Jump to content

Recommended Posts

And this is why the USOC should also stick L.A. in there, so Toronto doesn't become the sole North American entrant. Part of their reasoning & changing their mind to bid is bcuz Boston is likely to faulter. So why not put a big wrench in their train of thought anyway.

Simply cause you all consider that 2024 is Europe's time. And with all those European cities bidding, it seems that you're not the only ones to think so... But I agree that America can't be ruled out that quickly.

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".

Seriously? You'll find the answer to that in some of the older threads where this has been discussed already to no end.

Los Angeles already has most of venues in place as well as the main stadium, for staters. Whereas Boston does not. L.A. also didn't have anywhere near the local oppositi already set up like Boston did.

The rest however, is again in the older threads. Perhaps you should go through them instead of always asking these inane questions where the answers to what you ask are already there for you if you just took the time to actually thoroughly went throught the threads.

*local opposition

Simply cause you all consider that 2024 is Europe's time. And with all those European cities bidding, it seems that you're not the only ones to think so....

What - can't I be a pessimist, too. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if this is about America's inherent dislike of tax, why was Boston so much worse as a choice than any of the other candidates, all of whom would need to spend $$ on an Olympic hosting.

FYI has indeed attempted to answer this question numerous times, but never none have satisfied my curiosity. Sure, LA has preexisting venues that might cut costs by a few billion dollars, but an LA games in the 21st century would still be a multi-billion dollar endeavor. Sure, LA lacked an organized opposition, but the same could be said of Boston a year and a half ago. All it took was a year of media attention on the bid and BAM! the opposition developed. The same thing could just as easily happen in LA.

For 1.5 years, Boston has been constantly reminded of Marty Walsh's original promise to sign a blank check to the IOC (he reneged on that promise today). That is something that did not happen in New York's 2012 bid or Chicago 2016's bid. When Chicago finally did sign such a guarantee, the support plummeted to the same levels found in Boston today. That is why today is a sad day for the Olympic movement; just as bad as the withdrawals of Sweden, Norway, Poland and Germany from the 2022 bid race. Until the IOC stops asking for taxpayer guarantees or drastically reduces the cost and scope of the games, no US city will be able to bid. Sooner or later this will come to bear when NBC negotiates the broadcast rights beyond 2032.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooner or later this will come to bear when NBC negotiates the broadcast rights beyond 2032.

Maybe, maybe not. Some (angry Americans) came on here after Chicago's loss and said the IOC wouldn't get big TV money from the US Networks again (more in angry hope than expectation). And then a few years later a bumper deal with NBC was signed.

I full expect the US to host within the timeframe of this broadcast contract anyway. I'd be surprised if they don't.

Edited by Rob.
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a WHOLE new paradigm for hosting the Olympics. The IOC will either have to step in or they will really have to whittle down the size of the Games to make it more attractive to smaller cities. But even with Paris and Rome, their citizenry could still do an about face and tell the IOC to go ph*ck themselves. The cost-overruns should be something the IOC should NOW eat. They have the money to do that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting though how it looks like the 2022 race, with cities starting to drop out. And I mean, it's the US dropping out (unless LA bids instead). It's a bit scary. The IOC should be scared.I have a feeling other cities will drop out...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting though how it looks like the 2022 race, with cities starting to drop out. And I mean, it's the US dropping out (unless LA bids instead). It's a bit scary. The IOC should be scared.I have a feeling other cities will drop out...

Well, it was more like being kicked out by the USOC or given up by the city and state leaders, if you ask me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a WHOLE new paradigm for hosting the Olympics. The IOC will either have to step in or they will really have to whittle down the size of the Games to make it more attractive to smaller cities. But even with Paris and Rome, their citizenry could still do an about face and tell the IOC to go ph*ck themselves. The cost-overruns should be something the IOC should NOW eat. They have the money to do that.

The games don't need to be smaller, they need to be less extravagant. And the IOC big-wigs have to change their demanding ways.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How many days until Hamburg's referendum?

It's this November. But their referendum is likely to pass, so I don't see that as an issue. Their initial polling numbers were well into the mid-60's (similar to what London 2012's numbers were. & FAR, far ahead of what Boston 2024's were). So I don't see why anyone should start making any correlations between 2022 & 2024 simply bcuz Boston the USOC chose to scupper the bid. And that's the key issue here, Boston was CUT by the USOC, Boston didn't "drop out" like virtually all of the cities in the 2022 race did.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, I still think it would be best for the USOC. So they could come back as definite frontrunner for 2028. Though it's never too late for LA to go for it, Toronto is just about to do it....

You sound scared buddy? :) What's the matter, i thought Paris was a shoe-in? Little old Toronto has very little chance against big formidable Paris after all...

Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI has indeed attempted to answer this question numerous times, but never none have satisfied my curiosity. Sure, LA has preexisting venues that might cut costs by a few billion dollars, but an LA games in the 21st century would still be a multi-billion dollar endeavor. Sure, LA lacked an organized opposition, but the same could be said of Boston a year and a half ago. All it took was a year of media attention on the bid and BAM! the opposition developed. The same thing could just as easily happen in LA.

