Is The Era Of The Monster Games Over?

[Augie4040]

All of us saw the Beijing game sand that astonishing openign ceremony. The spectacle of the whole games was #1 is every category.

But now the birds nest stadium(90,000+ seats) sits virtually empty and useless, the water Cube is sparsely used. i think the IOC has seen that and scratched their heads, what is the legacy if the infrastructure will be rarely used?

The London games will have a 80,000 seat stadium but will be removable to bring it down to 20,000 same with the chicagi bid, they know very well that Chicago's South side wont need a 80,000 stadium so the majority of seats will be removable.

With Cities like London and Chicago aiming to keep a usable legacy, does thos mean that the IOC will start looking at more realistic bids rather than "the most hugest games ever".

And I was wondering what this would mean for future bids. could smaller cities have a shot now that realistic/ affordable legacies are in vogue?

Cities like Zurich, Austin(TX), Perth(AUSTRALIA), San Jose(COSTA RICA), NAPLES, LAS VEGAS, AUCKLAND, and so on.

Because from now on you dont have to thnk about how always having abig city because it will have a 80,000 seat stadium. If all of the traditionally huge Venues are shrinkable(post games) the Olympics could go to a lot more cities. And a lot more Smaller Nations could afford to bid(Dublin, I'm looking at you)

[baron-pierreIV]

R u crazy? They will probably be adding 2 more sports for 2016!!

BIGGER IS BETTER!!

[micheal_warren]

Bring on Rugby 7's for the 2016 games!!!

[Sir Rols]

Not while the Olympic Dow-Jones Index is still growing:

Component Changes Made to Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games Index

Fr

NEW YORK, Sept. 11, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Dow Jones Indexes, a leading global

index provider, today announced the results of the regular quarterly review of

the Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games Index.

Nike Inc. (U.S., Personal & Household Goods, NKE) and Suncor Energy Inc.

(Canada, Oil & Gas, SU) will be added to the Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games

Index. Nike Inc. is being added since the company is a new official supplier of

the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games. Suncor Energy Inc. is being added as

national partner of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games.

No components will be deleted from the Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games Index as a

result of this review.

All changes will be effective after the close of trading on Friday, September

18, 2009.

These changes will increase the number of components in the Dow Jones

Summer/Winter Games Index to 37 from 35. As of Wednesday, September 9, 2009, the

free-float market capitalization of the reconstituted Dow Jones Summer/Winter

Games Index increased to US$762.38 billion from US$691.01 billion.

The Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games Index measures the performance of all publicly

traded companies that are official partners, sponsors or suppliers of the

current Olympic Games. The index is reviewed quarterly in March, June, September

and December.

Further information on the Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games Index can be found on

www.djindexes.com.

Company additions to and deletions from the Dow Jones Summer/Winter Games Index

do not in any way reflect an opinion on the investment merits of the company.

Journalists may e-mail questions regarding this press release to

PR-Indexes@dowjones.com.

First I'd heard of this one.

[Athensfan]

This is a great question.

I think things are already changing -- London is approaching the project much more conservatively and carefully than Beijing. (Of course, just about anybody would.)

However, recent history suggests that the IOC will always choose the most expensive bid, the bid that requires the most new construction. In the case of 2016, that would obviously be Rio. If the IOC picks Rio, I suspect the monster Games will remain alive and well. Brazil has basically signed a blank check for the Games. If, however, they pick Chicago, I believe there will be a new model for Olympic hosts. Brilliant and dynamic, but affordable and sustainable. The IOC has been saying for YEARS that this is what they want. We will see if they put their money where their mouth is.

[Augie4040]

Rugby 7s is okay but they need to have the bigger Rugby Union as well.

I was just thinking. I know what the most watched spport would be if they put it in...Tug Of War, God do they need ot bring htat back. Imagine the audience watchign the most massive men in the world giving evrythign hteve got.

