Jump to content

2018 Evaluation Commission Visit Report


Recommended Posts

I just wonder about the differences between Pyeongchangs bid for 2014 and 2018 - or in another way why did Sochi "win"?

Sochi impressed, and Putin connected with the crowd in a way no one else could. But in terms of looking at the Korean bid, here are some changes I see:

1. The 2014 bid had to rely on foreign athletes like Alberto Tomba to promote Pyeongchang, making him seem like a hired name. There is nothing wrong with that, but a bid looks stronger when you include home-grown athletes as well. The 2018 bid is using its own national athletes to promote the bid. After the Vancouver Olympics, Korea finally had new champions from sports other than short track, such as Kim Yu-na and Mo Tae-bum, both very likable. Yu-Na is of course the star of Pyeongchang's bid, finally giving the bid someone with an Olympic pedigree that can resonate with the entire Olympic family. It doesn't hurt at all too that she's a great English speaker and has a cute smile.

2. The 2014 bid focused more on what the Olympics could do for Korea, always bringing up how the Olympics could help bring peace on the Korean peninsula. It was an outdated approach to talk about peace when no one cares the way people used to back in the 80's. The buzz words now are more about new frontiers, environmental sustainability and energizing the youth. The 2018 bid focuses more on what Korea can do for the Olympics rather than the other way around. By hosting the Olympics, Korea could help open up a new market in Asia for winter sports.

3. Probably the most important of all, from what I heard, the 2018 bid team is more friendly and approachable, and better at speaking English. In 2014, the bid team kept to themselves, speaking almost exclusively in the Korean language, and relied on their technical presentations to win the bid. The 2018 team is more accessible and wants to get to know the IOC and its members so they can be good partners for the next 7-8 years. People like Yang-Ho Cho and Theresa Rah want to meet you in hotel bars on a personal level and talk in English. They're not afraid to ask for input and advice on how to improve the Pyeongchang bid. They're humble and they know they can't take anything for granted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 292
  • Created
  • Last Reply

By hosting the Olympics, Korea could help open up a new market in Asia for winter sports.

Well,

This pirctures today in Korea Daegu.

World Athletics pre-championships.

Nobody pure spectators, almost free tickets.

Nevertheless, 70% of the stands are empty.

Like 2009 Baithlon World Championships.

NISI20110512_0004518629_web.jpg

Why host the World championships ?

They has the same claim.

By hosting the Athletics WC, Korea could help open up a new market in Korea-Asia for athletics.

Always ambiguous slogan.

It was used too long and not true.

Korea has always held for politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well,

This pirctures today in Korea Daegu.

World Athletics pre-championships.

Nobody pure spectators, almost free tickets.

Nevertheless, 70% of the stands are empty.

Like 2009 Baithlon World Championships.

NISI20110512_0004518629_web.jpg

Why host the World championships ?

They has the same claim.

By hosting the Athletics WC, Korea could help open up a new market in Korea-Asia for athletics.

Always ambiguous slogan.

It was used too long and not true.

Korea has always held for politicians.

You are soooo predictable. The Athletics Championships are in August, by the way.

Here's a photo of the ACTUAL Athletics Championships (not the pre-championships like you're showing) in 2009, in..... you guessed it... BERLIN!!!!

emptyseatsberlin.jpg

Low attendance at 2009 Berlin Athletic World Championships

Does this mean Germans don't care about sports either? Maybe you should support Annecy now, since both Munich and Pyeongchang won't have any supporters. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are soooo predictable. The Athletics Championships are in August, by the way.

Here's a photo of the ACTUAL Athletics Championships (not the pre-championships like you're showing) in 2009, in..... you guessed it... BERLIN!!!!

emptyseatsberlin.jpg

Low attendance at 2009 Berlin Athletic World Championships

Does this mean Germans don't care about sports either? Maybe you should support Annecy now, since both Munich and Pyeongchang won't have any supporters. :D

That picture probably Preliminary of AM.

2009 World Athletics Championship in Berlin.

Almost pull stadia. I was wached TV.

berlino_bolt-300x187.jpg

leichtathletik_wm_stadion.jpg

athletics_world_championships_01.jpg

023630-world-athletics-championships-2009.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

I would have preferred that the commission frankly says:

All of the 3 bids can host the games. Nevertheless, we strongly recommend:

1. PC because it’s a new horizon and we need to develop the interest for winter sports in Asia.

2. Munich because Germany is a very strong winter sports country that hosted the winter games once only. Keep it in mind for 2022.

