Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think a lot depends on who the opposition is. If it is a German city, Paris, Rome, Los Angeles it would be a challenge at this stage and is probably too early. I think it's fair to say that countries like France, Germany, Italy, USA, South Africa and even Canada if they want it are ahead in the queue for the summer games.

But if the other bids were Dohas and Bakus - or even Russia and China - then why not? It's a safe pair of hands and offers a win-win situation on almost every front. A fresh informal and human face that counters claims that the Games are just mega projects for dictators.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I suppose it looks that way when you live in a tundra.

Yeah, this is the serious one.

I think a lot depends on who the opposition is. If it is a German city, Paris, Rome, Los Angeles it would be a challenge at this stage and is probably too early. I think it's fair to say that countrie

Like Barcelona?

This has been discussed before, but Spain was already on the upswing after the Franco years. Catalonia's growth in tourism likely has more to do with its beaches and the fact it is a departure port for Mediterranean cruises than hosting the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed before, but Spain was already on the upswing after the Franco years. Catalonia's growth in tourism likely has more to do with its beaches and the fact it is a departure port for Mediterranean cruises than hosting the Olympics.

It may have had all the ingredients, but Barcelona used the games superbly to show that to the world and transform it from a no-profile city to a hugely glamorous one. It's not for nothing barcelona's always held up as how a city can really transform and bring benefits to a city.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed before, but Spain was already on the upswing after the Franco years. Catalonia's growth in tourism likely has more to do with its beaches and the fact it is a departure port for Mediterranean cruises than hosting the Olympics.

And why do you think that is. Before the 1992 Summer Olympics, Barcelona was an old, decrepit industrial town. Those beaches that you speak of, were a direct result of the city's transformation for the Games. Demolishing old, abandoned warehouses & making way for new recreational public areas. The cruise port-of-call is also a result of the Olympics, not the other way around.

Pre-1992, the top three most visited cities in Europe were London, Paris & Rome (back then, Barcelona wasn't even in the top ten). Nowadays, it's London, Paris & Barcelona. The city underwent a $12 Billion (by today's Olympic dollars) transformation for the 1992 Summer Olympics. Certainly a city that was already on the "upswing" wouldn't have needed to invest so much if that were truly the case. Maybe Madrid was on the uptick, but Barcelona was definitely underneath-the-radar before they ever hosted the Games. Barcelona is one of the few cities that the Olympics did indeed put them on the global map.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed before, but Spain was already on the upswing after the Franco years. Catalonia's growth in tourism likely has more to do with its beaches and the fact it is a departure port for Mediterranean cruises than hosting the Olympics.

To further what Rols and FYI said.. I was in Barcelona for the first time last summer. Might be my new favorite city in the world. I like to think I learned at least a little about what makes the city tick.

You may be right that they were on the upswing post-Franco, but the Olympics is what really put them over the top and made them a major vacation destination. What the Olympics did, as Rols alluded to, was showcase the newly transformed city to the world. Sure, the city underwent a lot of change (which may have happened anyway, but a lot of that was most definitely spurred on by the Olympics), but the rest of the world may not have known about it if not for the Olympics. I think there are similar elements with Sydney where a lot of people knew about Australia before the 2000 Olympics, but a lot of people saw the city in action for the first time then and that added to a desire to want to travel there. Ditto for Beijing where the Olympics there revealed some of the mystery that is China.

Some people here like to say that their city could be "the next Barcelona." I always call bullshit on that one. Barcelona's history played into their story in a way that almost no city could hope to replicate. Meaning that it would be next to impossible for a city to get a similar legacy from an Olympics. And like FYI said, Barcelona and Catalonia didn't just experience a growth in tourism, they shot up the list of the most popular tourist destinations in all of Europe. IMO, there's no way that would have happened if not for a major world showcase like the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I visited Barcelona, it seemed widely agreed upon that the Olympics transformed the city from an industrial port to a massive tourist attraction. Evidence of this are the beaches in Barcelona, which were man-made from sand from the Middle East for the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I visited Barcelona, it seemed widely agreed upon that the Olympics transformed the city from an industrial port to a massive tourist attraction. Evidence of this are the beaches in Barcelona, which were man-made from sand from the Middle East for the Olympics.

