timing i think other cities looking at the olympcis should look at hiring the Sydney staff especially developing countries

[sydney was the best Olympic games is history when it comes to the bottom line]

actually the '92 games, barcelona were the best in terms of bottom line.

south africa is ready to host the games, we are a sports mad nation wanting our chance. africa copntributes hugely to the olympics and as yet have still not hosted the olympics, the flame touched our continent for the first time since its inception for the '36 games.

the games in cape town will be beautiful games on a human scale. exactly what the ioc is looking for

[Sir Rols]

I think South Africa's chances of bringing the games to Africa will be excellent in 2020. 2012 and 2016 will be shares out between Europe and America, so I think 2020 is the big chance for a "new frontiers" games (unless Rio manages to pull off a surprise against NYC for 2016 _ assuming, of course, that NYC doesn't win 2012).

Asia would probably be South Africa's main competition for 2020, but I think Capetown would be able to get a lot of support from IOC members in the other continents.

[Faster]

i would like to see paris 2012 toronto 2016 2020 Capetown or Rio 2024 Berlin 2028 Capetown or Rio 2032 Singapore

[december stud]

Toronto 2016 <- Joke

Singapore <- Bigger Joke

[Faster]

Singapore is a very likely city to host so is toronto, i thinks its time for the city with the best bi d from 2008 to host the olympics. Singapore would be interesting because of the caning and gum laws

[Guardian]

Singapore is a very likely city to host so is toronto, i thinks its time for the city with the best bi d from 2008 to host the olympics. Singapore would be interesting because of the caning and gum laws

Don't think Malaysia would like that too much, especially if KL is thinking seriously of having a bid themselves.

[Faster]

Kl would be ok too

[jawnbc]

I think it will--and should be--South America. In fact, I think Rio should have Moscow's place on the current short list for 2012. So far only 2 SOG have been in the Southern Hemisphere (Melbourne 56 and Sydney 2000). Rio's plans were innovative and manageable; with proper corporate support the additional infrastructure would be entirely possible.

Capetown can't ever host the Games due to hotel space. There are only 2 cities on the African continent that possible could meet the hotel demands for a SOG: Cairo and Durban. Which is why the first international AIDS conference to be held in Africa was held in Durban, not Jo'burg or Capetown.New Zealand could host the WOG in Queenstown, as could Santiago Chile.

Bangkok could accomodate the SOG, but have there ever been a tropical SOG? I'm pretty confident Pyongchang will get the 2014 WOG (deservedly so), making Korea the second Asia host of the WOG (Japan having hosted twice).

[Citius Altius Fortius]

I think it will--and should be--South America. In fact, I think Rio should have Moscow's place on the current short list for 2012. So far only 2 SOG have been in the Southern Hemisphere (Melbourne 56 and Sydney 2000). Rio's plans were innovative and manageable; with proper corporate support the additional infrastructure would be entirely possible.

Capetown can't ever host the Games due to hotel space. There are only 2 cities on the African continent that possible could meet the hotel demands for a SOG: Cairo and Durban. Which is why the first international AIDS conference to be held in Africa was held in Durban, not Jo'burg or Capetown.New Zealand could host the WOG in Queenstown, as could Santiago Chile.

Bangkok could accomodate the SOG, but have there ever been a tropical SOG? I'm pretty confident Pyongchang will get the 2014 WOG (deservedly so), making Korea the second Asia host of the WOG (Japan having hosted twice).

I agree with you on

Rio de Janeiro (SOG), Queenstown (WOG), Santiago de Chile (WOG) and Bangkok (SOG)...

Concerning South Africa: I have some doubts about Durban - the city is not really known and therefore comparable with Lille, Sevilla, Birmingham, Leipzig, (etc. etc.) - it would have problems in the international competition - the international AIDS conference is something different to Olympic Games - furthermore I would like to see the 2014 Olympic Winter Games in Östersund (SWE) instead in PyeongChang.

What do you think of Kuala Lumpur?

[English Kev]

Africa - the campaign has already begun . One would initially suggest South Africa as it is the richest out of the bunch . It will take some time to convince the world though . I think Africa deserves it in a sporting context  but affording it and being able to cope with security are entirely different matters .