Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sheep, you pretty clearly have an axe to grind. I'm sorry for whatever experience gave you such a low view of the US.

I actually think the US' image is improving. The low point was 2004-2008, the second Bush term. We're getting out of the Middle East and acting much less like a nation of rogue cowboys -- some thing that really only happened for about four years due to poor choices made by that administration.

I have no axe to grind. I view the USA with complete indifference. Its somewhere I occasionally have to go with work. That's it.

Don't underestimate the damage of the Bush-Cheney area, as it still is regarded as hugely negative. It is very easy to lose respect and every difficult to earn it back. Some new democracies have followed the US, but others have looked to other nations for their. cues.

And the idea that the US must have the games by 2032 because ......of what? A summer games is an honour not an entitlement, and the US could put up 3 candidates in 2024, 2028 and 2032 and be deservedly beaten in each by exceptional candidates - it is how the USA responds in these circumstances theat might be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US can be a nightmare, but as a Canadian we get special treatment and in fact get treated like Americans when coming into the country. But it sounds like you two are arguing from two different perspectives. One as a personal traveller and the other as a business traveller. Business travel into and out of the US is an absolute nightmare, especially if you are there to do paid work from your company.

Brazil's visa process wasn't actually that bad. Went to the consulate, had the 5 yr visa in about a week.

Russia on the other hand is a nightmare. Gabon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Guinea-Bissau are by far the worst though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not cheering your departure, but I'm genuinely glad to hear you have other things happening. There have been times you've seemed QUITE absorbed in Olympic-world.

As for krow, I'll be curious to see his response to your query. I really appreciate his levity. He seems pretty well-informed but rarely dives in too deep (he will sometimes though, pretty judiciously). The humor is a welcome reality check and change of pace.

i don't really have anything to say that won't turn this thread into a four page pissing contest. i have grown up with many old timers here and enjoy reading their posts. some people like reading mine. if they don't, and if their ego permits, they can put me on ignore.

as for comparing my accomplishments at 26 with 60 year old baron's? i don't know what to say to that. i guess everyone knows i'm a full-time journalist, but i don't brag about much else.

baron has my name. he can google me if he wants, although he won't find anything nearly as prestigious as a submission to the amateur journal of olympic historians, the crown jewel of that esteemed publishing house, kinko's. if i'm not mistaken, that's where NBC gets many of its olympic commentators and the times mines it for regular columnists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The U.S. of course doesn't have an "entitlement" to the Games. But the IOC, however, sure likes to feel entitled to R money, though. Even before the IOC had the NBC broadcasting deal all wrapped up last year, it still was seen as iffy that the IOC would receive that large of an amount of money for the U.S. TV rights as they had in previous deals. The IOC still felt "confident" that they would get a lucrative contract yet again. N sure enough, not only did NBC sign up again for big bucks, but they also did it with a record 4-Games deal!

N now with this less than desirable revenue agreement, with the USOC getting nearly half as much LESS money than they did before, & then on top of that foolishly agreeing to pay the IOC's administrative costs?! :blink: N for what? To maybe get a good, or at the very least a decent, shot at the Olympics. So which party felt "entitled" there?! Sounds like the IOC did. Bullying their way to this ludicrous deal that doesn't really benefit the USOC, nor the athletes, or anyone other than the IOC itself.

So yeah, I actually hope that USOC now does feel a bit "entitled" to something, since the IOC doesn't have any trouble in doing so. Even if it is the than less than desirable Winter (throw us a bone, at least) Olympics! The IOC can only throw so much sand in the face of the U.S. Sooner or later it's gonna come back to bite them in their fricken, royal-wanna be, Lausaunne asses!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the idea that the US must have the games by 2032 because ......of what? A summer games is an honour not an entitlement, and the US could put up 3 candidates in 2024, 2028 and 2032 and be deservedly beaten in each by exceptional candidates - it is how the USA responds in these circumstances theat might be interesting.

I agree that hosting is an honor, not an entitlement. I did not write that the US "must" host by 2032. I wrote that there would be positive consequences that would be good for all concerned if they did.