The only medal that rewards brute strength. Bring it in for a trial run in 2016 and see if it would have the popularity for medal consideration in 2020.

I predict GOLD SILVER AND BVRONZE go to easten European countries...imagine how perpostrously-awesome and unlikely that the most viewed match in the 2020 olympics would be between Estonia and BElarus.

[baron-pierreIV]

I was just thinking. I know what the most watched spport would be if they put it in...Tug Of War, God do they need ot bring htat back. Imagine the audience watchign the most massive men in the world giving evrythign hteve got.

Nah. Tug-of-War is something that would belong to the "C+" reality TV shows like THE BIGGEST LOSER or that ilk. Midget-throwing would draw bigger TV ratings.

[micheal_warren]

Rugby 7s is okay but they need to have the bigger Rugby Union as well.

I was just thinking. I know what the most watched spport would be if they put it in...Tug Of War, God do they need ot bring htat back. Imagine the audience watchign the most massive men in the world giving evrythign hteve got.

The only medal that rewards brute strength. Bring it in for a trial run in 2016 and see if it would have the popularity for medal consideration in 2020.

I predict GOLD SILVER AND BVRONZE go to easten European countries...imagine how perpostrously-awesome and unlikely that the most viewed match in the 2020 olympics would be between Estonia and BElarus.

I think rugby 7s is great as the tournament is played over 2 days whereas the Rugby world cup is played over a month. Rugby union with 15 aside is just 2 big for the olympics and rugby 7s has more world wide appeal with a dozen nations having a potential chance of winning a medal.

[Rob2012]

Is The Era Of The Monster Games Over?

No, we've got one coming up in 3 years! If London had followed anyone but Beijing its Games projects would be viewed as a massive, monster unteraking.

It's a freak of timing that London's massive regeneration project, the biggest construction site in Europe, is seen as relativley small after Beijing. Below is an old photo - from a year and a half ago - but it's probably the best one I have for giving you an idea of the scale of the Olympic park London is building. Even with Beijing just gone, and even with our temporary venues, London 2012 will be one of "the most hugest games ever"

If you look in the top right hand corner of the park site you can see the embryonic stadium bowl, which is massive but is made to look tiny by the size of the park itself.

Here's a few figures to back up what I've just said:

• over one million cubic metres of soil excavated to shape the park
  
• 2 6km long powerline tunnels built, 200km of cabling installed
  
• 52 pylons have been removed
  
• More than 3,000 workers on site (it'll peak at about 10,000 next year)
  
• Nearly 200 buildings (since the start of demolition in 2007) demolished
  
• more than 30 new bridges will be constructed in total
  
• 20km of permanent roads in and around the Olympic Park will be built
  
• New lock and water control system along with half a kilometre of river widening to take place
  
• £100m upgrade to Stratford rail station as well as rerouting the High speed network to the area
  
• A brand new primary substation and wind turbine
  
• The creation of the largest Urban park in Europe, about the size of Hyde Park, for 150 years.
  

...and that's before we even get onto the venues, the Olympic village, and the media centre which are all under construction.

Chicago's plan is comparable to London's in its use of a temporary stadium. That's where the similarities end. What London is doing is huge.

[oakydoky]

No, we've got one coming up in 3 years! If London had followed anyone but Beijing its Games projects would be viewed as a massive, monster unteraking.

It's a freak of timing that London's massive regeneration project, the biggest construction site in Europe, is seen as relativley small after Beijing. Below is an old photo - from a year and a half ago - but it's probably the best one I have for giving you an idea of the scale of the Olympic park London is building. Even with Beijing just gone, and even with our temporary venues, London 2012 will be one of "the most hugest games ever"

If you look in the top right hand corner of the park site you can see the embryonic stadium bowl, which is massive but is made to look tiny by the size of the park itself.

