Jump to content

COC To Back Possible Toronto 2024 Bid


Recommended Posts

Er, North America is not the world. Toronto is no doubt growing against the grain on a stagnant continent, but in terms of skyscraper growth open your eyes and take a look at the likes of Beijing, Shanghai (and a plethora of other Chinese cities), Moscow and the Middle East. Even here in Australia, we have five major cities with significant skyscraper construction happening - Melbourne for instance has two supertall skyscrapers (388m/108 floors and 410m/95 floors) that are expected to be approved in the coming weeks. Its an arbitrary argument, and NOT an argument that makes an Olympic bid compelling.

http://www.thestar.com/business/2012/12/12/toronto_leading_the_western_world_in_high_highrise_development.html

Quite a lot of movement for Toronto I must say. I mean the amount of skyscrapers compared to hong kong is low but they aren't considering bidding. If facts like these were out there about Durban it would be great for there city and would help change my opinion on the city that it is a while before hosting an olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 278
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just for clarification, those countries are MORE populous than Canada, not less. Of course the IOC won't get out their calculators and crunch numbers, but I think that 4 games in 48 years will "feel"

But you know, it won't matter because the IOC is "desperate" to go to Africa right away

Someone from Brisbane, who would like to see the Olympics there someday, really shouldn't be "picking" on Durban.

The construction is also insane in Baku & Doha, but the IOC said, thanks but no thanks.

Um, I never said that helps a Toronto bid. In fact, it probably weakens it

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thestar.com/business/2012/12/12/toronto_leading_the_western_world_in_high_highrise_development.html

Quite a lot of movement for Toronto I must say. I mean the amount of skyscrapers compared to hong kong is low but they aren't considering bidding. If facts like these were out there about Durban it would be great for there city and would help change my opinion on the city that it is a while before hosting an olympics.

Seriously - what are you basing all this on? All you've contributed is "Africa is poor like Delhi = Durban shouldn't bid". Total lol-fest of logic going on around here.

Er, I think you might change your mind if you took a look at Toronto right now. The amount of construction is insane.

This means nothing! As I've mentioned, take a look at some Australian cities (Melbourne, Brisbane and Gold Coast come to mind) and their construction rates are mammoth - but I'm doubtful anyone where would consider that an emotive attribute to an Olympic bid.

Anyway, property booms are fleeting. Toronto can't sustain this kind of growth eternally. No city can. Its economics 101.

Edited by runningrings
Link to post
Share on other sites

This means nothing! As I've mentioned, take a look at some Australian cities (Melbourne, Brisbane and Gold Coast come to mind) and their construction rates are mammoth - but I'm doubtful anyone where would consider that an emotive attribute to an Olympic bid.

Look at what I just posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because I quote you, doesn't mean I'm referring to just you. I get that you don't see this as a component to a Toronto bid - but there are others that seem to believe it does (hence - the reason it is being discussed).

I'm out. Boring thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because I quote you, doesn't mean I'm referring to just you. I get that you don't see this as a component to a Toronto bid - but there are others that seem to believe it does (hence - the reason it is being discussed).

I'm out. Boring thread.

I don't think anyone thinks its a component to a Toronto bid. It just came along probably due to a mention of Toronto being a booming city (nothing to do with the Olympics itself).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously - what are you basing all this on? All you've contributed is "Africa is poor like Delhi = Durban shouldn't bid". Total lol-fest of logic going on around here.

This means nothing! As I've mentioned, take a look at some Australian cities (Melbourne, Brisbane and Gold Coast come to mind) and their construction rates are mammoth - but I'm doubtful anyone where would consider that an emotive attribute to an Olympic bid.

Anyway, property booms are fleeting. Toronto can't sustain this kind of growth eternally. No city can. Its economics 101.

