Jump to content

Recommended Posts

They have no track record of terrorism because there's no reason to attack LA. We're not the financial capital like NYC, and we're not the iconic and dear city of a mostly passive nation. Plus, LA hasn't faced anything like what Paris or NYC has gone through (this century at least), so it's unfair to compare Paris' "track record" with LA's.

(Also, I don't think "track-record" is the best word to be used here. It makes it sound like the incidents were something earned and deserved. O.O)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is mostly a coincidence that Los Angeles has not been attacked. If Ahmed Ressam wasn't intercepted by a customs agent after already passing through the US-Canadian border, Los Angeles' airport probably would have been bombed.

Edited by Nacre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have no track record of terrorism because there's no reason to attack LA. We're not the financial capital like NYC, and we're not the iconic and dear city of a mostly passive nation. Plus, LA hasn't faced anything like what Paris or NYC has gone through (this century at least), so it's unfair to compare Paris' "track record" with LA's.

Well, yes, but Caitlin Jenner lives there. She's in the X-hairs of the tranny-islamic-terrorists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woohooitsme, your very argument as you put it in and of itself says something. Problem is perspective. Regardless of perspective, yours or mine, the conclusion is the same. LA has not faced what NYC or Paris have. I have not compared security. You guys have. All I said is that, through coincidence or not, Fox News reported less than a month ago that LA's terror prep may be its biggest card. As a matter of fact I didn't even say that. I said it was funny that this very topic had recently been covered by the media, and it was. You guys took this somewhere else.

"Fox News reported". Did you happen to look at the video? 1 of the panelists was laughing at some of the claims LA was making. So regardless of how someone feels about Fox News, hard to take them seriously at that point.

Here's the perspective we need to keep in mind and you alluded to it earlier. It's November of 2015. The vote isn't until 2017. For you to jump on this in the immediate aftermath of what just happened in Paris does seem a little disingenuous, especially coming from someone who already has a penchant for trying to shine a positive light on LA and a negative light on the competition. It may be correct that LA is better prepared to protect the Olympics from a terrorist attack. But to post that story (and yes, I know it's from a month ago) the day after the Paris attack and then be surprised when someone thinks you're making a comparison.. come on. You were the one who brought that "coverage" into the conversation and timed it with Paris in the news. So whether you intended it or no (and clearly you did intend it this way), you're making a comparison.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What penchant do you think I'm carrying? I'm from New York, so I'm almost glad I wasn't here back in 2005 when they were in the running because it's the nature of this forum to look right through someone and think they can't be objective about a city they're backing. And my viewpoint then as it is now is that I would have loved to see an Olympics in New York, but they didn't have the goods and that's why they lost.

So you ask why I seem to take your viewpoints on LA with a grain of salt? Stuff like this..

The French economy is closer to California's than it is to that of the USA. Assuming this is true, LA has incredible potential here that Paris is going to lack and already the Paris bid is priced higher than LA's. There are also rumors that the USOC is trying to be humble and play down the potential profit numbers. Of course, those are rumors. But given Agenda 2020 and the way the numbers can look I think Paris is going to need more than just a strong bid. I can't wait what story develops with each as we get closer to the vote in 2017.

I know the technical plan for LA, and I know the sentimental plan for Paris. I am not really interested in the boo boo Paris hasn't hosted or Europe needs a hug story. It's been worn out. I'm interested in technical data. What is the budget and where are the venues. Transportation wise how will they connect. The media center, athletes village and stuff like that. I know the sappy story but sappy stories don't win bids alone. For the purpose of examining data that pertains to the bid not sentiment.

There's been rhetoric for awhile here from different people in support of different cities (including South Africa before they announced they weren't bidding). There is certainly a case that can be made for each city, but you're 1 of the only people I can think of who seems so eager to want to downplay Paris in order to prop up LA. That's the perception I get from you and maybe it's not as true as it is in my head.

