baron-pierreIV Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 (edited) On 3/3/2017 at 3:51 PM, JesseSaenz said: the head of that company publicly declared their support and their role in the bid. Did I say otherwise? My point is, as Mein Trumpff tries to make out, the part LA plays in the making of movies is really just a small one now, since movies released by the LA-based studios are made THE WORLD OVER; therefore local economies are more impacted than just the what? 50 square miles of Hollywood. I am NOT discounting the endorsement of the studios in LA's bid -- and I doubt that that will have any sway in the minds of the 100 or so IOC voters. Edited March 5, 2017 by baron-pierreIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 I think we can do that with many of your posts, too. Especially when you were talking about, when the brand-new OV was still being proposed at the piggyback yards, how much of a "legacy" that would be post-Games to the much needed affording housing in L.A. And ever since they scrapped that, your tune has changed as well. Not to mention, Boston 2024 still had a lot to construct, like the other big piece Olympic stadium. So it's not like they were going to be some cost effective Games. Hence, why the people there said NO to begin with, & the USOC then turned to their *second* choice L.A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 Yeah, typical trollish behavoir when your total double standards are pointed out. But what else can one expect from a complete TROLL(ette) such as yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 What I actually find hysterical is for one, for as much as you criticize Baron that he doesn't know what he's talking about, that you're now wanting to use a point-of-reference from him in order to "suit" your hypocritical argument(s). And two, that meant that you actually had to venture out into other threads (besides your bubble here) to find that it. I'm sure that was quite difficult for you to do, Truff! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 20 hours ago, RuFF said: The circle jerk in the Paris thread isn't discussing this. http://gamesbids.com/eng/summer-olympic-bids/rio-2016/french-investigation-raises-corruption-suspicions-over-rio-2016-olympic-bid-election/ Please don't confuse what goes on in that thread with what goes on in your bedroom. One of those places has people offering worthwhile discussion. The other is just you, your right hand, and probably a drawer of old socks. And it's true what they say that you are what you eat. Which explains why you're such a dick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted March 5, 2017 Report Share Posted March 5, 2017 TMW you get completely and utterly roasted by Quaker. Thank you Quaker, that was amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted March 5, 2017 Report Share Posted March 5, 2017 23 hours ago, RuFF said: While reading through the Boston 2024 thread I ran into this tidbit by baron-pierreIV. It was in reference to an asset Boston had in University housing: "Just to argue one small point. I don't hold that it will sway them. But it is a very fiscally savvy move for anyone organizing a gargantuan event to NOT ignore this tremendous, cost-saving asset. It is a good legacy point because not only will the host be making use of infrastructure already in place, the benefits will be can-do living facilities for the media (probably they will be housed there) during the 3 weeks party AND refurbished units for incoming students afterwards. This would be a high point for me if I were an IOC voting member." If what you're saying is that I was wrong in this regard -- and, really, all I did was point out that Boston has an abundance of dorms, and it flopped -- therefore, it also gives lie to LA's big boast that it has the ready-made villages. In other words, even that asset of LA over Paris wouldn't matter. You just shot yourself in the foot and mouth, tRuffmpf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMarkSnow2012 Posted March 6, 2017 Report Share Posted March 6, 2017 16 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said: If what you're saying is that I was wrong in this regard -- and, really, all I did was point out that Boston has an abundance of dorms, and it flopped -- therefore, it also gives lie to LA's big boast that it has the ready-made villages. In other words, even that asset of LA over Paris wouldn't matter. You just shot yourself in the foot and mouth, tRuffmpf. Surprising discovery- there is an American University of Paris ! Maybe they'll have some spare dorm rooms over the summer of 2024. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted March 6, 2017 Report Share Posted March 6, 2017 OK....I'll bite. Because of his agenda he's making way too much of a fuss about Paris' Olympic Village (as far as I'm aware Rio is the only host city which has had legacy issues with new housing - it's not like it's a difficult thing for a city to make use of!). Olympic Stadiums usually cause the biggest headaches, along with awkward specialist venues that can't be converted into something more flexible. Olympic villages....not so much. And selling LA as the "change option" is a nonsense. The only "change option" would be for the IOC itself to fundamentally change venue requirements, the sports programme and the number of athletes. Unless they do, nothing will change. LA being in the privileged position of having most things in place doesn't change any of the demands that will be put upon the 2028, 2032, 2036 hosts. It's PR fluff from LA. They are not the ones in a position to change anything. He's almost certainly right about the optics with Fredericks though. That's not going to help perceptions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 ...wasn't Vancouver's Olympic village a problem also, a big loss? ...and Rio's, well that's a special level of problems nobody wants to focus on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 London's 2012 village was a success. So I see Paris' 2024 village having similar success. But these people never focus on the positive examples, only the negative ones to further their bias agendas. But when it's convenient for L.A. to use London as an example, they do it. But when they want to paint negative towards Paris' 2024 plans they use Rio 2016 as the example. That's what's "disingenuous". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 Paris' village should be fine unless, like Vancouver, there's a developer bobble or larger economy or political issues, then there could be bigger issues than the village (see Rio). Olympic Village proves to be a costly lesson for Vancouver It’s hard to imagine a mayor or council ever assuming the kind of financial risk that the Non-Partisan Association government did when it entered into an agreement with the Vancouver Organizing Committee in 2002 to provide athlete housing for the 2010 Winter Games. It was that arrangement that ultimately left the city on the hook when the developer ran into financial difficulties in 2008 as financial markets teetered. Suddenly, the city owned the project, which it had to complete in time to house Sidney Crosby and his fellow Olympic friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 London was preparing for the 2012 Games precisely at the time of those very financial markets teetering, & managed to weather the storm very well. Besides, Rio's problems stemmed much beyond the Olympic Games anyway. Brazil, even when their economy was booming when they won the 2016 Olympics back in 2009, was