Boston 2024

[Boston2024]

Once any city informs their mayor what the price tag is—it leaves them in a very difficult position to say YES. Especially when your public transportation system is so desperately needing life support to keep thousands of people getting to where they need to be safely on time.

It's so easy to say NO and walk away from something but Mayor Menino hasn't flat out said no. He also hasn't said yes. The Boston 2024 effort is still needing to do their research and even figure out what exactly the price of a games would be and if we have the infrastructure to host it. Let them do the ground work and if we cannot sustain a games in the end, than we can't. That has yet to be proven thus far.

[ChrisValentine]

Its also worth noting that there's an upcoming mayoral election. Not that I have any confidence that Mumbles will lose. But its worth noting.

[baron-pierreIV]

And here's the rub for ANY US candidacy. The IOC insists that the contract must be backed by a gov't agency of the would-be host, guaranteeing any and all cost overruns. That is totally anathema to the US way of doing things. So, unless your numbers have been crunched solidly (Salt Lake, Atlanta and LA), the US will always be handicapped by such a stipulation...which the IOC can easily get, no questions asked, from pseudo-"democratic" nations like Russia, China or the Gulf states.

[intoronto]

I think Boston is out without the Mayor's support.

[Quaker2001]

Once any city informs their mayor what the price tag is—it leaves them in a very difficult position to say YES. Especially when your public transportation system is so desperately needing life support to keep thousands of people getting to where they need to be safely on time.

It's so easy to say NO and walk away from something but Mayor Menino hasn't flat out said no. He also hasn't said yes. The Boston 2024 effort is still needing to do their research and even figure out what exactly the price of a games would be and if we have the infrastructure to host it. Let them do the ground work and if we cannot sustain a games in the end, than we can't. That has yet to be proven thus far.

That's the thing though.. this is ground work that could have (and probably should have) been done months ago, not now. If this commission had been put together 6 months ago, they'd have more of that research and information ready to present to the mayor before he was asked by the USOC if he was interested. So when the mayor receives a letter than says an Olympics require 45,000 hotel rooms, instead of being able to tell Merino "Boston has X number of hotel rooms," instead the response is probably more "we have to look into that and we'll let you know what we come up with."

Let's be realistic here.. there's a pretty good chance that it will be proven that Boston can't sustain a games, certainly not given the constraints of the costs unless there's a lot of private investment. That's not me trying to kill the hopes and dreams of this effort, that's just the nature of the situation where it's exceedingly difficult to make this work. But clearly your mayor is unimpressed with what he's been shown so far and when there's an article in 1 paper with Eric Reddy saying he thinks he'll get the mayor's support and another article in another paper the next day with a quote from the mayor saying he thinks it's far-fetched, that's not an encouraging sign. Again, if you and others want to put your time and resources into this, I hope you all keep in mind that the end result may be that you did this all for nothing.

I will say this though.. a lot of this discussion is specific for 2024. If that doesn't work out for the USOC, there could very well be 2028. Or 2032. If you're all willing to think long-term, I believe there's a much greater chance that this effort will be worthwhile.

[Quaker2001]

Pretty Cute Watching Boston Residents Play Daily Game Of ‘Big City’

This is from The Onion, so obviously it's not to be taken seriously, but I figured it might get a laugh in a thread discussing Boston's hopes to host an Olympics

[ChrisValentine]

The point had some resemblance to validity until it compared Boston to Los Angeles. I hate that place. Gonna go listen to tool to unwind a bit.

[boston_2024]

Stoked that Los Angeles is throwing their hat in the ring along with Tom Hanks and Magic Johnson. If there's one city that has the balls to pull this off—it's LA! Screw Texas and Oklahoma; Los Angeles is electric and has major plans to tear down their century old convention center if the proposed Farmers Field project moves forward.

To all those who count Boston out, this city isn't out. It's merely conducting a feasibity study to show proof with actual figures and findings "yes, it's feasible, or no, it's not feasible".

[baron-pierreIV]

For Boston to beat LA and impress the IOC, you have to present the most BOMBASTIC new venues...even outdoing the Beijing and Sochi white elephants. Run a few international architectural competitions...promising the moon for the greatest designs. Include those in your bid and u see...u will WIN!! Cost? Details. Let tomorrow take care of itself!!

[Quaker2001]

Stoked that Los Angeles is throwing their hat in the ring along with Tom Hanks and Magic Johnson. If there's one city that has the balls to pull this off—it's LA! Screw Texas and Oklahoma; Los Angeles is electric and has major plans to tear down their century old convention center if the proposed Farmers Field project moves forward.

To all those who count Boston out, this city isn't out. It's merely conducting a feasibity study to show proof with actual figures and findings "yes, it's feasible, or no, it's not feasible".

