Jump to content

Recommended Posts

it couldn't be any less shady.

Then where is the detailed accounting regarding the privately financed venues that need to be built? Don't pretend that there's transparency where there isn't The Boston 2024 organizers are being opaque in this area for political reasons. Honestly, I think being discreet like this may be the better route for the time being. When the bid books are submitted in December, then it will be a different story.

Case in point: the No Olympics crowd has already latched onto the $9.5 Billion sum reported in the press. You and I know it is dishonest for them to claim that the taxpayers are on the hook for a $9.5 Billion party, but yet that is exactly what happened. If the Boston 2024 organizers weren't being so shady the political fallout would have been much worse. Obfuscation is every politician's best friend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Boston, Massachusetts is taking the first big steps towards looking into the feasibility of a Summer Games bid for the earliest year 2024. On Thursday, January 10, 2013, the MA State Senate file a Re

Oslo was an abortion - Boston is a miscarriage.

We prefer "Masshole" to "total douche".

Easy bernham. There's nothing shady about all this, especially in comparison to LA. This is not something that needs to play out in a public forum. That's exactly what the USOC does NOT want to happen and why they changed the process to move away from open bidding. Good for LA that they had a plan in March. Doesn't matter. All that matters is what these cities have in December or whenever it is that the USOC makes their decision. We don't know if the USOC is insistent on a finalized plan and a bid book and all that. This is the work up that the USOC is using to vet out candidates. Boston is under no obligation to share any or all of this with us. This is not an effort by them to keep things under wraps. It's about a lack of reporting on specifics with their plans. I do agree with you and some of those specifics are a little shady, but that says nothing of how they're going about this IMO

it has already been announced by both the USOC and Boston that they were asked to not put out certain information until it was time and well researched and the USOC announced that the US Bid submissions and choice would be made in early 2015 after the IOC 2020 Agenda Meeting in December.

Why not talk about what you think the plans are for swimming? I think it be amazing if they did what Rio is doing for their "Future Arena" with "Nomadic Architecture" the building will be temporary and after the games the pieces are dismantled and will be reconstructed to create 4 brand new schools for 2000 students.

Or talk about why with so much money behind the Boston bid they keep creating such horrible logos, graphics, websites etc.. They announced a logo competition over a year ago and never went through with it, the DC Website is awesome. And why they changed their URL from Boston2024.org to 2024Boston.org? LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then where is the detailed accounting regarding the privately financed venues that need to be built? Don't pretend that there's transparency where there isn't The Boston 2024 organizers are being opaque in this area for political reasons. Honestly, I think being discreet like this may be the better route for the time being. When the bid books are submitted in December, then it will be a different story.

Case in point: the No Olympics crowd has already latched onto the $9.5 Billion sum reported in the press. You and I know it is dishonest for them to claim that the taxpayers are on the hook for a $9.5 Billion party, but yet that is exactly what happened. If the Boston 2024 organizers weren't being so shady the political fallout would have been much worse. Obfuscation is every politician's best friend.

I have agreed I think it's a low number but I also know that NoBoston has never posted ONE fact from day one and they say in all of their interviews and website that it will cost up to $20 Billion and paid by taxpayers which is incorrect, until this week when they altered their verbal amount. They're pure propaganda which is what the Boston Globe loves and really the only legitimate press they have received.

They have been asked to not release numbers like that until the Agenda 2020 because it could dramatically alter costs and what the IOC pays for. But if it's paid for privately there is no reason for them to be transparent about those numbers at this point anyways I am sure they don't have actual bid numbers for venues yet just locations and estimates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have agreed I think it's a low number but I also know that NoBoston has never posted ONE fact from day one and they say in all of their interviews and website that it will cost up to $20 Billion and paid by taxpayers which is incorrect, until this week when they altered their verbal amount. They're pure propaganda which is what the Boston Globe loves and really the only legitimate press they have received.

They have been asked to not release numbers like that until the Agenda 2020 because it could dramatically alter costs and what the IOC pays for. But if it's paid for privately there is no reason for them to be transparent about those numbers at this point anyways I am sure they don't have actual bid numbers for venues yet just locations and estimates.