Here's a few figures to back up what I've just said:

• over one million cubic metres of soil excavated to shape the park
  
• 2 6km long powerline tunnels built, 200km of cabling installed
  
• 52 pylons have been removed
  
• More than 3,000 workers on site (it'll peak at about 10,000 next year)
  
• Nearly 200 buildings (since the start of demolition in 2007) demolished
  
• more than 30 new bridges will be constructed in total
  
• 20km of permanent roads in and around the Olympic Park will be built
  
• New lock and water control system along with half a kilometre of river widening to take place
  
• £100m upgrade to Stratford rail station as well as rerouting the High speed network to the area
  
• A brand new primary substation and wind turbine
  
• The creation of the largest Urban park in Europe, about the size of Hyde Park, for 150 years.
  

...and that's before we even get onto the venues, the Olympic village, and the media centre which are all under construction.

Chicago's plan is comparable to London's in its use of a temporary stadium. That's where the similarities end. What London is doing is huge.

Very true!

Different cities approach the games differently due to their own needs. Beijing's games were given a lot of spotlight due to the scrutiny involved in viewing a games in communist China. Accordingly, China's games were viewed as 'massive, huge, gargantuan...etc'. They were! But, I do not think that those kind of games are necessarily over or unique to China.

London in 3 years time will be just a huge as Beijing -in fact even bigger! London is spending a lot on their games (almost £10billion) which is roughly half of Beijing's budget. But keep in mind that Beijing was an underdeveloped city and had to build rail lines, roads, airports, etc so a lot of their spending was on non-venue structures. London is spending most of their budget on venues and 'tangible' things to the games themselves. However, London also understands the 'legacy' aspect to the Olympic movement.

I think some cities may go for 'monster' games; cities like Dubai, Sochi, etc. Some may emphasize more sustainable vitures; cities like Chicago or any US bid. Some combine massive architecture with sustainability; cities like London.

I think that rather than the era of the monster games being over, I would personally view it as the era whereby multiple approaches to the Olympic are fully employed and understood! What I mean is that now cities can see that several cities have hosted the games and have hosted them in different ways therefore, Olympic precedents are there! Some cities will cite Barcelona's transformation, some will aspire for Beijing grandeur like Dubai presumably, some will emphasize a temporary games a la Los Angeles.

[stryker]

No way. The Era of the Monster Games is just getting started and it's going to be around for a while. The selections of Beijing and London along the with 2016 Candidates are evidence enough that the Olympics are not only getting bigger and more extravagant, but only the big name cities really have a shot at the Games anymore. Madrid, Chicago, Rio de Janeiro, Tokyo, London. Big metropolises in big countries with big money. The days of cities like Atlanta, Barcelona, or Stockholm hosting are over for the forseeable future. Athens was an exception.

It's the same story on the Winter Olympics. Gone are the days of the tiny resort being the main host like Lillehammer, Lake Placid, or Albertville. Nowadays the Winter Olympics is centered in a major hub with the skiing events located in the smaller nearby resort. Turin, Sochi, Salt Lake City, and Vancouver. I think Munich will continue the trend. Again, just like the Summer Olympics, these are big money countries. Salzburg put together probably the best technical bid of the 2014 Candidates but Austria doesn't have the clout the others countries do. I've said it before, I think that's another reason Winter Games powerhouses like Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland have been skiddish about spending the money to bid. Would a city like Geneva, Oslo, or Ostersund really have a chance against Munich, Reno, Harbin, or even Zaragoza?

[Kenadian]

I think the Games have been monsters for a long time. Munich, Montreal, Barcelona, Sydney, Athens, Beijing all built massive sports complexes or reshaped their cities. And Berlin, Tokyo, Moscow and Beijing all used the Games as a catalyst to show off their national might. London may not be using 2012 as a global coming out party (I think they did that when they reigned as capital of 1/4 of the globe) but it certainly isn't a cheap little tea party on the Thames.

[Soaring]

I don't believe the Olympics will become smaller (especially if Chicago loses). Rio and Tokyo would continue the trend, but I don't believe every future host city will put on a mega games.