They could just as easily have done that without hosting the Olympics, though. If you look at the evidence, it's the infrastructure that matters rather than hosting per se. Hosting the summer games did not really revitalize Atlanta or Montreal. Barcelona worked because it built itself into a destination for sea bathers and cruise ships, not because it built stadiums and hosted athletics competitions.

I'll use my home city of Seattle as an example. Seattle saw a 40% increase in tourist travel from China in 2013 after the Chinese film "Beijing meets Seattle" was released. There was a similar boost to domestic tourism from "Sleepless in Seattle." Both of those movies cost a miniscule amount of money compared to the Olympics and had a bigger impact that Vancouver got from hosting in 2010. If a city's goal is to increase tourism, then tax breaks for shooting films there is a far smarter investment than spending huge amounts of money on white elephant arenas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They could just as easily have done that without hosting the Olympics, though. If you look at the evidence, it's the infrastructure that matters rather than hosting per se. Hosting the summer games did not really revitalize Atlanta or Montreal. Barcelona worked because it built itself into a destination for sea bathers and cruise ships, not because it built stadiums and hosted athletics competitions.

I'll use my home city of Seattle as an example. Seattle saw a 40% increase in tourist travel from China in 2013 after the Chinese film "Beijing meets Seattle" was released. There was a similar boost to domestic tourism from "Sleepless in Seattle." Both of those movies cost a miniscule amount of money compared to the Olympics and had a bigger impact that Vancouver got from hosting in 2010. If a city's goal is to increase tourism, then tax breaks for shooting films there is a far smarter investment than spending huge amounts of money on white elephant arenas.

Thank you for doing an excellent job of illustrating my point. Seattle sees an uptick in tourism when it is showcased to an audience, not simply because they have something to sell. Just like Barcelona didn't see a boom in tourism until they got showcased during the Olympics. They could have built the most beautiful beaches in existence, but it wouldn't have mattered until all those potential tourists got a taste of what Barcelona had to offer. So in that regard, the hosting was more important than the infrastructure. And again, those 2 work hand in hand when it comes to the Olympics. No, Barcelona absolutely could not have done what they did without the Olympics for that reason.

You're right that an Olympics isn't always the best investment for a city. It's extremely expensive and often leaves you with white elephants (although that's hardly the case for Barcelona.. they already had the main stadium plus many of the venues in place and the most prominent venue they built was Palau Sant Jordi which has seen plenty of use). If you want to talk about tax breaks for shooting films, that's a completely different argument altogether. Either way, the history of Barcelona is that Port Vell and Barceloneta and other areas got revitalized as a direct result of Barcelona hosting the Olympics, so that wouldn't have happened if they didn't also build a few stadiums and hosted athletics competitions. You can make the case that infrastructure might have gotten built without the Olympics, but there's no way of knowing that for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

They could just as easily have done that without hosting the Olympics, though. If you look at the evidence, it's the infrastructure that matters rather than hosting per se. Hosting the summer games did not really revitalize Atlanta or Montreal. Barcelona worked because it built itself into a destination for sea bathers and cruise ships, not because it built stadiums and hosted athletics competitions.

So if it's the infrastructure that matters rather than the hosting you say, then Sochi is about to get an onslaught of tourists that they have never seen before. Again, the people going to Barcelona bcuz of its beaches & going on cruises is because of the Olympics. They weren't going there for those things before the Games.

Just look at Madrid. In their stubborn eagerness to clearly outdo their Catalonian neighbors & host the Olympics, they built the facilities regardless. And yet it's Barcelona that still out does them in the tourism numbers. Madrid wanted to replicate what Barcelona did, built everything anyway, but ended up without the benefit of what the Olympics did for their rival city, so they could've said "see, we did it, too".