NoBostonOlympics is still projecting the right costs.

it has already been announced by both the USOC and Boston that they were asked to not put out certain information until it was time and well researched and the USOC announced that the US Bid submissions and choice would be made in early 2015 after the IOC 2020 Agenda Meeting in December.

Why not talk about what you think the plans are for swimming? I think it be amazing if they did what Rio is doing for their "Future Arena" with "Nomadic Architecture" the building will be temporary and after the games the pieces are dismantled and will be reconstructed to create 4 brand new schools for 2000 students.

Or talk about why with so much money behind the Boston bid they keep creating such horrible logos, graphics, websites etc.. They announced a logo competition over a year ago and never went through with it, the DC Website is awesome. And why they changed their URL from Boston2024.org to 2024Boston.org? LOL

That is understandable, but from the interview it seems like they are trying to push it through with out a proper public discussion and conversation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking the last 8 Olympics both Summer & Winter and averaging the Total Cost is as far from a realistic budget estimate that you can get.

Especially with Beijing and Sochi included in that average when they made the conscious decision to spend that kind of money before even bidding. Asia did the same for the Youth Olympics and was actually reprimanded because that is not what those games are supposed to be about. And Sochi built an entire city, transportation system and waste treatment before even adding the venues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it couldn't be any less shady, regardless if the 4.5b is lowball or not it is very very clear that it won't be a public or city expense, if it is there won't be a bid so just stop attacking people for stupid **** be constructive with your hate of the bid the rest falls on deaf ears. I've made it clear I think if it can work it will if it can't it won't and from the beginning I have said I think Boston should be the first US city to bid for the Youth Olympics it's a better fit.

No, it is not very very clear. I know that's what he said, but that part does seem shady to make. What happens if the budget for the Olympics is larger than the initial projections? What if ticket sales aren't as strong as expected? It's easy to say the city/state won't be on the hook for cost overruns. But again, the Olympics inevitably go over budget, so someone is going to have to make up for the shortfall. To say nothing of the fact that some of the revenues they're counting on won't come in until later on in the process. They'll need that money to operate beforehand.

Taking the last 8 Olympics both Summer & Winter and averaging the Total Cost is as far from a realistic budget estimate that you can get.

Especially with Beijing and Sochi included in that average when they made the conscious decision to spend that kind of money before even bidding. Asia did the same for the Youth Olympics and was actually reprimanded because that is not what those games are supposed to be about. And Sochi built an entire city, transportation system and waste treatment before even adding the venues.

You're going to average the total cost? No, doesn't work that way..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games

For the sake of fairness, we'll skip Beijing and Sochi since they are anomalies. But if you're looking at a realistic budget estimate, follow the trends, not an average translated into future dollars. Atlanta cost $2 billion. That was a pre-9/11 Olympics. Athens cost significantly more. London as well. Those are the trends you're looking at. So where Boston claims they can do it for $4.5 billion, the actual amount of money spent (and I'm not counting infrastructure projects that you noted are already underway) will probably be double that. I know you keep telling us about Agenda 2020, but I'll believe it when I see it. Here's some cautionary tales that are worth noting for any city, not just Boston..

London Olympics exceed initial budget by £6.52bn

Olympics 'may cost Greece dear'

Olympic glory at any price?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it is not very very clear. I know that's what he said, but that part does seem shady to make. What happens if the budget for the Olympics is larger than the initial projections? What if ticket sales aren't as strong as expected? It's easy to say the city/state won't be on the hook for cost overruns. But again, the Olympics inevitably go over budget, so someone is going to have to make up for the shortfall. To say nothing of the fact that some of the revenues they're counting on won't come in until later on in the process. They'll need that money to operate beforehand.

You're going to average the total cost? No, doesn't work that way..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games

For the sake of fairness, we'll skip Beijing and Sochi since they are anomalies. But if you're looking at a realistic budget estimate, follow the trends, not an average translated into future dollars. Atlanta cost $2 billion. That was a pre-9/11 Olympics. Athens cost significantly more. London as well. Those are the trends you're looking at. So where Boston claims they can do it for $4.5 billion, the actual amount of money spent (and I'm not counting infrastructure projects that you noted are already underway) will probably be double that. I know you keep telling us about Agenda 2020, but I'll believe it when I see it. Here's some cautionary tales that are worth noting for any city, not just Boston..