Similarly, your hypothetical scenario of three more failed Summer bids (making a grand total of 5) would create a great deal of strain between the US and the IOC and this would be a blow to the Olympic movement.

Evidently you give no weight to American sponsorship or broadcast funds, administrative underwriting, sporting prowess, Olympic history, audience share or popular interest. Consequently, it isn't surprising that you see no value to the US hosting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and again - it was the NEW YORK TIMES who raised the issue of restrictive entry requirements

I guess you just didn't read the article you linked to. All it does is frame a question in an op-ed, based on a single expression from only ONE IOC member, from Pakistan.

Again your views on US immigration are absolutely flawed. I've outlined my personal experiences. Those of colleagues, friends and family are the same.

Over the past decade, from 2002 to to 2012, the growth rate in Transatlantic flights has been 6% CAGR. Even during the economic troubles of 2011 to 2012, Europe - US flights grew by 1.4%, vs. an intra-Europe decline of -1.1%.

These facts flight straight in the face of your flawed claims about US immigration.

Now, show me the facts for your claim. I'm waiting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was living in the UK when I went to the Athens Games. On my return I was forced to face off with a very surly British customs official who insisted my passport was a fake. It was ugly. Suffice it to say that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what Athensfan, are our Greek members not allowed to discuss Spain's financial problems from now on, our Brazilian members not allowed to bring up the issue of crime in other host cities? Where are you drawing the line here?

The problems at Heathrow of late are well reported, but this thread's about the US, and the change in visa policy during the Bush years is something that could cause difficulties for future US bids - and furthermore Black Sheep's experiences ring true from what friends have told me. I don't see why bringing that up in this thread is necessarily an issue.

Edited by RobH
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you just didn't read the article you linked to. All it does is frame a question in an op-ed, based on a single expression from only ONE IOC member, from Pakistan.

Again your views on US immigration are absolutely flawed. I've outlined my personal experiences. Those of colleagues, friends and family are the same.

Over the past decade, from 2002 to to 2012, the growth rate in Transatlantic flights has been 6% CAGR. Even during the economic troubles of 2011 to 2012, Europe - US flights grew by 1.4%, vs. an intra-Europe decline of -1.1%.

These facts flight straight in the face of your flawed claims about US immigration.

Now, show me the facts for your claim. I'm waiting...

What Facts? You merely claim what has happened to you ... that is not a fact.

Did you not read the comments of our Canadian colleague Faster on here who confirmed the aggravation that business travellers face. My brother needing to work in Seattle on a contract for seven weeks, took 4 days to get a visa processed despite the fact he actually has security clearance to work at the Pentagon. Another colleague, had his company abandon GM crop trials in the USA because it was too awkward to continually get their European biochemists over there and switched it to Canada. You may have your experiences, but I have had mine.

As for your non-sensical travel statistics ..... increasingly people in Europe commute by high speed rail. Only 3 years ago, I travelled LHR - CDG on business all the time. .... now we expected to travel on Eurostar except in exceptional circumstances, which is why so many European airlines are focusing on intercontinental routes because they cannot compete with high speed rail especially as governments increase air travel duties.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was living in the UK when I went to the Athens Games. On my return I was forced to face off with a very surly British customs official who insisted my passport was a fake. It was ugly. Suffice it to say that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Who is throwing stones? Your personal experience is irrelevant. Its about the changes to visa/entry policy of the Bush/Cheney years. Whatever our personal experiences, and I have had good and very poor customer service in almost every country I have visited, the IOC undoubtledy look at what the official government policy is regarding the entry of athletes, support staff, and spectators into the country to support the games.

'Syed Shahid Ali, an I.O.C. member from Pakistan, in the question-and-answer session following Chicago’s official presentation, pointed out that entering the United States can be “a rather harrowing experience.”

"It’s clear the United States still has a lot of work to do to restore its place as a premier travel destination,” Roger Dow, U.S. Travel’s president, said in the statement released today. “When IOC members are commenting to our President that foreign visitors find traveling to the United States a ‘pretty harrowing experience,’ we need to take seriously the challenge of reforming our entry process to ensure there is a welcome mat to our friends around the world, even as we ensure a secure system.”