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if it's the infrastructure that matters rather than the hosting you say, then Sochi is about to get an onslaught of tourists that they have never seen before.

I was specifically referring to infrastructure that would be used by tourists as opposed to white elephant stadiums and arenas. Athens is a pretty good example of this. The decaying venues were a poor use of money, but the metro lines were a good long term investment. However they could have expanded the Athens metro system without hosting the Olympics. After all Madrid hasn't hosted and is only a bit bigger than Barcelona yet it has a much larger metro system.

Sochi is handicapped by a number of factors not faced by Spain. It's farther than similar competitors for western Europeans, it doesn't have many flights to it, it is a pain to get a visa, the country it is in is viewed as being hostile to gays and non-Orthodox people, etc. Even if all other factors were the same Sochi wouldn't get as many tourists from a tourism redevelopment plan as a city like Barcelona.

Just look at Madrid. In their stubborn eagerness to clearly outdo their Catalonian neighbors & host the Olympics, they built the facilities regardless. And yet it's Barcelona that still out does them in the tourism numbers. Madrid wanted to replicate what Barcelona did, built everything anyway, but ended up without the benefit of what the Olympics did for their rival city, so they could've said "see, we did it, too".

Madrid doesn't have beaches or something like the cruise industry to bring people to it. If Madrid hosted the Olympics it would still be beaten by Barcelona in tourist traffic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

can anyone give us a possible venue plan? thanks

The 2006 Commonwealth Games are a good starting point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Commonwealth_Games

One thing I don't like is cities like Toronto and Melbourne hosting the commonwealth games and then building facilities that won't be useful for the big show. Melbourne would likely have to build a new cluster with an aquatics facility and a velodrome. They have multiple existing options for both but none appear to be big enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2006 Commonwealth Games are a good starting point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Commonwealth_Games

One thing I don't like is cities like Toronto and Melbourne hosting the commonwealth games and then building facilities that won't be useful for the big show. Melbourne would likely have to build a new cluster with an aquatics facility and a velodrome. They have multiple existing options for both but none appear to be big enough.

Oh really? Then what is this place right outside of the Melbourne CBD?

masterplan-aerial-birdseye-.jpg

All they have to do is add a new Aquatics Center and Velodrome. I also disagree with the whole 'smaller venues' BS. Toronto is using a mix of temporary and expandable stadiums, in what world is that a pointless investment? It cuts down the costs of constructing brand new venues.

More pictures of the MOP

MOP-Master-Plan-1.jpg

Eastern-Plaza-Aerial-Jan-2012.jpg

m34979-002_AAMI%20Park%20heroShot_white~

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was specifically referring to infrastructure that would be used by tourists as opposed to white elephant stadiums and arenas. Athens is a pretty good example of this. The decaying venues were a poor use of money, but the metro lines were a good long term investment. However they could have expanded the Athens metro system without hosting the Olympics. After all Madrid hasn't hosted and is only a bit bigger than Barcelona yet it has a much larger metro system.

Sochi is handicapped by a number of factors not faced by Spain. It's farther than similar competitors for western Europeans, it doesn't have many flights to it, it is a pain to get a visa, the country it is in is viewed as being hostile to gays and non-Orthodox people, etc. Even if all other factors were the same Sochi wouldn't get as many tourists from a tourism redevelopment plan as a city like Barcelona.

Madrid doesn't have beaches or something like the cruise industry to bring people to it. If Madrid hosted the Olympics it would still be beaten by Barcelona in tourist traffic.