London Olympics exceed initial budget by £6.52bn

Olympics 'may cost Greece dear'

Olympic glory at any price?

This has nothing to do with what I said... I did not say that's how you find the estimate that is a direct quote of how NoBostonOlympics.org found their estimate..

And I already said everything you said above about the cost being closer to $8 etc.. still private money.

Vancouver got stuck because they made bad partnerships and bad contracts.

London destructed and rebuilt an entire new neighborhood so again not a figure that can be used.

Greece was in financial disaster long before their bid and it was the first summer games directly after 9/11 the costs of security were huge and the only games to lose more than 2 billion let alone 15 billion only 6 games have not profited and none of those were in the US we have always been in the Green.

And the IOC would not do interviews or post news about the Agenda and support on their own website if there was not at least an 90% chance it was gonna happen, that is how they operate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't think we have an answer re: venue budget. I'd be perfectly happy with an honest "we don't know yet", or an honest "it's being discussed", but it seems clear that neither the $4.5bn nor the $5bn are it.

It's good things are moving forward. I certainly think this bid is more serious than many seemed to think. But if the budgets being spoken about in the Boston press don't encompass everything I as suspect, that's not exactly been made clear (for whatever reason),

Edited by Rob.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't think we have an answer re: venue budget. I'd be perfectly happy with an honest "we don't know yet", or an honest "it's being discussed", but it seems clear that neither the $4.5bn nor the $5bn are it.

So saying the "First Estimated Operating Budget" "Very Fluid" "Still many hurdles to clear" and that "It does not included infrastructure or city upgrades" is not honest enough?

Especially when a combination of these venues will be financed and are already planned or being adjusted by other entities like Umass, BU, BCEC, MBTA etc. etc. ?

No other city has released this kind of information... LA only listed fairytale hollywood locations...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vancouver got stuck because they made bad partnerships and bad contracts.

London destructed and rebuilt an entire new neighborhood so again not a figure that can be used.

Greece was in financial disaster long before their bid and it was the first summer games directly after 9/11 the costs of security were huge and the only games to lose more than 2 billion let alone 15 billion only 6 games have not profited and none of those were in the US we have always been in the Green.

And the IOC would not do interviews or post news about the Agenda and support on their own website if there was not at least an 90% chance it was gonna happen, that is how they operate.

And I already said everything you said above about the cost being closer to $8 etc.. still private money.

If we're going to talk about Olympics in the United States making a profit.. should we bring up the amount of taxpayer money the Salt Lake organizing committee received to make that happen. I believe the number is around $1.3 billion.

So you just brought up 3 examples of organizing committees who make mistakes that made their Olympics more costly. I just offered up a 4th. Obviously what happened with Greece wouldn't be replicated with the United States. But again, budget overruns and other issues are practically inevitable with the Olympics. And with all due respect to Boston, this is the city that gave us the big dig. So again, forgive the rest of us where we're a little skeptical that Boston is going to be able to do this all better than previous Olympic hosts or that the IOC's new agenda (this is still the IOC we're talking about.. not exactly the most forthright and trustworthy organization out there) means everything has changed. This is not all as simple as it sounds, and aside from the fact Boston needs to be selected by the USOC both any of this can be put to the test, history tells us this will all get a lot more complicated going forward.

No other city has released this kind of information... LA only listed fairytale hollywood locations...

What happened to cities not putting out information until it was time? What we're privy to as the public (which is a function of what gets reported) does not necessarily correlate to what's going on behind the scenes and when it comes down to it, that's all that matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So saying the "First Estimated Operating Budget" "Very Fluid" "Still many hurdles to clear" and that "It does not included infrastructure or city upgrades" is not honest enough?

Especially when a combination of these venues will be financed and are already planned or being adjusted by other entities like Umass, BU, BCEC, MBTA etc. etc. ?

No other city has released this kind of information... LA only listed fairytale hollywood locations...

It's not my money or my concern really. I'm a neutral observer. If those quotes are adequate for Bostonians looking at these budget projections, then who am I to say otherwise? All I'm trying to do is get a better idea of what this bid involves, because that's what this forum is about. If that seems like picking holes, I'm sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No other city has released this kind of information... LA only listed fairytale hollywood locations...

