FYI Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 I read that article as well a few weeks ago. They also agree that after Oslo, Stockholm was the next best bet. No surprise what they say about Almaty, I've been saying that all along, despite the enamored delusion by some here with them. And now with Stockholm gone, it really becomes Oslo's. Hopefully they don't withdraw as well, & can get convinced by some within the IOC with the danger of them pulling out, too. *convinced.. to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petrpetr Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 I cant find english source (polish here: http://www.sportowefakty.pl/zimowe/412342/norwegia-wyda-2-mln-dolarow-na-lobbing-na-rzecz-zio-oslo-2022) It said that Oslo will spend 2 mld USD on VIP Norway House in Sochi with access only for members of IOC. It seems 'lobbing' has just started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Doesn't sound like a move for a bid that could pull the plug by the end of the month then. Intriguing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 I cant find english source (polish here: http://www.sportowefakty.pl/zimowe/412342/norwegia-wyda-2-mln-dolarow-na-lobbing-na-rzecz-zio-oslo-2022) It said that Oslo will spend 2 mld USD on VIP Norway House in Sochi with access only for members of IOC. It seems 'lobbing' has just started. Thereby proving that Bach and all the other IOC members talking about cleaning things up, lowering the cost of bidding, etc. are all talk and zero action. Big surprise. Same bunch of corrupt weasels as always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gromit Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I think there is a difference of using a technical facility 30km away from the bidding city saving a city from building a white elephant whilst in terms of the Krakow bid there is an realistic option within borders just down the road at Zakopane offering 930m of vertical whilst Korbielow-Pilsko offers 792m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Oslo is the front runner. They are a winter powerhouse, are in a good shape in economical wise, and would be good for the Winter Olympic Movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p85 Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I think there is a difference of using a technical facility 30km away from the bidding city saving a city from building a white elephant whilst in terms of the Krakow bid there is an realistic option within borders just down the road at Zakopane offering 930m of vertical whilst Korbielow-Pilsko offers 792m Of course there is a difference. Salzburg proposed a Germany-located venue, because they didn't want to build a "white elephant", so it was based purely on the financial reason. I consider it as a some kind of breach of the Olympic Charter rules, but if the IOC agreed to that, it is OK for me. Now tell me, how exactly using a neighbouring country facility based on a financial reason is better, or more justified, than using a venue that saves the nation from destroying the national park area and possible huge envirnonmental protests, following in a drop of public support? whilst in terms of the Krakow bid there is an realistic option within borders just down the road at Zakopane offering 930m of vertical whilst Korbielow-Pilsko offers 792m Kasprowy Wierch isn't a realistic option, unless you imprison all environmentalists, or just simply shot them in a head. Or you just exlude the whole mountain from the Tatra National Park area. I can't see any Polish political party that could even think of a such ridiculous solution. Korbielow-Pilsko? Vertical drop is to short, do you propose some elevation increasement, Quebec City style? And some investments in Korbielów had been already heavily protested by ecological groups, resulted in a court judgement and dismentling of the newly constructed ski-lifts. Pilsko itself is placed on the Polish-Slovak border, and even Slovak eco-groups protested against expansion that Polish skiing resort. And you might have forgotten about one thing: that 800m vertical drop isn't the only requirement for men downhill alpine skiing slope. Slope's proper shape, weather conditions, snow cover, even the direction that the wind usually blows are comperably important. Those winds conditions are particularly important when it comes to the Polish Tatra mountains, because they're could be affected with a dry, warm, down-slope foehn wind. Back in 1998, when Zakopane hopelessly bid for 2006 WOG, the Polish government and the Zakopane Bid Committee tried to whipe the environmental concerns out and moved with Kasprowy Wierch as a men downhill slop. They failed enormously. They pulled a bid with a alpine-skiing slope, that hadn't been even FIS-approved. And FIS finally didn't approve it just a week before the 1999 IOC Seuol Session. The FIS non-approval wasn't even based on the ecological factor (they don't care about that, so does the IOC), they were more concerned about the slope shape and foehn wind. That was a real, REAL, last kiss of death to that far-fetched Zakopane 2006 bid. Do you all here really think, that the Krakow 2022 Bid Committee didn't try to use a proper mountain slope placed in Poland? They did, and the only solution is to bring into play that particular Olympic Charter rule, and move alpine skiing events to the neighbouring country. If the Krakow 2022 wasn't be shortlisted because of that one venue placed in a neighbouring country, there wouldn't be any future Polish winter bid. NEVER EVER. Another country will be just removed from that not really big list of possible WOG hosts. Why we're even talk about it in a Oslo thread?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Salzburg proposed a Germany-located venue, because they didn't want to build a "white elephant", so it was based purely on the financial reason. I consider it as a some kind of breach of the Olympic Charter rules, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't something in the charter requiring countries to waste money on white elephants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p85 Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't something in the charter requiring countries to waste money on white elephants. Please quote me that concrete excerpt from the Olympic Charter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I'm sure that was a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 What does staging ANOTHER Winter Olympics in Norway really do for winter sports or the Olympics in general? Nothing. Does it give the Olympic idea any new dimension at all?? I don't think so. It's just going to another medal-fest for one tiny country. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 What does staging ANOTHER Winter Olympics in Norway really do for winter sports or the Olympics in general? Nothing. This coming from the uber-supporter of Reno/Tahoe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScholaOsloensis Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Does anyone have inside info yet to if the the Norway government if they approved the bid or not? Not exactly inside info, but the latest signals point towards the parliament majority leaning yes. The "Progress" party (holding an important key, given that they are the second player in the majority coalition) has turned 180 degrees, which is big news. They do this several times a year and it's a stupid, ridiculous party that I had wished never would set foot in the government, but nonetheless they are now in favour of approval. The conservatives is the largest party in both the national government coalition and the city government coalition, and many of the politicians from this party has been early supporters of the bid. It would be very strange if they back down now. What the other parties do is in the blue as far as I'm concerned, but with the dynamics of a majority coalition, the likely outcome is that the government reps, holding majority in parliament, will vote yes (read: a deal is struck if disagreement), and if not all do, I'm certain that there are supporters among the opposition as well. I'd guesstimate about 75/25 now, up from 50/50. But hey, I don't really have a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorwayOlympics Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Another signal of government interest in the bid. The minister of culture, Thorild Widvey has signaled to the city of Oslo and the bidding organization "Oslo 2022" that they should choose Økern as the site for the Olympic Village, Media village MMC and IPC. Økern - illustrations by Snøhetta. The same area today: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScholaOsloensis Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 And how do you know the Winter federations' votes will all go to Norway?? Is Poland such a minor country that is has no friends? It's a country many centuries older than Norway. Ehm, not that it matters, but try googling "how old is norway" and you'll find that it was founded in 872 AD. The equivalent year for Poland is 966 AD. U're really getting fenced in, aren't you? Norway is a homogenous country of only 5 million. The USA, as you well know -- I don't even know why I have to explain it to you - is a hybrid nation of immigrants right now, some 310 million strong. Take it from there... About 30 percent (real numbers are prob higher) of the population in Oslo are immigrants or children of 1st generation immigrants, which for the record, is something i view as exclusively positive. But again, not that it matters; just addressing your ignorance. I'd be happy with a polish games. If both Oslo and Krakow goes ahead with a serious bid, I'd say IOC is in good hands with respect to enthusiasm for the games. The polish are the best skijumping fans in the world by far for the time being. During SLC 2002, the local media referred to Soldier Hollow as a ghost town due the lack of spectators. And this in the words greatest super duper nation of gazillion peoples and dollars. So as much as size matters, the winter olympics is an event that doesn't automatically become a "great success"; there are many obstacles. It's not like the world cup where people will show up around the world. Many will say that SLC were great games and in many respects they were; in some others they weren't. The IOC, luckily, measures "success" or even "legacy" in more ways than just how "coked up" you can make the games (with reference to your focus on marketing and sponsors). Also, it's like you're trying to say that the asian, american and other european markets become irrelevant if it were to be hosted in *one* european country? Then I have news for you, we're no longer in 1924, There are TV deals and marketing deals negotiated for regions around the world. Sponsors get exposure around the winter olympics interested world regardless of where it's held. In this context you might as well view the european economic zone (in to which Norway is integrated despite not being an EU member) as a "market". Obviously it's an intricate matter and a WOG in Germany would make more money, but that doesn't mean that you can derive the commerical value from a simple formula based on population numbers in host countries, which is something that really should be self explanatory. As for your argument that there's nothing new. Yea, it's a good point - the best point, though I don't agree there's nothing new at all. What is new is that you'll have a big (in WOG context) city that will actually see much more than indoor action, in fact, all the action except alpine+sliding events. Except it's not new, but 1952 doesn't really come into play and the city is vastly different. It just depends on which priorities one has, where the olympics have been prior and where the powers that be, see it fit to go next time. Is the olympics exclusively a mean? Obviously it's a combination. As far as I'm concerned Poland has a strong bid, so I see no reason to downplay it or "attack it"; so that's not my intention, but you say things that don't make much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markun Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 I think Økern is a good choice for the location of the village, it's good to have some more development in the eastern part of Oslo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petrpetr Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Schola, I