Again, that all is a part of the story of Barcelona's history. Everything was in the right place at the right time for them.. they were emerging out from under the reign of Franco, they were ripe for development, and the Olympics brought it all together. It's the whole package that made Barcelona the success story that it is in a way that no other city can copy. And Barcelona was largely free of white elephants because they had a good mix of existing stadia and a relatively small need in terms of new venues. Again though, the "infrastructure that would be used by tourists" came as a result of the Olympics. So if the crux of your argument is that Barcelona could have done that without the Olympics, it's a bad counter-argument to look at other cities who weren't as successful to talk about what they could have done without an Olympics. Maybe Athens could have expanded their metro without the Olympics. Maybe Los Angeles would have built a new international terminal without the Olympics. But the fact remains that these projects WERE a direct result of the Olympics and you can't assume they would have happened without it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Madrid doesn't have beaches or something like the cruise industry to bring people to it. If Madrid hosted the Olympics it would still be beaten by Barcelona in tourist traffic.

Why did I have an inkling that you were going to come up with something like this. So only beaches & cruise ports are what attract tourists? What about Madrid's rich history & feverish, vibrant nightlife & wonderful cuisine? Doesn't that warrant large number of tourists, too?

How did London & Paris become such hot tourist spots without sandy beaches & cruise ships docking right on their riverbeds. I've been to Europe a couple of times. And on both those occasions, it wasn't to visit beaches & cruise docks, but for rich history, foreign cuisine & old world charm & architecture. If I wanna beachy vacation, I'd go to the Caribbean or guess what, I'd take a cruise!

I strongly believe, & obviously I'm not the only one here, had Barcelona not hosted the Olympics, it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is now. It's the only city that gets mentioned by advocates of potential bid cities when trying to sell the Olympics to their populance. It's not Atlanta. It's not Montreal. It's not London, but Barcelona. Go figure. The Catalonian capital is unfortunately, an anomaly as far as it comes to the Olympics benefitting a city for the better. We need more Barcelona's on the Olympic host legacy sheet, versus the Sochi's, the Montreal's & the Athens'.

As far as the rest of your post, I think Quaker addressed that pretty well above.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say Barcelona is an anomoly when it comes to the Olympics benefitting a city for the better. But it's by far and away the best example to give, which is why it's always given.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2006 Commonwealth Games are a good starting point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Commonwealth_Games

One thing I don't like is cities like Toronto and Melbourne hosting the commonwealth games and then building facilities that won't be useful for the big show. Melbourne would likely have to build a new cluster with an aquatics facility and a velodrome. They have multiple existing options for both but none appear to be big enough.

Melbourne would not have to build an existing Velodrome. It would simply have to convince the IOC that it's existing 4,500 seater one at Hisense Arena (Or Multipurpose Arena) is suitable enough, despite the lower capacity. It would also have to convince the IOC that the same venue can also host say, parts of the Basketball preliminaries or some other indoor sport to serve its dual purpose.

As for Aquatics, Melbourne already has the Melbourne Sports and Aquatics Centre, which was used during the 2006 Commonwealth Games. We'd simply need to build a new "outdoor" pool seating 10,000+ for swimming, use the existing 9,000 seater pool (the capacity it was for the Commonwealth Games) for synchronised swimming and waterpolo preliminaries and find a way to turn the indoor diving pool above its 3,500 capacity (or alternatively just build a new one).

We don't have to build a new cluster, but if we must, I can see Geelong hosting some events to ease the strain on the city. It would most likely host Football preliminaries anyways at a 40,000+ Kardinia Park.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Melbourne is positioned stupendously to host an Olympic Games on short notice. Indeed, the only major piece of infrastructure absent from the city's illustrious portfolio of sports venues is a major aquatics arena. Virtually every sport on the Olympic programme could already be accommodated by existing infrastructure, as exemplified by the following hypothetical plan:

If Melbourne were to bid, undoubtedly the constituent cluster used for the Games would be the Melbourne Sports and Entertainment Precinct, situated directly south-east of the city's central grid. The venue plan for this vast precinct may look something like this:

· Melbourne Cricket Ground, existing, capacity of 100,000: Hosts Ceremonies, Rugby 7's, Athletics, start/finish of the Marathons and the Men's Football Final