*cough* LA River revitalization (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Metro expansion (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Metrolink, *cough* Amtrak *cough* LAX revitalization (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Starting formation of narrative (diversity, reinvention, history, and innovation), *cough* renderings. *cough* good graphics (sucker for good graphics, here)

and by fairy tale, did you mean magical ;):P

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're going to talk about Olympics in the United States making a profit.. should we bring up the amount of taxpayer money the Salt Lake organizing committee received to make that happen. I believe the number is around $1.3 billion.

So you just brought up 3 examples of organizing committees who make mistakes that made their Olympics more costly. I just offered up a 4th. Obviously what happened with Greece wouldn't be replicated with the United States. But again, budget overruns and other issues are practically inevitable with the Olympics. And with all due respect to Boston, this is the city that gave us the big dig. So again, forgive the rest of us where we're a little skeptical that Boston is going to be able to do this all better than previous Olympic hosts or that the IOC's new agenda (this is still the IOC we're talking about.. not exactly the most forthright and trustworthy organization out there) means everything has changed. This is not all as simple as it sounds, and aside from the fact Boston needs to be selected by the USOC both any of this can be put to the test, history tells us this will all get a lot more complicated going forward.

What happened to cities not putting out information until it was time? What we're privy to as the public (which is a function of what gets reported) does not necessarily correlate to what's going on behind the scenes and when it comes down to it, that's all that matters.

BTW DC's estimated budget is $3 Billion and they have less than we do..

Also if you need to use Wikipedia for your facts you should fact check and look in the right columns.. $600 Million taxpayer contribution which is not correct and the $1.3 billion figure you got was 100% for Olympic Security which is an expense for every US Olympics. Salt Lake had a budget of $1.9 billion which was reduced to $1.5 they had over a $100 million profit which they used for the local sports and paid money back to the federal government which was not even something they were required or needed to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

*cough* LA River revitalization (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Metro expansion (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Metrolink, *cough* Amtrak *cough* LAX revitalization (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Starting formation of narrative (diversity, reinvention, history, and innovation), *cough* renderings. *cough* good graphics (sucker for good graphics, here)

and by fairy tale, did you mean magical ;):P

So where is their estimated operating budget? They have not announced one COUGH!

And by Fairy tale I mean -

the Walt Disney Concert Hall for taekwondo

the Nokia Theater for fencing

the Hollywood Sign for Cycling

Rodeo Drive for the Triathlon

and the Griffith Park Observatory which has no place for any spectators and would destroy the grounds

*cough* LA River revitalization (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Metro expansion (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Metrolink, *cough* Amtrak *cough* LAX revitalization (happening even w/out the Olympics), *cough* Starting formation of narrative (diversity, reinvention, history, and innovation), *cough* renderings. *cough* good graphics (sucker for good graphics, here)

and by fairy tale, did you mean magical ;):P

And they have 1 Rendering of an already existing structure that has been updated and a worse website then Boston... the ONLY good Graphic they have over us all is their Logo

DC has the best website

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay! A bash-off!

So where is their estimated operating budget? They have not announced one COUGH!

They aren't required to share that! and since you're going off of released info why don't we continue, eh?

the Hollywood Sign for Cycling

There is an actual trial that can take you up the mountain and around the Hollywood sign. I think that's what they mean?

and the Griffith Park Observatory which has no place for any spectators and would destroy the grounds

*cough* Franklin Park

And they have 1 Rendering of an already existing structure that has been updated

Oh joy! have you been Google Image searching? If you must know, the leaked prelim plans had numerous renderings of LAX, the Olympic Park (Expo Park), the Athletes' Village, Olympic Live, Farmers Field, the LA River, the Downtown cluster, and even maps and diagrams to support.

the ONLY good Graphic they have over us all is their Logo

I'm guessing you haven't even seen their PDF, correct?


*trail

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay! A bash-off!

They aren't required to share that! and since you're going off of released info why don't we continue, eh?

There is an actual trial that can take you up the mountain and around the Hollywood sign. I think that's what they mean?