3. Annecy because France already hosted the winter games 3 times. Keep it in mind just in case North Korea drops a nuclear bomb on PC and a new pole invalidates Garmisch's participation.

It would be better that all these insidious remarks all along the report, the game consisting in minimizing PC’weaknesses and maximizing Annecy’s, Munich being in the middle of this 2 extremities.

A few examples:

Annecy:

In terms of cultural and city activities, Annecy 2018 proposes to use the city’s historic, pedestrian centre as an “Urban Olympic Park” in which two live sites are planned. The “Nations Square” concept, to showcase the history and cultures of the countries belonging to the Olympic Movement to the public, is a positive initiative. Similar activities would take place in the centre of Chamonix.

Although several initiatives were broadly outlined, and some cultural themes were identified, little detail was provided. Should Annecy be elected as the host city, early attention would need to be paid to these areas to develop concrete and integrated programmes to ensure that the bid’s vision for culture, education and city activities would be implemented.

Is this remark justified (bold)? Why does the commission need to minimize this positive initiative?

(From my point of view, venues at the heart of Annecy, Chamonix and mountain villages, closed to pedestrian areas with cultural events is a very good idea that would boost the whole atmosphere)

As the Games vision is to use existing infrastructure wherever possible and as the City of Annecy has a low accommodation capacity, the Games accommodation plan has been based on providing rooms in the various Games zones. The approximately 25,500 guaranteed rooms are thus located in 533 accommodation facilities in France and Geneva (Switzerland). The spread of accommodation and the number of establishments involved would create operational and financial challenges across various client groups.

This could be re-written “a la PyeongChang”:

As the Games vision is to use existing infrastructure wherever possible and as the City of Annecy has a low accommodation capacity, the Games accommodation plan has been based on providing rooms in the various Games zones. The approximately 25,500 guaranteed rooms are thus located in 533 accommodation facilities in France and Geneva (Switzerland). The spread of accommodation and the number of establishments is a challenge. However, the area welcomes millions of visitors each winter and is used to manage this. Moreover, it participates to the convivial atmosphere in Annecy 2018's vision.

In general the transport concept incorporates many forward-thinking measures in terms of environmentally friendly transport and more sustainable travel patterns minimizing automobile use and maximizing public transport. The substantial rail development would be the most significant long term legacy for the Annecy-Chamonix-Geneva region and would promote a more sustainable transport system in line with Annecy 2018’s Games vision.

__

With the plans for a much improved rail and public transport system, the Commission believes that the Olympic transport demands would be met. However, given the relatively dispersed concept, travel times between Games zones for some client groups could be long.

This could be re-written “a la PyeongChang”:

With the plans for a much improved rail and public transport system, the Commission believes that the Olympic transport demands would be met. The Semnoz, La Clusaz/Le Grand Bornand ski venues present a transport challenge due to limited access but this should not be problematic as this was perfectly managed at the 2009 world championships in Val d’Isere with the same type of access. Moreover, this allow to offer snow events at the Annecy hub.

PyeongChang:

The average snow depths are relatively low but this should not be problematic as the bid committee committed to providing 100% snow coverage for Games competition through artificial snow-making facilities and the distribution of stored snow if natural snowfall was insufficient.

This could easily be re-written as:

The average snow depths are relatively low. The bid committee committed to providing 100% snow coverage for Games competition through artificial snow-making facilities and the distribution of stored snow if natural snowfall was insufficient. However, it could be a major challenge in case of bad weather conditions like in February 2009.

PyeongChang 2018’s vision, reflected in its motto “New Horizons”, is for the City and Region (Gangwon Province) to become a new winter sports hub in Asia, and for the Games to be the catalyst for the further and accelerated growth of winter sports participation, particularly amongst youth, in Korea and throughout Asia.

The bid aims also to develop interest in those winter sports not traditionally popular in Korea.

This could easily be re-written as:

However, winter sports are traditionally not popular in Korea. It may be a challenge to fill all the stadiums and create a real atmosphere.

Although the development of the Jungbong venue is likely to have a significant site impact, the Commission received assurances that the forest preservation area would remain protected.

This could easily be re-written as:

The development of the Jungbong venue is likely to have a significant site impact. Although the Commission received assurances that the forest preservation area would remain protected, little detail was provided. Should PyeongChang be elected as the host city, early attention would need to be paid to this point.