God. That isn't all i've contributed. I'm sure Durban would be an alright host. I just think there are other cities that should be more ahead. It's only got this huge pulling power because it's in Africa. The final frontier. I was genuienly asking, if Durban is out there for fastest growing city or a new olympic sized stadium is being built then I would be praising them for trying to achieve something however so far Toronto have had more talk about a bid. When Durban does something good tell me and my mind might change

Link to post
Share on other sites

When Durban does something good tell me and my mind might change

Well, Durban has hosted some World Cup matches; it has hosted an all-important IOC Session. Toronto hasn't done either. Whether you perceive it or not, RSA is particularly mindful that the right climate is important for whichever city they put forward again. They must've learned from 1997 with Capetown that while they offered their most photogenic city then, that wasn't enough to win...and if they tweaked their bid more with a more appropriate acclimatized city, with a ready made Olympic stadium AND having the entire IOC body actually see the lay of the land, then the juggernaut, when they decide to launch it, would be in place. ;)

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Durban has hosted some World Cup matches; it has hosted an all-important IOC Session. Toronto hasn't done either. Whether you perceive it or not, RSA is particularly mindful that the right climate is important for whichever city they put forward again. I think they must've learned from 1997 with Capetown that while they offered their most photogenic city then, that wasn't enough to win...and if they tweaked their bid more with a more appropriate acclimatized city, with a ready made Olympic stadium AND having the entire IOC body actually see the lay of the land, then the juggernaut would be in place. ;)

Toronto has hosted the Olympic movement before through football matches in 76 and the 76 Paralympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

God. That isn't all i've contributed. I'm sure Durban would be an alright host. I just think there are other cities that should be more ahead. It's only got this huge pulling power because it's in Africa. The final frontier.

Runningrings is right, that's all you've contributed. We've all been telling you how "this huge pulling power because it's in Africa" would mean to the Olympic Movement, but all you continue to say is that is it's "only" pull. So how different really, is that from the only pull of Beijing, the Olympics finally visiting 1/5 of humanity; or Rio's only, the Olympics need to finally come to South America (Lula's words); or the Olympics finally coming home, in Athens' case. Or even now, the Olympics, most likely, finally making it to a predominately Muslim country, Istanbul 2020. So why are you singling out Africa in this case, when it's really no different from those other major cases which also only had "one huge pulling power".

I was genuienly asking, if Durban is out there for fastest growing city or a new olympic sized stadium is being built then I would be praising them for trying to achieve something however so far Toronto have had more talk about a bid. When Durban does something good tell me and my mind might change

Well, Durban already has the Olympic-sized stadium already built. Plus a sport precinct that can house other venues. The ideal weather in the IOC's preferred Games times window. What more do you fricken want, geez.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

God. That isn't all i've contributed. I'm sure Durban would be an alright host. I just think there are other cities that should be more ahead. It's only got this huge pulling power because it's in Africa.

Remove the "only" and you are answering your own questioning of Durban's claim. Durban has pulling power because IT IS a capable African city, with an agreeable climate. I think you are having issues too with the fact that its not a more well recognised African city like Cape Town or Johannesburg. You would think someone from Brisbane would be sympathetic to the third-city aiming high.

The final frontier. I was genuienly asking, if Durban is out there for fastest growing city or a new olympic sized stadium is being built then I would be praising them for trying to achieve something however so far Toronto have had more talk about a bid. When Durban does something good tell me and my mind might change

"Does something good" - can you be anymore ambiguous? What is something good? What as Toronto done thats good, in comparison? 2015? Murmurs from City Hall and speculation from people on these message boards? Thats about as much as Durban, really.

Lets compare:

Durban -

-2010 World Cup host city, legacy stadium

-first South African host city

-first African host city

-only fourth SH Olympics after Melbourne, Sydney and Rio de Janeiro

-GDP Growth - 2.6% (a growing economy in volatile world)

-real potential for a London style social legacy in city that has experienced genuine adversity. Durban's story isn't as polarised as Johannesburg, or as glamourous as Cape Town - but it is arguably the SA city that most reflects the story of Africa. It isn't necessarily glamourous, but it has the goods to deliver, and its changing. This is a leap of faith that the IOC would be taking that delivered Games like Tokyo, Mexico City, Barcelona, Beijing, Rio de Janeiro and potentially Istanbul. There is a distinct tradition of this occurring and Durban has the characteristics to be one of these cities. I think the comparisons as an African Barcelona are well placed.

Toronto:

-2015 Games legacy?

-First Olympics in Canada's largest and most multicultural city

-Fourth Canadian (second summer) Olympics in 48 years.