*cough* Franklin Park

Oh joy! have you been Google Image searching? If you must know, the leaked prelim plans had numerous renderings of LAX, the Olympic Park (Expo Park), the Athletes' Village, Olympic Live, Farmers Field, the LA River, the Downtown cluster, and even maps and diagrams to support.

I'm guessing you haven't even seen their PDF, correct?

*trail

No not correct in fact since I have every bid document and final reports from every Olympics to date.

Premature? they were told to remove it.

Farmers - cancelled, LA River not funded and mostly tabled... Where are all your amounts for these projects listed since thats what you're asking for from Boston private pre-approved projects. LA has not even released an estimated operating budget.

And that is the function of Franklin Park LOL

No not correct in fact since I have every bid document and final reports from every Olympics to date.

Premature? they were told to remove it.

Farmers - cancelled, LA River not funded and mostly tabled... Where are all your amounts for these projects listed since thats what you're asking for from Boston private pre-approved projects. LA has not even released an estimated operating budget.

And that is the function of Franklin Park LOL

And Google Search is the last thing I would ever do for a resource here. If you Google Boston Bid Books you can find at least 10 by individuals

Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, I think comparing specifics between Boston & LA is very premature. Boston undoubtedly has a pretty bid book in the works that hasn't been released yet. LA has undoubtedly begun to crunch the numbers for their budget just as Boston has. In December, we'll have at least two solid bids to compare side-by-side. And who knows? Maybe DC or SF has a surprise in store for us.

There are hurdles both cities will have to overcome. Finding money to fund things is the 800 pound elephant in the room. Neither LA nor Boston have proved that they have that question solved. In addition there are problems specific to each city: LA still hasn't articulated why it should host the games for the 3rd time when the Northeast BosWash Megalopolis has never hosted. Conversely, it seems Boston has stronger political opposition that it needs to overcome. Not to mention the technical challenges inherent with decking over Widetts Circle.

In any case, we shouldn't let pretty pictures in a leaked PDF or Boston's nostalgic charm cloud anyone's judgement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston and LA are very different to be directly compared, especially when talks of the Olympics. However, that hasn't stopped Mr. Rik here...

No not correct in fact since I have every bid document and final reports from every Olympics to date.

Premature? they were told to remove it.

Farmers - cancelled, LA River not funded and mostly tabled... Where are all your amounts for these projects listed since thats what you're asking for from Boston private pre-approved projects. LA has not even released an estimated operating budget.

And that is the function of Franklin Park LOL


And Google Search is the last thing I would ever do for a resource here. If you Google Boston Bid Books you can find at least 10 by individuals

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/09/la_might_continue_dead_attempt_to_get_nfl_to_downtown.php

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/10/report_nfl_will_move_a_football_team_to_la_within_two_years.php

http://la.curbed.com/places/sixth-street-viaduct

http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/05/29/44425/mayor-says-army-corps-backs-comprehensive-plan-to/

http://thelariver.com/revitalization/other-projects/in-the-works/

http://www.metro.net/projects/measurer/

http://media.metro.net/riding_metro/maps/images/rail_map_underconstruction.pdf

http://www.cahsrblog.com/2014/06/state-senate-unveils-cap-and-trade-funding-plan/

http://www.laxishappening.com/default.aspx

http://lawa.org/laxdev/

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/05/tour_all_the_big_construction_underway_at_lax_right_now.php

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/09/take_a_look_at_the_huge_makeover_coming_to_laxs_terminal_1.php

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/09/see_the_brand_new_look_coming_to_laxs_terminal_2.php

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/07/lax_terminal.php

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2013/06/tour_laxs_brand_new_tom_bradley_international_terminal.php

I don't really see how we can even compare at this stage. Everything is just so secretive. For all we know, LA may have a budget plan, but has decided to keep it to themselves. Boston may have a bid book, but still needs polishing. or a secret budget plan that they want to share with the USOC directly. If you keep on bringing back publicly releasing budget plans to use against other cities, I might as well use:

EWWWWW. BOSTON IS SUCH A INEXPERIENCED FAIL FOR NOT RELEASING A PUBLIC BID BOOK AND FULL SET OF VENUE LOCATION AND MAPS. THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT PREPARED AND DON'T KNOW ANYTHING. LA HAS SO MUCH EXPERIENCE BECAUSE THEY'RE COMMITTEE HAS BEEN STANDING LONG BEFORE BOSTON'S

does the logic make logic?