Some people replied to this post saying that we can write it many different ways and that any supporter for a particular bid would write it such a way that it would

benefit to its favourite bid....

and that the way it is written by the commission is supposed to be fair and balanced.

It is not my opinion. For me, the report is clearly written such a way that it maximize PC's chances.

Honnestly, what is more risky for winter games:

to have a lack of snow and no atmosphere?

or to manage many small hotels instead of a few big hotels and 10 minutes additional travel time to go from Annecy to some snow venues?

Some other people said that it is not really important and it is not what will make the difference.

It is not my feeling.

Of course GB's title was not too bad: all 3 candidates could host 2018 olympic winter games

But it's not the case for InsideTheGames: Pyeongchang out in front after IOC Evaluation Commission report published

or AroundTheRings: Munich, PyeongChang Edge Annecy in IOC Winter Olympics Report

and many other articles...

For sure, all of these articles that highlights Annecy's risks (transport and accomodation) will influence IOC members... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you get it?? It doesn't matter if the Berlin stadium was full or not. I'm trying to show that just because you post a photo of an empty stadium doesn't mean the country doesn't care about sports. It doesn't mean that Germans don't care, and it doesn't mean that Koreans don't care either. You showing a photo of an empty stadium doesn't mean anything. How do we know the photo you showed wasn't taken 3 hours before the actual competition started? Then again, it doesn't matter!! You're trying to fool everyone here by showing photos of empty stadiums and broken seats and all this other crazy stuff, but none of this matters because you're not telling the whole truth behind the photos. You tried to use a photo of some Korean guy pointing to one broken seat before to show that the Seoul Stadium was in ruins. Who are you trying to fool?

I agree with you Germans love sports. I was trying to prove a point, that your posts are ridiculous and full of hidden half-meanings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you get it?? It doesn't matter if the Berlin stadium was full or not. I'm trying to show that just because you post a photo of an empty stadium doesn't mean the country doesn't care about sports. It doesn't mean that Germans don't care, and it doesn't mean that Koreans don't care either. You showing a photo of an empty stadium doesn't mean anything. How do we know the photo you showed wasn't taken 3 hours before the actual competition started? Then again, it doesn't matter!! You're trying to fool everyone here by showing photos of empty stadiums and broken seats and all this other crazy stuff, but none of this matters because you're not telling the whole truth behind the photos. You tried to use a photo of some Korean guy pointing to one broken seat before to show that the Seoul Stadium was in ruins. Who are you trying to fool?

I agree with you Germans love sports. I was trying to prove a point, that your posts are ridiculous and full of hidden half-meanings.

Not 3 hours before the actual competition started.

http://www.newsis.com/ar_detail/view.html?ar_i...............

I've never cheated anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, it DOESN'T MATTER!!! :lol:

My photo of the empty Berlin stadium was during the competition too. During the actual Championships and not the pre-championships. WHO CARES??? It's one measly photo. It doesn't represent any kind of level of support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Korea was host the 1997 Winter Universiade.

Organizers has mobilized a lot of students.

When Pyeongchang was host the 2009 Biathlon World Championships.

Pure spectators ZERO. Almost free tickets.

2002 World cup in Korea,

When was the foreign match there were few spectators.

So, 30% of the stands covered by a tent.

(Gwangju, Daegu, etc.)

2011 World Athletics Championships in Korea.

Almost Korean people don't like athletics.

They sell the tickets through the students and government sources.

Bulk purchases of certain groups, group purchasing.

Also 30% of the stands will covering by a tent.

Probably PyeongChang 2018 will be the same.

But, When Germany was host the 2010 Ice Hockey WC and 2011 Alpine WC.

Aa that time, wrote a new history.

France too in 2009 Alpine WC.

0,,5554767_1,00.jpg

500.336.AM_09-02-2011_Super-G_Herren_09022011_0026.jpg

500.336.AM_Coulage.jpg

If you want the best stage for athletes and tourists Munich or Annecy is better than Pyeongchang.

Pyeongchang 2018 is just One of the record. No more No less.

All flattery is fake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow I have to agree with nature here: To get spectators in a stadium you need local heros or real passion for the sports. I am very familiar with athletics, but I have to confess I dont know a single Korean world class T&F-athlete.

Athletics has had its problems here in Germany. We have won only a single bronze medal in Beijing. That was a huge disappiontment. So the number of local heros in Berlin 2009 was limited.

Noone can argue, that France and Germany would attract more spectators as Korea. The main market for winter sports is still Europe and if the IOC wants to develope winter sports in Asia, they have to go to China.