Yes, again.. it's conducting a feasibility study. That's something that perhaps should have been done BEFORE the mayor of Boston received a letter asking if his city is interested in bidding for an Olympics. I don't know if there's a timetable for when these cities have to let the USOC know or if there's a cut-off where they say "no more takers," but this is the problem now. They're trying to play catch-up behind a couple of other cities that have done more of this research and prep work. And then, let's say it's determined that it is feasible for Boston to host an Olympics, then you have to work on proving you're not only feasible, but can do it better than the other interested cities. Your mayor is already clearly very skeptical of this plan. It's not helping matters that Eric Reddy and his team are still looking for answers rather than being able to present them already. To say nothing of what happens when someone looks at the price tag. Even Los Angeles might get scared off by that, but I'd still give them a big edge over "we're still not sure if it's feasible" Boston

[ChrisValentine]

Yes, again.. it's conducting a feasibility study. That's something that perhaps should have been done BEFORE the mayor of Boston received a letter asking if his city is interested in bidding for an Olympics. I don't know if there's a timetable for when these cities have to let the USOC know or if there's a cut-off where they say "no more takers," but this is the problem now. They're trying to play catch-up behind a couple of other cities that have done more of this research and prep work. And then, let's say it's determined that it is feasible for Boston to host an Olympics, then you have to work on proving you're not only feasible, but can do it better than the other interested cities. Your mayor is already clearly very skeptical of this plan. It's not helping matters that Eric Reddy and his team are still looking for answers rather than being able to present them already. To say nothing of what happens when someone looks at the price tag. Even Los Angeles might get scared off by that, but I'd still give them a big edge over "we're still not sure if it's feasible" Boston

Well, it seems to me that the feasibility study is what the group was going for at first, and then the letter to the 35 cities got published and people got ahead of themselves and a little too excited.

[baron-pierreIV]

Well, it seems to me that the feasibility study is what the group was going for at first, and then the letter to the 35 cities got published and people got ahead of themselves and a little too excited.

But the sequence of events shouldn't change things. It's either a city can handle it or not. I KNOW the USOC has to be inclusive in sending out the call to the top 35 cities; but that is just a pro forma move. Legally, it would be obligated to do that...but in reality only 3 or 4 cities really can answer the call to arms and, if the USOC is wise, would put forth internationally. That's what it boils down to. It is a gargantuan massive effort that only a city with the size and stature of an NYC, Chicago, LA and San Francisco can put on. But we knew that from the start, didn't we?

[Quaker2001]

Well, it seems to me that the feasibility study is what the group was going for at first, and then the letter to the 35 cities got published and people got ahead of themselves and a little too excited.

That's part of the problem for them, because now they might have to rush their study a little bit because the USOC is starting to solicit bidders. And while I disagree with baron that it's a foregone conclusion that Boston doesn't have the goods, the likely outcome from this feasibility study will probably be that Boston either can't do it or would be wise not to try especially now with Los Angeles now so prominently in the mix.

[Sir Rols]

Don't know if there's anything new in this, but just came across it:

Boston Talking About Hosting 2024 Olympic Games

There hasn't been an Olympic games hosted in America since 1996 in
Atlanta, and like leaders at Massachusetts' State House, the Boston City
Council will be exploring the feasibility of bringing the games to New
England.

"Why hasn’t Boston made a serious play for the Olympics?" District 6
City Councilor Matt O'Malley asked during Wednesday's council meeting.
"It’s obvisouly a huge undertaking. [...] It could bring peril. [...]
The Atlanta Games of 1996 was really run well and turned a profit. [...]
Montreal hosted the games in 1976 and it took 30 years for them to pay
off a billion dollar budget."

He added that Vancouver had debt problems after hosting the games, too.

O'Malley said he doesn't want to rush the process but that there is
momentum with State Sen. Eileen Donoghue, D-Lowell, having filed a state
bill to study the feasibility of hosting the Summer Olympics.

Boston was selected among 35 cities to submit a bid by the United States Olympic Committee.

But Mayor Thomas Menino has called the idea of Boston hosting the Olympics "far-fetched" as he told WBUR that it costs $6-8 million just to bid, and that would be publicly funded.

Pushing for the games is the Boston Olympics Exploratory Committee,
which has already reached out to councilors and the city administration
(having met with Menino already). The group also has its own website for the 2024 games.

"The benefits could be enormous," O'Malley said. "We have the hotel
rooms, the dorms. The locations of sporting events would not just be in
Boston proper. It could be 200 miles north, south, east, west of Boston.
We could be talking about the New England region. Another strength we
have is the city could hold the summer or winter games. When you apply
for both your chances are exponentially heightened."

However, O'Malley also admitted it could cost billions of dollars to implement additional infrastructure.

The matter was referred to the Committee on Economic Development for a future hearing.

Charlestown Patch

[Faster]

I don't mean to be a homer here, but the situation with Dallas and Boston sounds a lot like the situation leading up to Toronto's will they/won't they for 2020. There was a group in place that would lead the bid, their was NOC support but ultimately City Hall said no. I am not sure if this will turn out to as critical of a mistake as Ford's decision was, but it could be a serious blow.

Part of me wants to see a scaled-back, legacy forward American Games, especially after the 'bombastic' Beijing, Rio and Tokyo Games.