(oh and one more link for the funsies: http://thesource.metro.net/2014/10/19/final-e-clip-marks-completion-of-track-work-for-gold-line-foothill-extension/)


if link above doesn't work: http://thesource.metro.net/2014/10/19/final-e-clip-marks-completion-of-track-work-for-gold-line-foothill-extension/


and for even moar funzies! http://www.lawa.org/laxspas/LAX_Solutions.aspx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking the last 8 Olympics both Summer & Winter and averaging the Total Cost is as far from a realistic budget estimate that you can get.

Especially with Beijing and Sochi included in that average when they made the conscious decision to spend that kind of money before even bidding. Asia did the same for the Youth Olympics and was actually reprimanded because that is not what those games are supposed to be about. And Sochi built an entire city, transportation system and waste treatment before even adding the venues.

Beijing and Sochi are the exceptions NOT the norm.

This has nothing to do with what I said... I did not say that's how you find the estimate that is a direct quote of how NoBostonOlympics.org found their estimate..

And I already said everything you said above about the cost being closer to $8 etc.. still private money.

Vancouver got stuck because they made bad partnerships and bad contracts.

London destructed and rebuilt an entire new neighborhood so again not a figure that can be used.

Greece was in financial disaster long before their bid and it was the first summer games directly after 9/11 the costs of security were huge and the only games to lose more than 2 billion let alone 15 billion only 6 games have not profited and none of those were in the US we have always been in the Green.

And the IOC would not do interviews or post news about the Agenda and support on their own website if there was not at least an 90% chance it was gonna happen, that is how they operate.

Damn! $8 bucks! Well someone should show these numbers to Europe!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So where is their estimated operating budget? They have not announced one COUGH!

And by Fairy tale I mean -

the Walt Disney Concert Hall for taekwondo

the Nokia Theater for fencing

the Hollywood Sign for Cycling

Rodeo Drive for the Triathlon

and the Griffith Park Observatory which has no place for any spectators and would destroy the grounds

And they have 1 Rendering of an already existing structure that has been updated and a worse website then Boston... the ONLY good Graphic they have over us all is their Logo

DC has the best website

Websites honestly do not matter until you become the nominee and host. If anything LA's website trumps them all because it proudly showcases their two successful games rather then a bunch of PR BS and pretty pictures/renderings.

All of those places you mentioned add a vibrancy to the bid and as good ole Athens used to say "a breath of fresh air a creativity" or something along those lines. Not to mention, a lot of those places are highly probable:

The Walt Disney Concert Hall for taekwondo - adjust the stage and you got it
The Nokia Theater for fencing - adjust the stage and you got it
The Hollywood Sign for Cycling - yeah, cycling includes mountains and the Hollywood sign is on a mountain and due to its popularity does have trails that would work
Rodeo Drive for the Triathlon - includes running and Rodeo Drive is a street which means that this could happen as well
Seems to me you are just jealous that they can incorporate such iconic landmarks, streets, and buildings into their plan. Before Sydney 2000 the Harbour was not capable of hosting sailing, but after some rule changes they did it.

no! Dogecoin FTW!!

Guys lets be real, it's going to be the pound.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW DC's estimated budget is $3 Billion and they have less than we do..

Nobody believes that number either.

You are taking this personally and viewing this as an indictment of Boston. That's not why people are skeptical about the bid. We don't have a vendetta against Boston.

Los Angeles can do the Olympics more cheaply than Boston because they already have most of the venues. There's very little to work with in the city of Boston itself, so the city would either need a tear down and rebuild like London or the venues would have to be located out of the area in places like Foxboro, which would be politically difficult.

I detest the idea of a Washington DC Olympics (it would be a jingoistic nightmare), and think that IF Boston can find a way to host it would be good for the US. But I have to admit that DC has a lot more going for it (except for climate) than Boston. It's not an issue of disliking Boston: it's an issue of existing venues and places to put new ones.

Edited by Nacre
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...