-North American timezone

-Fast growing city, strong economy

-Renown for culture

-Potential redevelopment of waterfront for venues (at what cost? and what is the social legacy?)

Toronto can doubt organise a wonderful Olympics in the vein of Sydney or London, but in the binary above, its not exactly compelling. I think this is the core point people are making here. Toronto will probably have a harder time nabbing 2024 than it did for 2008 or 1996. Throw NYC, Paris and Rome into the mix (+Istanbul if Tokyo 2020?) and I'd go as far to say its not even a frontrunner. It seems like its strengths depends greatly on the weaknesses of other candidates - much like Atlanta 1996.

Runningrings is right, that's all you've contributed. We've all been telling you how "this huge pulling power because it's in Africa" would mean to the Olympic Movement, but all you continue to say is that is it's "only" pull. So how different really, is that from the only pull of Beijing, the Olympics finally visiting 1/5 of humanity; or Rio's only, the Olympics need to finally come to South America (Lula's words); or the Olympics finally coming home, in Athens' case. Or even now, the Olympics, most likely, finally making it to a predominately Muslim country, Istanbul 2020. So why are you singling out Africa in this case, when it's really no different from those other major cases which also only had "one huge pulling power".

Well, Durban already has the Olympic-sized stadium already built. Plus a sport precinct that can house other venues. The ideal weather in the IOC's preferred Games times window. What more do you fricken want, geez.

Nailed it.

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

^^ One should also note that Durban (as a city, not counting South Africa's previous bid with Cape Town) is a first time bidder and Toronto is not.

Durban has to present something wild and compelling to win on the first attempt.

If Toronto does things right, then it could very well win. A failed bid would just make Quebec 2026 a good possibility.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ One should also note that Durban (as a city, not counting South Africa's previous bid with Cape Town) is a first time bidder and Toronto is not.

Durban has to present something wild and compelling to win on the first attempt.

If Toronto does things right, then it could very well win. A failed bid would just make Quebec 2026 a good possibility.

Well of course Durban has to present something compelling to win. But as we've outlined, their team have a lot to draw upon, arguably Toronto is going to have a harder time finding a compelling argument to match.

First attempts, sixths attempts, etc... are all pointless to consider, as these things are based on time and place. Sydney won on its first attempt, but this is a reflection of a solid bid that was in the right place at the right time. Compare Sydney's experience with that of Madrid, or even Toronto itself. I'd say that so far, Sydney chose its fight wisely, and only just came through.

I think if Sydney was against Beijing for 2008 it would have lost, like Toronto. As I mentioned a few pages back - Toronto may as well be bidding for the first time, I think 1996 and 2008 would have very little impact on the outcome of a 2024 bid - especially given the fact that Vancouver 2010 is down in the books of history, which Toronto hasn't had to contend with.

As for Quebec City - isn't this pointless to consider as the mountain issue is non-negotiable? I'd say a second Calgary Games would have a seemingly better chance. I could see a solid bid from China for 2026 as a potential threat too.

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

^^ One should also note that Durban (as a city, not counting South Africa's previous bid with Cape Town) is a first time bidder and Toronto is not.

Durban has to present something wild and compelling to win on the first attempt.

Really?? Like the first Olympics on African soil wouldn't be something "wild & compelling". :rolleyes:

Again, once they were to get on that short-list (which would be Durban's biggest challenge), all bets are are off then & it wouldn't matter how many bids anybody else may have placed in the past (just look at Paris, Detroit & Ostersund, & soon Madrid, for precedence) cuz then the campaign would be about who can pull those heart-strings the best (again, see Rio & PyeongChang for reference).

And look at how many times Australia kept changing their bid city until they finally won, same with the U.K.. The "repeat bid" thing is blown way outta proportion here since that single element can't be isolated to a winning bid all the time. There's usually a much bigger component(s) that determines the final outcome. Plus, there's also evidence of first-winners, too. The most recent being Atlanta, Nagano, Turin & London 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant on a city level, this will be Durban's first bid. If they do make the Candidate stage, then they really need to sell their bid as something wild and compelling, which will be hard in lieu of recent newcomer hosts.