It wasn't just me, but Quaker & a couple of other members went through it, it wasn't a matter of "satisfying your curiosity" but rather your refusal to acknowledge the differences. A "few 'billion' dollars is still a few billion dollars. You make that amount sound so trivial, when in light of what's going on these days with these things, it's not. Just look at Tokyo 2020 trying to save a billion here & a billion there, since they won their bid.

The media was well focused on all four finalists at the same time when the USOC was still making their determinations. Boston's opposition was more well organized than any of the other cities, so I don't see how more of the media focus was on Boston. New York & Chicago had their issues, but Boston's was definitely in a league of their own. The USOC should've seen the problems a mile away, but were more afraid of L.A.'s been there, done that aspect. Now I'm sure they're reeling in their huge mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's this November. But their referendum is likely to pass, so I don't see that as an issue. Their initial polling numbers were well into the mid-60's (similar to what London 2012's numbers were. & FAR, far ahead of what Boston 2024's were). So I don't see why anyone should start making any correlations between 2022 & 2024 simply bcuz Boston the USOC chose to scupper the bid. And that's the key issue here, Boston was CUT by the USOC, Boston didn't "drop out" like virtually all of the cities in the 2022 race did.

I think you underestimate the efficiency of No campaigners in Germany. They took a lot from the failed Swiss referendum to help bring Munich down, and the Hamburg No campaign will definitely use Boston for its purposes, fitting or not. I'm not convinced the referendum will pass so easily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

San Francisco Is A Good Choice For The Games of The XXXIII Olympiad.

Duh. BASOC just said 6 weeks aren't enough to put together a winning bid. Even the new Warriors Arena is running into some headwind; what more an Olympic Games...when there is NO main stadium and a Village?? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you underestimate the efficiency of No campaigners in Germany. They took a lot from the failed Swiss referendum to help bring Munich down, and the Hamburg No campaign will definitely use Boston for its purposes, fitting or not. I'm not convinced the referendum will pass so easily.

True. Interesting, with this Boston fall, we may see another fall in Germany. The No campaigners have becoming a great movement to take a hit. Now, if Hamburg leaves and USOC stays kn bench, maybe we can see a 2020 race redux again...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Arf, thanks for that. It's just that Paris is, you know, a city. Quite a major one. It can't keep being a museum. When tourists go to Paris they're always surprised that it's not like on a postcard: there are smells, it does rain sometimes, dog's poo, homeless people, etc. Because they forget that it is a city, with people living there, working there, having fun there, having sex there, dying there, you know....life! It is NOT a museum. And as a city that has the most higher number of people per square meters in the world, it needs to grow, and to build in order to host all of this growing population. At least they're not building those towers IN Paris. And the suburb is, you know, a suburb. It's never pretty, never nice, and never quite safe (well, a european suburb anyway). Paris can't keep living in the past, it needs to move on, and I think that's why it's doing (expanding metro lines and creating new ones, new housing, lowering the price of the metro user card...redifining the limits of Paris basically). And that's why Games in Paris would be great as it will show the world the real Paris, whith some major venues in the suburb (Saint Denis) like the Olympic Stadium, the aquatic center, the athletes village, the small arenas, etc. Of course their would still be venues in places like Versailles, la Tour Eiffel, le Grand Palais, etc, but I actually quite like the contrast it has: postcard Paris vs real Paris. It's not about scaring people away, it's more about telling the world that Paris is so much more than the touristic places. When I have friends from abroad visiting, they're always amazed by the non-touristic Paris, which can be quite amazing!

Honestly all of the 'realistic' things about Paris either didn't bother me or made me love the city more. In fact my first night (we stayed on St. Germain, close to Palais du Luxembourg) I stayed up all night, sitting on our balcony just watching the people and the city at night. It was nice. There was a homeless family across the street and a couple having a little fun in the building across from me. It was a city and people living their lives, enjoying one another, and wallowing in poverty. I would rather see that then a Disneyfied Paris where it's squeaky clean and nothing 'bad' going on. I will always prefer the real Paris and always love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you underestimate the efficiency of No campaigners in Germany. They took a lot from the failed Swiss referendum to help bring Munich down, and the Hamburg No campaign will definitely use Boston for its purposes, fitting or not. I'm not convinced the referendum will pass so easily.

Maybe, but a couple of our European friends here have also said that the referendum is likely to pass. I'm sure you (& other Germans here) would know more about German matters, but I can't help but feel that there may still be a bit of bitterness in your opinion since Munich's referendum failed for 2022 & on Friday they coulda literally ran away with it if they were there.

Munich's first bid went through for the most part without too much drama only to lose quite soundly against PyeongChang. So I could see why Bavarians would not want to go through the bother once again (simliar to Chicago's failed 2016 bid). But who would've thought how dismal the 2022 choices were going to become.

Hamburg is trying for its first attempt on a Summer Games. So I'd think that there would be more excitement there than indifference or negativity there after a big loss. Yeah, the no-groups there could use Boston's demise to their advantage. But if the USOC decides to still put Los Angeles forward without much fuss, then that doesn't do much for their cause to use Boston as an excuse. And it would show how different supper could be in different parts of any country. Not to mention if the other 2024 cities also have better support than not. So I'll believe it once & if Hamburg does pull out.

*support not supper.

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...