Is this person an utter irrelevance or a high paid individual who can speak with professionalism and clarity about the general problem rather than pontificate about personal experiences?

Now if the Travel Promotion Act suggested has now been passed any further bidding team really needs to emphasise this.

We can all gloat about how wonderful our entry into the US might have been .... the issue is how are those participants and spectators from countries with less convivial relations with the US treated? Venezuela, countries in the Middle East, South East Asia etc The US Travel Association have highlighted it as evidence of an issue ..... I mean it must be an issue if legislation is being passed so for some to merely say in a derisory fashion that its only from a Pakistani IOC member highlights the problem. With the quality of all bids, such molehills can easily become mountains.

Chicago went out in R1 by 4 votes - if three IOC members had voted for them instead of Tokyo then Chicago would have been through and as Chirac discovered when discussing Finnish food, you cannot afford to upset any one single IOC member who might go on to express their criticisms to their colleagues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is throwing stones? Your personal experience is irrelevant. Its about the changes to visa/entry policy of the Bush/Cheney years. Whatever our personal experiences, and I have had good and very poor customer service in almost every country I have visited, the IOC undoubtledy look at what the official government policy is regarding the entry of athletes, support staff, and spectators into the country to support the games.

'Syed Shahid Ali, an I.O.C. member from Pakistan, in the question-and-answer session following Chicago’s official presentation, pointed out that entering the United States can be “a rather harrowing experience.”

"It’s clear the United States still has a lot of work to do to restore its place as a premier travel destination,” Roger Dow, U.S. Travel’s president, said in the statement released today. “When IOC members are commenting to our President that foreign visitors find traveling to the United States a ‘pretty harrowing experience,’ we need to take seriously the challenge of reforming our entry process to ensure there is a welcome mat to our friends around the world, even as we ensure a secure system.”

Is this person an utter irrelevance or a high paid individual who can speak with professionalism and clarity about the general problem rather than pontificate about personal experiences?

Now if the Travel Promotion Act suggested has now been passed any further bidding team really needs to emphasise this.

We can all gloat about how wonderful our entry into the US might have been .... the issue is how are those participants and spectators from countries with less convivial relations with the US treated? Venezuela, countries in the Middle East, South East Asia etc The US Travel Association have highlighted it as evidence of an issue ..... I mean it must be an issue if legislation is being passed so for some to merely say in a derisory fashion that its only from a Pakistani IOC member highlights the problem. With the quality of all bids, such molehills can easily become mountains.

Chicago went out in R1 by 4 votes - if three IOC members had voted for them instead of Tokyo then Chicago would have been through and as Chirac discovered when discussing Finnish food, you cannot afford to upset any one single IOC member who might go on to express their criticisms to their colleagues.

Even for Americans air travel is a harrowing experience, especially on domestic flights. I hear stories everyday about how Americans are furious with Airport security going overboard with their procedures, even to the point where they have to record airport security inappropriately touching little children for fear that the little children may have a bomb inside their body, which is 100% insane on the part of airport security. Of course, those recordings go up on Youtube, causing worldwide outrage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only ever had issues with entering the US because of work. Most of the time it is easy and you just go with the flow.

That being said. Russia has far more restrictive and nightmarish requirements that are far more burdening then the USA. And they have legions of corrupt/unhelpful police across the country that just love to harass people to get back-handers. There is registration, and red tape a mile wide by a mile deep and slip up once and it costs you. Yet Sochi is hosting 2014 and the IOC hasn't said one word about the Russians not honouring their promise of easy access for visitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even for Americans air travel is a harrowing experience, especially on domestic flights. I hear stories everyday about how Americans are furious with Airport security going overboard with their procedures, even to the point where they have to record airport security inappropriately touching little children for fear that the little children may have a bomb inside their body, which is 100% insane on the part of airport security. Of course, those recordings go up on Youtube, causing worldwide outrage.

the problem is if even if these are misconceptions, they carry significant weight until they are disproved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what Athensfan, are our Greek members not allowed to discuss Spain's financial problems from now on, our Brazilian members not allowed to bring up the issue of crime in other host cities? Where are you drawing the line here?