As for Australia, we changed the city yes, but learned from our previous bids. Melbourne offered more than Brisbane, whilst providing a good mix of existing venues. Sydney offered much the same, but with the new mega projects of a new stadium and arena. They also learned from Melbourne and Brisbane's Main Media Centre concept by providing much the same, but in a much smaller (but large area sized) 10 or so storey office building rather than for example Melbourne's 36 floor approach...

Atlanta was an anomaly, which the IOC deemed (though I'm sure now somewhat regret) suitable enough a consolation host over clearly not ready Athens.

Nagano was probably boosted from Nagoya's loss in 1988, as well as being a safe country to have the games in and it's clear record of hosting major events.

Turin was most likely boosted by several factors: Italy's past hosting experience, and the 2 finalist thing on account of the Salt Lake City bid scandal, the other choice being Sion made Turin the sure fire winner.

London had the benefit like Sydney of past bidders from the same country failing as well as the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games restoring faith in Britain's capability of hosting major sporting events.

I doubt that Durban will win based on Cape Town's bidding experience in 2004, nor in it's hosting of an IOC session or even the 2010 World Cup. Perhaps a 2028 bid after a safe host will give them more chances in winning, especially if they gain experience from a 2024 bid.

Edited by Lord David
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that you meant on a city-level, but it still makes no difference. And if they make the short-list, all they have to do is play the game well like Rio did. So IDK what you mean that it'll be hard in leiu of recent newcomer hosts. Based on what? Expense? I think that you underestimate Durban's appeal simply bcuz you're so in awe over bid books & renderings & think that's all that matters. Besides, how do you know that a Durban bid book won't be as flashy.

And you're trying to give explcit reasons why all those cities won, so regardless of what they were, I see no difference in a race where Durban is concerned. Each race is different & has their own set of dynamics as to why certain cities do or don't make it. Hindsight is always 20/20 & it's easy to try & explain afterwards. But right when the 2016 race got started, not very many gave Rio a glimpse of a chance to even get short-listed (since they failed before), let alone go all out & actually win the 2016 Games. But won they did. So I don't see why Durban couldn't do the same, all things being equal.

And just to note, "repeat bidder" Sion was actually the favorite for the 2006 Games. The election of Turin came to much surprise, even to the Torino's themselves, & was an upset similar to 1996. Many of the Swiss weren't happy at all & accussed the IOC of further corruption despite the 2002 scandel in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant on a city level, this will be Durban's first bid. If they do make the Candidate stage, then they really need to sell their bid as something wild and compelling, which will be hard in lieu of recent newcomer hosts.

So if Durban has to sell themselves as "wild and compelling," are other cities held to a different standard? Does Toronto not have to offer something wild and compelling in order to win?

I agree with the sentiment that the repeat vs. first-time bidder line of thinking is over-blown. Yes, it would be a little unusual for an African city to enter the race and win it while other cities have tried and lost before. But so what. Toronto may be a repeat bidder, but it will have been 16 years since their previous bid. And you're talking about a country that gave up on Toronto and instead decided to go with Vancouver (which in retrospect wasn't such a bad move.. it did get them an Olympics).

I get the argument that says the IOC may sour on new frontier-type hosts. Who knows.. maybe Rio 2016 doesn't go somewhere and the IOC does decide they'd rather play it safe. But unless you're factoring that into the equation, there's every reason to believe that a satisfactory bid from Durban might be able to get it done. Whereas a city like Toronto will be the one that really needs that X-factor in order to get the votes they need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ One should also note that Durban (as a city, not counting South Africa's previous bid with Cape Town) is a first time bidder and Toronto is not.

Durban has to present something wild and compelling to win on the first attempt.

I'd disagree with this. Durban has to present something solid and workable to win on its first attempt. And not only that it has to convince everyone that it is solid and workable.

Rogge, whilst always the consummate diplomat, has never been shy of wanting to go to Africa for Africa's sake. On the other hand, what Rob says of IOC members' impressions of Durban from their session there it seems they're not convinced Durban is yet ready to take on the mantle of the first African host. When an African city is ready and has the infrastructure or is deemed capable of building it in the timeframe, then I think it can very easily win with a less obviously "compelling" bid.