still a developing country with a great deal of social equality. That's what many of their political issues were from. It's pretty unfair when people try to blame the Olympics for all of Rio's downfalls. It's akin to some people trying to blame Greece's economic woes on the Athens 2004 Olympics. When in reality, the Olympics were just a blip on the radar of the Greek's troubles, not the cause of them. So still, see London. Not Rio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 *social INequality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) 33 minutes ago, FYI said: London was preparing for the 2012 Games precisely at the time of those very financial markets teetering, & managed to weather the storm very well. Besides, Rio's problems stemmed much beyond the Olympic Games anyway. Brazil, even when their economy was booming when they won the 2016 Olympics back in 2009, was still a developing country with a great deal of social equality. That's what many of their political issues were from. It's pretty unfair when people try to blame the Olympics for all of Rio's downfalls. It's akin to some people trying to blame Greece's economic woes on the Athens 2004 Olympics. When in reality, the Olympics were just a blip on the radar of the Greek's troubles, not the cause of them. So still, see London. Not Rio. i don't blames the Olympics for Rios problems at all.....they confidently ran toward their commitments and promises to the IOC. It's not the Olympics fault that Rio staggered through to the finish line as so many more critical problems and priorities piled up and took focus from the event. However, I really don't think the IOC did Rio any favors by egging them on to take on un-achievable commitments like cleaning the bay, city wide crime pacification, legacy plans for unnecessary/unused sports venues like an Olympic golf coarse (built from scratch no less), whitewater stadiums, and velodrome. neither LA nor Paris would experience any of these problem......unless there was some terrible economy issue or they take a bath with some horrendous development deal.......it probably wouldn't happen but it could. It did in Vancouver. Paris is a greater risk simply because their village is a more complex project with greater risk. LA......just shove em in a dorm where they belong....smarter. Edited March 7, 2017 by paul 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamBlakeUSA Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 I Won't Bleame Rio's Either They Been Having Before The Games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 I got bored with Abramson's meandering article. Brevity is the soul of wit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 For Vancouver it is important to point out that the city itself is a major property developer. Vancouver has made a lot of money in the past on its own building projects; the loss on the Olympic village was due more to economic factors than it being unwise for cities to buy housing. Also, Vancouver is a bit of a weird major city from a business perspective. It has comparatively few big corporations and it is more of an entrepot for western Canadian commerce as a whole. So I think it must have been harder for them to coordinate with a single big corporation or industry to build housing tied to some other nearby commercial development. Meanwhile it should be relatively easy to arrange an agreement to provide housing for some of Air France's 95,000+ employees at a new media village located near Charles de Gaulle airport. For the record I think the same thing would be the case with a new village in Los Angeles. Several of my family members have moved out of Los Angeles simply because they can't afford the rents of LA. Spending public money on housing development would require taxpayer money up front, but it might very well end up making a profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 (edited) ...maybe governments should not be funding this type of entertainment and all countries should follow the American model? Or perhaps it's better to require a referendum to always let the voters decide how to (or if to) bid or host. The USOC was crazy to ever share so much revenue with the failing IOC. Edited March 8, 2017 by paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neige Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 hours ago, RuFF said: I predicted it first. http://gamesbids.com/eng/robs-bidblog/bidweek-no-boston-olympics-movement-touches-paris-2024-calgary-2026-will-the-ioc-be-next/ It will not at all be surprising if LA is the only bid to make it to September. In being a publicly financed bid the Parisian bid shares the very core problem that exists in all fleeting bids, taxpayer money. I predict a failed bid. 7 minutes ago, neige said: In my opinion, this petition stuff is not a hot topic at all with regards to the number of signatures: about 10 000 at the present. Amazing to see it is discussed in 4 different threads: Paris 2024, Los Angeles 2024, and 2 in GB newswire! It can be find petitions for anything! This one was started on the same day and has more than 40 000 signatures to save kangourous.... http://www.mesopinions.com/petition/animaux/extermination-1-million-kangourous-australie/28281 The real hot topic of the moment is the Penelopegate! https://www.change.org/p/madame-fillon-rendez-nous-les-1-500-000-euros-penelopegate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 15 minutes ago, neige said: Good to know neige, but knowning tRuff, he won't listen anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neige Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 On 07/03/2017 at 4:23 PM, RuFF said: Fredericks steps down from IOC evaluation committee and he will also not cast a vote for the 2024 host. The French investigation threatens the Paris bid, especially if bribery is proven. https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN16E19C but it gets worse. With bribery and ballooning costs, one name on the Paris team sticks out that could potentially connect Paris 2024 to the bribery troubles and ballooning costs in Tokyo. Etienne Thobois, a member of the Tokyo 2020 bid team who has gone on record stating that a bid he worked on always had an unacheivable, pie in the sky budget. I think Abrahamson is right, #shareparis is probably going to share more than just the good things, and with a powerful tool such as social media and the meat of a backlash already present, I won't be surprised if LA goes on to be the only city to make it to the finish line. With an election looming the government backed bid is likely to suffer the changing ideology of the government. These next few months are going to be pivotal for the Paris bid, and how it manages to navigate it. Can someone explain what is exacty the problem with Etienne Thobois? Is he concerned by this investigation? Couldn't find his name in french articles.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 All this (silly) talk about private vs public backing is neither here nor there. Boston 2024 also promised to be privately financed, use many existing & temporary venues, & also rely on public works that were already pre-approved, & yet the people there still didn't buy any of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted March 9, 2017 Report Share Posted March 9, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, RuFF said: The Olympics should move on to Paris and become obsolete. And the final toy has been flung from the pram. Edited March 9, 2017 by Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.