The first picture of natures three pictures is from last years Ice Hockey World Cup. It shows the Opening match between Germany and the USA in Gelsenkirchen. It was a special situation and won´t be repeatable so quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow - what a great summing-up, jawnbc!

I agree with your comments about the report - how the IOC will decide is another issue...

I wouldn't be surprised if Munich or Pyeongchang win. (Its Pyeongchang to loose)

Coming from a gentleman of your calibre I am most appreciative B)

Do you have your flag ready for Saturday? Every gay guy should go to at least one Eurovision Grand Final! I'll be flying the flag of Austria for Nadine--I think she won today's semifinal and with #18 could win the whole thing! But so could a bunch of other!

Very well said!

I agree.

I would have preferred that the commission frankly says:

All of the 3 bids can host the games. Nevertheless, we strongly recommend:

1. PC because it’s a new horizon and we need to develop the interest for winter sports in Asia.

2. Munich because Germany is a very strong winter sports country that hosted the winter games once only. Keep it in mind for 2022.

3. Annecy because France already hosted the winter games 3 times. Keep it in mind just in case North Korea drops a nuclear bomb on PC and a new pole invalidates Garmisch's participation.

It would be better that all these insidious remarks all along the report, the game consisting in minimizing PC’weaknesses and maximizing Annecy’s, Munich being in the middle of this 2 extremities.

A few examples:

Annecy:

In terms of cultural and city activities, Annecy 2018 proposes to use the city’s historic, pedestrian centre as an “Urban Olympic Park” in which two live sites are planned. The “Nations Square” concept, to showcase the history and cultures of the countries belonging to the Olympic Movement to the public, is a positive initiative. Similar activities would take place in the centre of Chamonix.

Although several initiatives were broadly outlined, and some cultural themes were identified, little detail was provided. Should Annecy be elected as the host city, early attention would need to be paid to these areas to develop concrete and integrated programmes to ensure that the bid’s vision for culture, education and city activities would be implemented.

Is this remark justified (bold)? Why does the commission need to minimize this positive initiative?

(From my point of view, venues at the heart of Annecy, Chamonix and mountain villages, closed to pedestrian areas with cultural events is a very good idea that would boost the whole atmosphere)

As the Games vision is to use existing infrastructure wherever possible and as the City of Annecy has a low accommodation capacity, the Games accommodation plan has been based on providing rooms in the various Games zones. The approximately 25,500 guaranteed rooms are thus located in 533 accommodation facilities in France and Geneva (Switzerland). The spread of accommodation and the number of establishments involved would create operational and financial challenges across various client groups.

This could be re-written “a la PyeongChang”:

As the Games vision is to use existing infrastructure wherever possible and as the City of Annecy has a low accommodation capacity, the Games accommodation plan has been based on providing rooms in the various Games zones. The approximately 25,500 guaranteed rooms are thus located in 533 accommodation facilities in France and Geneva (Switzerland). The spread of accommodation and the number of establishments is a challenge. However, the area welcomes millions of visitors each winter and is used to manage this. Moreover, it participates to the convivial atmosphere in Annecy 2018's vision.

In general the transport concept incorporates many forward-thinking measures in terms of environmentally friendly transport and more sustainable travel patterns minimizing automobile use and maximizing public transport. The substantial rail development would be the most significant long term legacy for the Annecy-Chamonix-Geneva region and would promote a more sustainable transport system in line with Annecy 2018’s Games vision.

__

With the plans for a much improved rail and public transport system, the Commission believes that the Olympic transport demands would be met. However, given the relatively dispersed concept, travel times between Games zones for some client groups could be long.

This could be re-written “a la PyeongChang”:

With the plans for a much improved rail and public transport system, the Commission believes that the Olympic transport demands would be met. The Semnoz, La Clusaz/Le Grand Bornand ski venues present a transport challenge due to limited access but this should not be problematic as this was perfectly managed at the 2009 world championships in Val d’Isere with the same type of access. Moreover, this allow to offer snow events at the Annecy hub.

PyeongChang:

The average snow depths are relatively low but this should not be problematic as the bid committee committed to providing 100% snow coverage for Games competition through artificial snow-making facilities and the distribution of stored snow if natural snowfall was insufficient.

This could easily be re-written as:

The average snow depths are relatively low. The bid committee committed to providing 100% snow coverage for Games competition through artificial snow-making facilities and the distribution of stored snow if natural snowfall was insufficient. However, it could be a major challenge in case of bad weather conditions like in February 2009.