The problems at Heathrow of late are well reported, but this thread's about the US, and the change in visa policy during the Bush years is something that could cause difficulties for future US bids - and furthermore Black Sheep's experiences ring true from what friends have told me. I don't see why bringing that up in this thread is necessarily an issue.

It is germane. London is hosting 2012. They have their own customs issues. They are working through it. Similarly if the US got the Games, they would work through it. In other words, it's not the impossible obstacle that Sheep claims -- as London proves.

Incidentally, this thread is about potential American bids for 2024 -- not Bush's visa policy. So I'm trying to focus on whether that is really a major hurdle for a bid. I am confident that whatever administration is in power will smooth the way. Bush's policy was instituted in the wake of 9/11 -- quite understandably -- and as security methods improve I have no doubt an American Olympics can run smoothly from a customs/visa perspective.

Of course I am not suggesting we gloss over weak points. I'm suggesting we keep them in perspective. My personal experience was shared simply to provide context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blacksheep, if I were a customs agent, I would give you a hard time too... :lol:

I wouldn't even let you into the country if I were an agent, and dump your ass back on a plane

It is germane. London is hosting 2012. They have their own customs issues. They are working through it. Similarly if the US got the Games, they would work through it. In other words, it's not the impossible obstacle that Sheep claims -- as London proves.

Incidentally, this thread is about potential American bids for 2024 -- not Bush's visa policy. So I'm trying to focus on whether that is really a major hurdle for a bid. I am confident that whatever administration is in power will smooth the way. Bush's policy was instituted in the wake of 9/11 -- quite understandably -- and as security methods improve I have no doubt an American Olympics can run smoothly from a customs/visa perspective.

Of course I am not suggesting we gloss over weak points. I'm suggesting we keep them in perspective. My personal experience was shared simply to provide context.

The fact that Chirac didn't have a positive impression of Finnish food, became a hurdle in the end.

With the quality of the bids shortlisted all likely to be exceptionally close, any perceived weakness will be seized upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the problem is if even if these are misconceptions, they carry significant weight until they are disproved.

Ah ok. So you have absolutely zero facts for your position. Zero.

the problem is if even if these are misconceptions, they carry significant weight until they are disproved.

1) Your opinion is already disproved by the statistics that show massive growth in transatlantic air traffic.

2) Contrary to your belief, your own anti-american opinion does not carry significant weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every bid has perceived weaknesses to be seized upon! We have no idea who will bid, if the race will be close or anything else, so saying that a US bid is going to be critically handicapped by immigration policies that probably won't even be in place by the time of the 2024 vote really seems like making a mountain out of a molehill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every bid has perceived weaknesses to be seized upon! We have no idea who will bid, if the race will be close or anything else,

Much more salient point. If the big names like Chicago and NYC sit it out (and they probably will), the US will have to work harder to find a "special something" with a third LA games, or struggle with a beta city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much more salient point. If the big names like Chicago and NYC sit it out (and they probably will), the US will have to work harder to find a "special something" with a third LA games, or struggle with a beta city.

LA is already sick to death of traffic and construction. although i'd be in favor of anything that might help us get our subway extension before 2040 (actual date), i don't think the city could stand the hassle of an olympic bid.

i live here. i should be the bid's biggest fan. instead all i can think is, gee i hope they don't build any venues near my house.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that hosting is an honor, not an entitlement. I did not write that the US "must" host by 2032. I wrote that there would be positive consequences that would be good for all concerned if they did.

Similarly, your hypothetical scenario of three more failed Summer bids (making a grand total of 5) would create a great deal of strain between the US and the IOC and this would be a blow to the Olympic movement.

Evidently you give no weight to American sponsorship or broadcast funds, administrative underwriting, sporting prowess, Olympic history, audience share or popular interest. Consequently, it isn't surprising that you see no value to the US hosting.

At what point does the US become entitled to hosting more or for getting more representation in and on the IOC and the Executive Board? Considering that a huge portion of the entire IOC budget comes from us. How long are we going to pay massive sums to let the European's make fools of us? Black Sheep's attitude it all too common among Europeans they hate us, they have no reason (sometimes they try to dream up one, but it's never anything substantive) they just hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...