cant more agree with your post than i actually do. You described well governement background of bid, could you tell us also how Oslo bid is covered in media? Is there more 'wasting of money' or 'that would be great' expressions. Actually in Poland I feel media are mostly against Krakow bid, and huge public support in polls could be easily destroyed within months here. Personally I think it is connected with fact that all bigger media and journalists are located in Warsaw. Possible WOG in Krakow would make shifts in central budget from Mazovian district (Warsaw) to Malopolska district (Krakow and Zakopane). And there is 'a little' thing between Warsaw and Krakow. As far as i remember there wasnt such a negative PR when Poland was bidding for Euro 2012. Few days ago Krakow asked central governement for financing of metro construction. Mostly TV's and press were outraged by this idea, and fact that Warsaw is now constructing second line of metro with central budget support wasnt mentioned. I would like WOG back to Europe in 2022. Of course, I support with all my heart Krakow bid, but I would be happy with Oslo win. Norway is a guarantee of great quality and atmosphere. ... and also good broadcasting hours for european time zones ;-) We should be ready for night transmissions three times in a row: Rio,PC,Tokio. I'd be happy with a polish games. If both Oslo and Krakow goes ahead with a serious bid, I'd say IOC is in good hands with respect to enthusiasm for the games. The polish are the best skijumping fans in the world by far for the time being. Its always a real pleasure to read such a words. I hope both Krakow and Oslo will give us as many emotions with their race for Olympics as Marit Bjoergen and Justyna Kowalczyk outclassing other bids . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorwayOlympics Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 By the way I have been invited to the official unveiling of the bid logo, next week. I will post the logo here immediately during the ceremony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donutman88 Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 By the way I have been invited to the official unveiling of the bid logo, next week. I will post the logo here immediately during the ceremony What day is it this week? I assume it's before Sochi starts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikarus360 Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 I'm glad to hear the Norwegian government is actually showing interest, for once, for a sport event. Also i'm glad they're going to try to revitalize an underdeveloped area of Oslo, much like London revitalized Stratford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 And that could be another part of the "new dimension" that a certain someone here says that the Oslo 2022 bid lacks. Some legacy in an underdeveloped part of town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixie_Victoria Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 What does staging ANOTHER Winter Olympics in Norway really do for winter sports or the Olympics in general? Nothing. Does it give the Olympic idea any new dimension at all?? I don't think so. Some people just like to watch the same show over n over again 30 times. Then wonder where their feeling of boredom comes from. Not much you can do... Others just don't give a da*n about "the olympic idea" (which is what members of the olympic are logically asked to do though - forget about their own national stakes and neutrally work in favor of olympism only) and just have their national interest in focus. Sad and anachronistic, but same thing...Nothing we can do about it. That's why. Once more; no one is saying that our dear old traditional nations should never host again ( how crazy would that be?), or that the issues raised by some of the new hosts shouldn't be raised. But geez, how well this quoted comment did sum it up... members of the olympic...movement* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanMUC Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 Some people just like to watch the same show over n over again 30 times. Then wonder where their feeling of boredom comes from. Not much you can do... Others just don't give a da*n about "the olympic idea" (which is what members of the olympic are logically asked to do though - forget about their own national stakes and neutrally work in favor of olympism only) and just have their national interest in focus. Sad and anachronistic, but same thing...Nothing we can do about it. That's why. Once more; no one is saying that our dear old traditional nations should never host again ( how crazy would that be?), or that the issues raised by some of the new hosts shouldn't be raised. But geez, how well this quoted comment did sum it up...members of the olympic...movement* The last time that show was on from Norway will have been 28 years ago by 2022. Most athletes participating weren't even born when Lillehammer happened. These constant anti-Oslo rants are hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 I have to say I'm surprised by the intensity of some posters' disregard for Oslo. I really don't see it as "been there, done that." What I see is that the IOC has taken two big gambles with the Winter Games in a row: Sochi and PC. The Winter Games are already the tougher sell and squarely in the shadow of their Summer counterparts. We hope both Sochi and PC go well, but I suspect that the passion and enthusiasm for the Games may flag a bit in their wake. It's a great time for a fail-safe host that can guarantee enormous enthusiasm and educated crowds. Of course, Munich would've been the first choice, but I trust the Norwegians to do a fantastic job. Unless the government withholds support (and that is appearing unlikely), I think this race is well nigh over. I've got nothing against Krakow, but it's not a slam dunk and I think that is what the IOC both wants and needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 Not necessarily. Have any of you polled the IOC today...or how they will vote next year??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.