PyeongChang 2018’s vision, reflected in its motto “New Horizons”, is for the City and Region (Gangwon Province) to become a new winter sports hub in Asia, and for the Games to be the catalyst for the further and accelerated growth of winter sports participation, particularly amongst youth, in Korea and throughout Asia.

The bid aims also to develop interest in those winter sports not traditionally popular in Korea.

This could easily be re-written as:

However, winter sports are traditionally not popular in Korea. It may be a challenge to fill all the stadiums and create a real atmosphere.

Although the development of the Jungbong venue is likely to have a significant site impact, the Commission received assurances that the forest preservation area would remain protected.

This could easily be re-written as:

The development of the Jungbong venue is likely to have a significant site impact. Although the Commission received assurances that the forest preservation area would remain protected, little detail was provided. Should PyeongChang be elected as the host city, early attention would need to be paid to this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're gonna use the "biathlon metric" - the ability to fill crowds for a world cup or world championships - there's less than a dozen countries IN THE WORLD that can do that.

None of which are outside of Europe. The Biathlon world cup in Whistler Olympic Park in 2009 had OK attendance--and it was free. Mostly these events are nowhere near a large city: a weekend in Whistler runs about 800€ per person in January--plus airfare to Vancouver.

Outside of the powerhouse biathlon/combined countries, these sports are marginal for spectator support except for OWG or world championships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If when Pyeongchang host the WInter Olympics will help to the development of winter sports in Asia or Korea ?

Well, It's just a formality cause.

Maybe just a transient effect can be expect ?

The tradition can't be made ​​overnight.

I said some weeks ago.

1997 Universiade Jumping Park.

Korean athletes were still training in a foreign country. (Only 4-athletes)

They have neglected the Jumping Park.

I have a question about their basic mindset.

Incheon-City have already 50,000 capacity arena.

Nevertheless, will construction 70,000 capacity arena for 2014 Asian Games.

Residents favor strongly because of rising the real estate prices

They had even a hunger strike for this arena construction.

It can't be the case in Europe and North America.

Pyeongchang Alpensia have debt 700 million dollars for 2018 bid.

Nevertheless, 92% support this bid.

This is Korean's (negative) culture.

This is also associated with 92% support of Pyeongchang.

Not for the winter sport never.

Whatever the desire for victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well for Vancouver we used an old, indoor stadium for opening and closing ceremonies--and that was OK.

But AFTER the Games we are paying 500million dollars for a new roof. AFTER the Games.

No one is impressed. Or happy about it. And the new roof is hideously ugly.

So it's not just Asia or Korea ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a similar theme that the same people keep bringing up. That France and Germany are bidding purely for the love of sport, and that Korea is not.

When has anyone ever hosted the Olympics purely for the love of sport? I don't understand this. Hosting the Olympics is expensive to boot. Why would anyone ever play host to the Olympics if they got nothing in return? Going back at least 30 years (hey, maybe even going back to 1896), I can't think of a single city that hosted purely for the love of sport. Not London, not Vancouver, not Beijing, not Torino, not Athens. They all wanted to use the Games to get increased federal funding to build roads, construct social housing, revitalize the area, to encourage tourism, and promote their national brand abroad.

Does Korea want to develop winter sports in Asia? YES. Does Korea want better facilities for their winter athletes? YES. Promote a healthy lifestyle for the youth? YES. Host a great party for the world? YES. Is that all? NO. They want all the things mentioned above. Pyeongchang wants improved transport links, development of the area, tourism promotion, brand promotion, and they want a return on their 7-8 years of hard work. Actually, considering they've been bidding since 2001, that would be 17 years of hard work gone into hosting the Games. Is this such a bad thing? Annecy wants all these things too, and so does Munich. Yes, Munich wants to hold a festival of friendship, but they also want to develop the area and they want the brand recognition too. Same goes for Annecy. So enough with the holier-than-thou talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Munich say "Festival of Friendship",

Annecy also say "Festival of Ice and Snow".

The main purpose is not the development.

In terms of the Olympic movement,

I praised Munich-their renewal efforts and sustainable legacy.

Seoul - Gangneung railway construction in Korea.

Economics is low. Already the report suggests by Korea-Development-Institute.

Nonetheless, force the pace for 2018 Winter Olympics.

This is not an Olympic legacy.

After Olympics expected the huge deficit.

The Olympics has degenerated into a tool for development of land.

Passion and spirit for the sport has gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...