The question we should be asking though is...

Are "Monster Games" a good or bad thing?

[Rob2012]

It's completely dependent on the circumstances and the city. It may sound like a boring, stock answer but it has to be taken on a case by case basis Soaring. Will the venues be used afterwards, is the investment a good one for the city, do the people of the city mind paying for the investment or do they expect a quick financial return, and on the other hand will a smaller games take the gloss away from the Olympics etc. etc.?

[baron-pierreIV]

Are "Monster Games" a good or bad thing?

We, in the IOC, don't care.

We need back-up cities in case our first choices flop...therefore we always have to ask for Monster Games!!

[Soaring]

It's completely dependent on the circumstances and the city. It may sound like a boring, stock answer but it has to be taken on a case by case basis Soaring. Will the venues be used afterwards, is the investment a good one for the city, do the people of the city mind paying for the investment or do they expect a return, and on the other hand will a smaller games take the gloss away from the Olympics etc. etc.?

Yes, it should be considered case-by-case. I think Beijing is still too early to judge whether their "investment" really paid off. My opinion is no at this present time, but the Chinese seem like they have no problem with it, as thousands come daily in droves to the stadium.

I just am cautious in my views on the Games size, scope and new venue construction. I would hate to see another Montreal scenario, and I have some fears that we could see this play out again, and it could actually hinder developing nations from hosting because of the massive cost (even though I support Chicago over Rio, I would support Rio if Chicago were not in the running).

[aluz]

I think we are going to have very different Olympic Games. I wouldn't bet that Rio Games would have the architecture spectacle built for Beijing. By visiting China 2 years before the Games that did not surprised me. The Pudong district in Shanghai looks like it came out from the Jetsons cartoon.

Rio's big budget tends to be more Barcelona-like with the recovery of many districts in the city and a boost for a bid transformation for the citizens of Rio, since most of the investment is aimed at improving the infrastructure, especially transport, which is critical to solve the city problems. Other than that, I know that a SOG in Brazil will be a big party. Something to be remembered by the athletes and tourists who will have the privilege to experience.

Anyway, the SOG is a Monster Event and its grandiosity tends to remain, but the flavor will never be the same.

I believe Madrid would put up a nice party, something that Chicago and Tokyo might not do it in the same level.

Chicago would profit from being seen by the world as the beautiful city that it is and the Games would be massive economically with crowded stadia. Tokyo would do something in the same profile.

[baron-pierreIV]

I believe Madrid would put up a nice party, something that Chicago and Tokyo might not do it in the same level.

What are you saying? Chicagoans of course know how to party!!

Of this year's finalists, Madrid is the only landlocked city. All the other 3 have big bodies of water to draw upon...and that helps in either cooling down the city...or its humidity. Madrid a very "imperial"-type city. Any "partying" there will be constrained as it will be in Tokyo.

[aluz]

What are you saying? Chicagoans of course know how to party!!

Of this year's finalists, Madrid is the only landlocked city. All the other 3 have big bodies of water to draw upon...and that helps in either cooling down the city...or its humidity. Madrid a very "imperial"-type city. Any "partying" there will be constrained as it will be in Tokyo.

I've been to Chicago several times. It's not in the same league as Rio and Madrid when it comes to partying, you can trust me on that. By the way, if you think partying has contraints in Madrid, it seems that you have never been there, or failed to enjoy it at its most.

[Rafa]

it depends on what exactly you consider monster.

a large project or a large amount of new venues or elaborate venues or elaborate venues that wont be used.

these are all very different things and as long as host cities dictate how and what they will build, monster games will never really die. then theres the question of whether the "high cost" of temporary structures makes it worthwhile to build such a venue.

cities simply need to be smarter and balance the need for a compact games with a legacy that actually benefits the wider metropolitan region.

[Rafa]

if you dont want a montreal...dont use debt. blank government checks...thank you.