[zekekelso]

. I KNOW the USOC has to be inclusive in sending out the call to the top 35 cities; but that is just a pro forma move. Legally, it would be obligated to do that..

No it wouldn't. What the hell are you talking about.

But the sequence of events shouldn't change things. It's either a city can handle it or not. I KNOW the USOC has to be inclusive in sending out the call to the top 35 cities; but that is just a pro forma move. Legally, it would be obligated to do that...but in reality only 3 or 4 cities really can answer the call to arms and, if the USOC is wise, would put forth internationally. That's what it boils down to. It is a gargantuan massive effort that only a city with the size and stature of an NYC, Chicago, LA and San Francisco can put on. But we knew that from the start, didn't we?

Can anyone explain why (some) people think San Francisco is an a different league than Boston when it comes to ability to host the Olympics?

[FYI]

Really, like you have to ask such an obvious question. It's been answered already. I think Boston could host as well, but it would still lack in other areas from the big 4.

San Francisco, beautiful, international iconic city, that's beloved by international visitors. A very large, U.S. metropolitan area that boast 3 large international airports for international traffic. Even San Francisco city proper is still larger than Boston.

Asking what's the difference is like asking why is Istanbul in a different league than Ankara. Or Hamburg from Stuttgart, even though that they all could have the potential to pull-off a Games.

[Quaker2001]

Can anyone explain why (some) people think San Francisco is an a different league than Boston when it comes to ability to host the Olympics?

San Francisco - alpha city.. Boston - alpha-(minus) city

San Francisco Airport - hub for United Arlines and Virgina America and a major international gateway to both Asia and Europe (not to mention you have Oakland and San Jose with sizable airports as well)... Boston Logan Airport - hub for JetBlue airways, barely has more traffic to/from London than does SFO

San Francisco bay area - home to 2 baseball teams, 2 football teams, and 2 major D-1 universities.. Boston area - home to 1 baseball team, 1 football team (barely), and only 1 major D-1 university

Beyond all that, it's been suggested that members of the IOC would be very intrigued by a bid from San Francisco (who, less we forget, was in the running for both 2012 and 2016, so they have some experience in looking into the Olympics). Boston has all sorts of American history to offer and that would probably be their sell and probably could put on a good show. But when push comes to shove and the USOC has to make its choice, San Francisco is probably going to have that edge.

[Quaker2001]

Actually, here's another thought.

zeke, since there seem to be more than a couple of people here that think San Francisco is in a different league than Boston, can you explain to us why you think they're not? San Francisco has their issues, some of which may not be solvable, but do you really think Boston is that much closer to San Francisco in the grander scheme of things than most of us here are giving them credit for?

[Boston2024]

Since when has San Francisco even been a contender? Only Los Angeles has thrown their hat in the ring...and well lets face it, all of California is so completely in debt anyways. I'd rather see the Games in Los Angeles again than in San Francisco.

[zekekelso]

>> San Francisco, beautiful, international iconic city, that's beloved by international visitors. A very large, U.S. metropolitan area

Metropolitan Statistical Areas of the United States of America (2012 estimate)

Boston: 4,640,802

SF: 4,455,560

[Boston2024]

>> San Francisco, beautiful, international iconic city, that's beloved by international visitors. A very large, U.S. metropolitan area

Metropolitan Statistical Areas of the United States of America (2012 estimate)

Boston: 4,640,802

SF: 4,455,560

Boston is also a beautiful, walkable, international iconic city. Over 336,403 students live in greater Boston between 52 institutions of higher education. Boston and San Francisco both have perks and they're both worthy of having an Olympics. Boston has better sports teams although San Fran has been catching up to us lately! : )

[Quaker2001]

Since when has San Francisco even been a contender? Only Los Angeles has thrown their hat in the ring...and well lets face it, all of California is so completely in debt anyways. I'd rather see the Games in Los Angeles again than in San Francisco.

2012 Olympics and 2016 Olympics.. that's what San Francisco was a contender for. So they've been there before, even though they got passed over for various reasons. This is new territory for Boston and even the mayor has registered his skepticism. Yes, California's money issues could be what sinks San Francisco, but that seems to be a problem for almost everyone these days.

[FYI]

"SF: 4,455.560"

IDK where you got that figure, but out of the 8 counties that make up the San Francisco Bay Area, that statistic looks like it clearly ignores Santa Clara County, which would then take the SFBA into the 6.5 million range.

But even with that aside, it still doesn't negate all the other aspects of what San Francisco really has to offer compared to Boston.

[Boston2024]

2012 Olympics and 2016 Olympics.. that's what San Francisco was a contender for. So they've been there before, even though they got passed over for various reasons. This is new territory for Boston and even the mayor has registered his skepticism. Yes, California's money issues could be what sinks San Francisco, but that seems to be a problem for almost everyone these days.

Our Mayor hasn't said no. He's a very intelligent guy and won't say a thing until he has all the information he needs. The city council has introduced a hearing to discuss and this whole city is talking. It's far from a no but cautiously moving forward towards doing a study.