· Rod Laver Arena (within National Tennis Centre), existing, 15,000: Artistic Gymnastics, Trampolining and Basketball Finals

· Hisense Arena (within National Tennis Centre), existing, 10,500: Basketball preliminaries, Tennis (week 2, centre court for last 6 days of competition)

· Margaret Court Arena (within National Tennis Centre), existing, 7,500: Tennis (week 2, centre court for first 3 days of competition), Rhythmic Gymnastics

· Other show-courts (within National Tennis Centre), existing: Tennis

· New outdoor show-court (part of further hypothetical expansions of National Tennis Centre), 7-10,000, Beach Volleyball

· Melbourne Rectangular Stadium, existing, 32,000: Hockey

· Re-acquisition of an AFL oval within the Olympic Park precinct for the temporary training track

· The roads surrounding the nearby Royal Botanical Gardens precinct (opposite side of the river to the sports precinct) could host the Road Cycling Races

The Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre consists of the largest pillarless floor space in the Southern Hemisphere (with albeit halted plans for further expansion), making it conducive to hosting multiple Olympic disciplines simultaneously (which it did at the Commonwealth Games). It is located directly opposite the city's central grid on the south side of the river.

· Temporary Hall 1: Wrestling and Judo

· Temporary Hall 2: Handball

· Temporary Hall 3: Boxing

· Plenary Hall: Weightlifting

To the immediate west of the city's central grid is Docklands, a vast area which has undergone urban renewal for the past 20 years. Development will continue in the nearby areas of Fisherman's Bend and the E-Gate precinct.

· Docklands Stadium, existing, 56,000: Football. (This stadium will need to be the primary venue for the AFL season, so it may not be suitable even for Football (playing surface)).

· The E-Gate precinct is a vast unused space to the immediate north-west of the city’s central grid that is slated for redevelopment in the coming decade. The current plan is to transform it into a medium-high density suburb accommdating10,000 residents. Sports facilities (recreational) are likely to be constructed within the precinct. The area is 10 minute walk from the city’s central grid and adequately serviced by public transport connections due to its proximity to North Melbourne Station (key hub). For an Olympic bid in the near future, it would be logical to use this possible residential area as the Athlete’s Village immediately after completion. A major recreational sports centre could be established within the site to service the north-western suburbs (MSAC is relatively difficult to access from the north of the Yarra), as the growth of Melbourne may lead to demand for such a facility. It could consist of an aquatic hall with temporary seating for 15,000-20,000, to host Swimming, Water Polo Finals and Diving.

· New permanent velodrome to replace the part-time arrangement at Hisense Arena. The venue could be situated within the E-Gate precinct or Fisherman's Bend. Track Cycling

The World Heritage listed Royal Exhibition Building in the Carlton Gardens is located immediately north of the city's central grid. The building was used during the 1956 Olympics

· Fencing, Taekwondo

The Melbourne Sports and Aquatics Centre is a large recreational and training facility located in Albert Park (home to the Australian F1 GP racing circuit) around 25 minutes walk south of the city. An Olympics would likely attract investment to this facility, with perhaps a new indoor arena redeveloped (replacing the existing arena which is undersized).

· Outdoor roofed pool, existing, 3,000 (capacity can be increased to 12,000): Water Polo preliminaries, Synchronized Swimming and Modern Pentathlon (swimming component)

· Table Tennis Hall, existing (with temporary seating): Table Tennis and Modern Pentathlon (Fencing component)

· Badminton Hall, existing (with temporary seating): Badminton

· Indoor arena, new, 10,000 (reduced to say 5,000 post Games): Indoor Volleyball

· Lakeside Stadium (neighbouring venue), existing, 12,000: Archery and Modern Pentathlon (running component)

· F1 racing track (through picturesque parkland): Road Walks

St Kilda is a historic suburb located by Port Phillip Bay, 10-15 minute drive south of the city’s central grid. This area would likely be used as a hub for outdoor “free” events.