Imagine London 2012 hadn't happened. We go into 2024, and London offers its Olympic Park in the heart of the city - the same bid, the same presentation, everything. Durban brings out its map with an African shaped hole in it, its convinced the IOC in the previous months its venue plan is workable and its transport is too, but it's not offering anything like the same scale of development as the London bid. I still think the power of the map might be enough to overcome the presentation London used to steal the Games away from Paris.

So, it's not Durban that'd have to present something wild and compelling, but its rivals. That said, if Durban isn't ready or isn't trusted, it'll go the same way as Rio 2012. A good (by which I mean solid) African bid could sweep all before it, a flaky one that relies only on its trump card will sink like a stone. At the moment, I'm not at all sure a solid African bid is forthcoming, so this is all very hypothetical.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the argument that says the IOC may sour on new frontier-type hosts. Who knows.. maybe Rio 2016 doesn't go somewhere and the IOC does decide they'd rather play it safe. But unless you're factoring that into the equation, there's every reason to believe that a satisfactory bid from Durban might be able to get it done. Whereas a city like Toronto will be the one that really needs that X-factor in order to get the votes they need.

That's just it, though. Rio would have to be a total disaster for the IOC to be turned-off by new frontiers. Even a mediocre Rio 2016 I don't think would stop them from wanting to go to Africa. Especially since I can't see the IOC to hold South Africa to the same extravaganza-like scales of Beijing & Sochi or even London & PyeongChang. They won't want to be criticized for overburdening an African country with a huge expense, like some point the finger at Greece. If the IOC wants to "play it safe" for a cycle, then they'll do it now for 2020. Especially since Rio 2016 is still up in the air.

And like AF said, South Africa probably won't bid unless they are sure that they have a viable plan to present to the IOC. They're not going to go into this blindly, hence very likely why they skipped 2020. And much like the U.S. bids lately, I can't see the South Africans coming back over & over again, either. Some might like to say that they could use the "bid experience" from a 2024 bid for a 2028 one, but I don't see South Africa going the Madrid, PyeongChang or Istanbul route. Like Chicago, they may feel shunned if they don't win (especially if their plan was deemed viable) & may not come back to spend even more millions on another bid. And that's something that I think the IOC may take into account, especially if their bid makes the short-list, then it's deemed credible to take on the Games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ One should also note that Durban (as a city, not counting South Africa's previous bid with Cape Town) is a first time bidder and Toronto is not.

Durban has to present something wild and compelling to win on the first attempt.

If Toronto does things right, then it could very well win. A failed bid would just make Quebec 2026 a good possibility.

To reiterate what others have said, I sure think you have the cart before the horse. Assuming Durban could offer a halfway viable bid plan, It's the others that would have to be wild and compelling. Durban would have that aspect in spades just by showing up.

I know you love your bid books and venue lists (and can understand that), but you do seem to put far too much emphasis on those aspects, and seem clueless about the big role the emotional and geopolitical aspects play in the decisions. I still think the technical plans, venue lists etc are only useful as far as ensuring a bid makes the shortlist (and that's not even necessary if you have a compelling emotional pull like Rio in making the shortlist for 2016). By the time you have a shortlist of however many bidders all signed off as being viable hosts, there's far more intangibles that go into predicting the IOC's votes beyond who has the slightly better stadium or the more compact venue plan. I've said it before, but i doubt many of the members care about the nit-picking technical minutae at the end, and I'm pretty sure most don't obsessively pore through bid books and technical plans like you enjoy doing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ I'm just saying Durban alone, an existing (upgradable) main stadium, the IOC Session and a couple of more venues and other minor factors probably won't cut it. Especially if Istanbul wins, then Durban is definitely a no go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just going to have to disagree on that. Nobody's saying the IOC would hand them the games without being confident they'll pull it off to a modern professional standard, but beyond that I doubt they'd expect, much less insist, that Durban would have to build a whole new set of landmark designer architect stadiums and venues to be considered. The lure of Africa will be the X factor, and let's face it, Durban's really the only viable candidate on the continent, especially in the scheduling window.

It's anybody who goes up against it that would have to conjure up the magnetic levitating Hadid arenas to stand out against the lure of Africa.

The Istanbul factor, I'll give you, is a point worth debate. Should they win, the question of whether the IOC would risk three leap of faith new frontiers in a row will definitely get a working out here.

Edited by Sir Rols
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...