Jump to content

Rio De Janeiro - Ioc Evaluation Report


Recommended Posts

As pointed previously, the not-yet-accomplished WC 2014 will be a drag for 2016. And if the RIO supporters don't see that, then you guys shouldn't be on the IOC. Sorry; you asked.

Is it any likely that Rio might not host neither the opening nor closing matches/ceremonies in 2014?

They could preserve Rio by using Sao Paulo, Brasilia or some place in the Amazon for these occasions.

But I don't know if this decision can be made before 2nd October.

I didn't read the reports thoroughly but I think as a whole it was positive for Rio indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it any likely that Rio might not host neither the opening nor closing matches/ceremonies in 2014?

They could preserve Rio by using Sao Paulo, Brasilia or some place in the Amazon for these occasions.

But I don't know if this decision can be made before 2nd October.

I didn't read the reports thoroughly but I think as a whole it was positive for Rio indeed.

No way. Rio is the sole host city to have an 80.000+ stadium, a requirement for the WC Final. Moreover, CBF HQ is in Rio, Havelange and Ricardo Teixeira are cariocas and there is a national sentiment that we must avenge the 1950's final and win the WC in Maracana. No other stadium has the same mystique as this nearly 60 year-old monument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A mainly solid, if unspectacular report.

It's not bad or overly criticial, and given the sentimentality which goes with the possibility of a first South American host, that's fine. All Rio needed to do was not fall at this hurdle and it hasn't. So it still goes into the vote as slight favourite I think.

That said, the world cup "clash" was mentioned in much more blatent terms than I was expecting. We'll see whether that's picked up on in due course...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the EC Report was as nice to Rio as it possibly could be. I definitely believe Rio is the favorite to win.

Rio maintains it's position with the momentum. I admit that I am concerned about Chicago pulling out a victory.

As we speak, I am writing a letter to Obama begging him to go to Copenhagen!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read a little more the report, some conclusions of mine:

1 - It seems to me the EC simply let the doors open to any decision, giving reasons for each city to be chosen or not.

2 - Being so, noting has changed, because they are leveled. Voters will choice according to their own criteria;

3 - The EC couldn't have writen a better report about Rio;

4 - Despite what I say in the numbers 1 and 2, Madrid report bet the heart of the bid. If, and I mean just this, IF, someone was looking for a reason to wipe Madrid out, there it is.

5 - EC report about Chicago just emphasises domestic concerns on finances, maybe with the same proposal I said about Madrid.

6 - Tokyo goes on being untouchable, unless by public support. And boring, boring, boring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rio's bid is still not 100% but it certainly stands out amongst the four, and they could seal the deal by making a political development on transportation project(s) within the month.

I'm not convinced the world cup would affect marketing the games, if anything they could be tied in via allowances made by FIFA and more people would become Olympically-aware thanks to the 2014 cup. People who might think of working for the organizing committee, volunteering, etc. could possibly sign on earlier and working groups could start quick and at full speed. I do empathize with the perceived downside, such as attention dividing sponsorship, but I'm convinced the pros outweigh the cons. What could be a better test event for the 2016 games than the next most popular and competed-in sports event (outside of the Winter Olympics) in the world? They are two years apart, and the WC tournament is instantly forgettable for many people (when compared to the Olympics) because, well, only one team wins and just a few countries are in contention near the end of the month.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rio's bid is still not 100% but it certainly stands out amongst the four, and they could seal the deal by making a political development on transportation project(s) within the month.

I'm not convinced the world cup would affect marketing the games, if anything they could be tied in via allowances made by FIFA and more people would become Olympically-aware thanks to the 2014 cup. People who might think of working for the organizing committee, volunteering, etc. could possibly sign on earlier and working groups could start quick and at full speed. I do empathize with the perceived downside, such as attention dividing sponsorship, but I'm convinced the pros outweigh the cons. What could be a better test event for the 2016 games than the next most popular and competed-in sports event (outside of the Winter Olympics) in the world? They are two years apart, and the WC tournament is instantly forgettable for many people (when compared to the Olympics) because, well, only one team wins and just a few countries are in contention near the end of the month.

I agree. I've always thought WC 2014 could be considered as much a positive as a negative for the Rio bid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. I've always thought WC 2014 could be considered as much a positive as a negative for the Rio bid.

And that was what happend, actually. WC is reported as positive while helps the city to improve its infrastructure as well as a negative point for marketing. I think sponsors know the differences between both events, the people they reach accross the world. I can't see marketing as something that can not be solved. I believe both event's appeals and Rio's as well may create a sinergy. And that will be more than good for WC, OG and Rio.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it's not the same. Times are different; the 2 events are MORE DEMANDING than ever.

Being this the question - the 2 events being MORE DEMANDING than ever - Sir, I think a new country was found in these different times. One that can host both events and intends to spend whatever is need to do that. It's time to think a little about this, Sir.

Don't need make your considerations right now. I'm going to sleep. I won´t read it til tomorrow's morning.

Sir, may I ask you a question, if you don´t mind? Have you seen JJ there?

Good Night.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it's not the same. Times are different; the 2 events are MORE DEMANDING than ever.

USA is bidding for 2018 World Cup

Spain is bidding for 2018 World Cup

Japan is bidding for 2018 World Cup

So, Baron?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a possibility that WC 2014 could have a marketing benefit. Look at Vancouver 2010. In nearly every national level category, there was a competitive process for sponsoring the Olympics. In telcom, Bell trumped Telus. In clothing, Hudson Bay trumped Roots. In broadcasting, CTV beat out CBC. The losers (who strongly backed the bid) were a bit dismayed that they were dropped.

For Rio and Brazil, the question for potential sponsors will be which one to they want or benefit from more and if they don't get one, they can go for another, especially in categories were there are two or three major options.

The trick will be to differentiate the audiences and reach of each event.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a possibility that WC 2014 could have a marketing benefit. Look at Vancouver 2010. In nearly every national level category, there was a competitive process for sponsoring the Olympics. In telcom, Bell trumped Telus. In clothing, Hudson Bay trumped Roots. In broadcasting, CTV beat out CBC. The losers (who strongly backed the bid) were a bit dismayed that they were dropped.

For Rio and Brazil, the question for potential sponsors will be which one to they want or benefit from more and if they don't get one, they can go for another, especially in categories were there are two or three major options.

The trick will be to differentiate the audiences and reach of each event.

I agree. And by reading the report, the 2014 WC is portrayed as both positive (infrastructure) and nogative (Marketing).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...