· Triathlon

· Start/Finish Road Cycling Time Trials (route south along Beach Rd)

· Sailing

Around 10-15 minute drive north of the city’s central grid is a precinct of world class facilities suitable to host the equestrian events.

· Flemington Racecourse, 130,000, existing: Eventing

· Royal Melbourne Showgrounds Main Arena, 4,300 (easily expandable with temporary seating): Show-jumping, Eventing and Modern Pentathlon (show-jumping component)

Other sports would need to be hosted in outer suburbs or regional areas.

· Melbourne International Shooting Club (Port Melbourne), existing: Pistol and Air Rifle Shooting and Modern Pentathlon (shooting component)

· Melbourne Gun Club (Lilydale), existing: Clay Target Shooting

· Royal Melbourne Golf Club (Black Rock), existing (ranked in the top 10 golf courses in the world): Golf

· Lysterfield Park (Dandenong), existing: Mountain Cycling

· Werribee Park National Equestrian Centre (Werribee): Dressage

With only minor redevelopments to existing infrastructure (some of which are likely to occur in the coming decades anyway (further expansions to the National Tennis Centre)) and the addition of temporary seating to halls and exhibition spaces, this plan accommodates almost every discipline on the Olympic programme. It does, however, necessitate the construction of three major sports venues: a new velodrome (the capacity at Hisense Arena is insufficient for an Olympics), an additional aquatic centre (the capacity at MSAC is insufficient for an Olympics) and a rowing and canoeing centre.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh really? Then what is this place right outside of the Melbourne CBD?

I don't think it makes sense to cram everything into one location like Beijing did. It's smart to leave green space around the arenas for events like the Australian Open.

Additionally there is the transportation issue. If you put everything in one location that makes mass transportation even more of a priority, and that's probably the weakest point for Melbourne.

I also disagree with the whole 'smaller venues' BS. Toronto is using a mix of temporary and expandable stadiums, in what world is that a pointless investment? It cuts down the costs of constructing brand new venues.

It won't reduce costs if they end up hosting the Olympics. I agree that cities without any hope of hosting the Olympics should build smaller venues. But cities that are planning on hosting the summer games should use the "lesser" games to build up stuff they need to host the big show.

Why did I have an inkling that you were going to come up with something like this. So only beaches & cruise ports are what attract tourists? What about Madrid's rich history & feverish, vibrant nightlife & wonderful cuisine? Doesn't that warrant large number of tourists, too?

How did London & Paris become such hot tourist spots without sandy beaches & cruise ships docking right on their riverbeds. I've been to Europe a couple of times. And on both those occasions, it wasn't to visit beaches & cruise docks, but for rich history, foreign cuisine & old world charm & architecture. If I wanna beachy vacation, I'd go to the Caribbean or guess what, I'd take a cruise!

I personally would rather go to Madrid than Barcelona. But the majority of Spain's visitors are British and German tourists looking for warm weather beaches, not museums. And Madrid, as lovely as it is, can't compete with London and Paris when it comes to theater, ballet and museums.

It's clear I'm not going to be able to convince you guys, so I'll stop debating it. This thread should be about Melbourne, not Barcelona.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the majority of Spain's visitors that visit the beaches there are British & Germans, but I wouldn't go as far as saying that overall that's what makes up the bulk of their numbers. Spain ranks somewhere in the top five of international visitors, & I seriously doubt that most of them are traveling there for the beaches. Just like foreign visitors that come to the U.S. aren't primarily coming here for beaches & cruise docks, either. But domestically, many American's do like to leisure travel to beaches like to Florida & California. Which makes sense in that aspect. But that's not really the issue here.

Obviously, you're not going to 'convince' us anymore than we're going to convince you. So at this point, yeah, we should all agree to disagree. And thread drift is quite typical here on gamesbids. But it wasn't that much off-topic considering the context of the original thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...