Nevertheless.. you chose to post a month old story about LA's preparedness for a terrorist attack the day after a major and very tragic event occurred in Paris. That seems somewhat disingenuous from someone in your position who is supporting LA and is looking for reasons to downplay Paris. If someone else had posted that link, I might think about it differently. With all due respect, that it's coming from someone who is very eager to prop up LA, not sure I can view it that way.

Make your case for LA. But don't tell us how you're not on the Paris page and then make a post here that has much less to do with LA and everything to do with recent events in Paris.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am struck by the statement that "there is no reason to attack LA." There is no reason to attack any city or any people in any city. This is the horror of terrorism. Whichever city wins any Olympic bid--any bid for any future games--will become a potential target for cold hearted monsters hell bent on killing people. What happened in Paris this past week is proof that no city will be immune and the cost for security for future games will be staggering and may, eventually, surpass costs for venues. Winning a bid will put a bulls eye on the winning city. It's terrible but it's the reality of the insane age in which we are living.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here Q&A from the Chairman of LA>24 SBD Global Olympic Series: Los Angeles Pitch Focuses On Olympics 'Experience,' 'Low Risk'

By HJ Mai, Assistant Managing Editor

Published November 18, 2015

Casey Wasserman, chairman of LA 2024, says Los Angeles is a "truly" Olympic City, having hosted the Summer Games twice in '32 and '84, and with 85% of venues already "in place or planned" it is ready to deliver "low-risk, sustainable" Games. Wasserman, chairman and CEO of Wasserman Media Group, answered a series of questions about the city's qualifications and chances of winning its bid to host the 2024 Games in the third of a five-part SBD Global series with bid city representatives. Budapest andHamburg kicked off the series on Monday and Tuesday, respectively. We will continue, in alphabetical order, with the rest of the bidders: Paris and Rome.

Q: What do you think makes your city the best choice for the IOC?

Casey Wasserman: Los Angeles is truly an Olympic City. Olympism is in our DNA because every day Angelenos experience the positive legacies of the 1932 and 1984 Games. In L.A., the IOC has a Candidate City that has proven experience in hosting an impactful, sustainable Games; that lives and breathes sport, full of passionate sports fans; and has 85% of the world-class venues required for the Games already in place or planned. If we have the honor of hosting the Olympic and Paralympic Games, these assets would allow LA 2024 to deliver low-risk, sustainable and spectacular Games that give athletes the best platform to achieve their dreams and inspire the world. Our Games Plan is completely aligned with L.A.’s long-term vision and the IOC’s Olympic Agenda 2020 to ensure it will deliver a lasting legacy for the city. But we are also committed to delivering a legacy which goes beyond our city and benefits the entire Olympic Movement. L.A. is a hub for innovation, creativity and entrepreneurism, and we will harness this pioneering spirit to deliver fresh thinking and new ideas, in line with the progressive ambitions of Olympic Agenda 2020. Our city of storytellers would be the perfect partners to reinvigorate the Olympic Movement’s connection to the young people of the world.

Q: Your bid and Paris are the early frontrunners, why do you think that is? And how can you stay ahead of the competition?

Wasserman: We are just honored to be among so many great candidates in the race for the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games. I wouldn’t say there are any frontrunners in this group; we are just focused on our own bid and developing the best possible offering for the Olympic Movement and the City of L.A. There is a long way to go and the hard work has begun. Over the next two years we will work closely with the IOC to learn from their expertise and ensure that we maximize the huge potential of our city. We strongly believe that L.A. is ideally positioned to help the IOC deliver a reimagined Olympic Games in line with Olympic Agenda 2020.

Casey Wasserman Q: How important were Thomas Bach’s “Agenda 2020” reforms in your decision to bid for the Olympics?

Wasserman: Los Angeles and the United States have consistently shown our commitment to the Olympic Movement. Under IOC President Thomas Bach’s visionary leadership we are seeing a new, revitalized Olympic Movement emerge, making us even more convinced that L.A. could be the perfect partner to the IOC at this moment. The Olympic Agenda 2020 reforms have allowed for greater flexibility and put an emphasis on making sure the Olympic Games fits within the long-term vision of the city to optimize its legacy. With 85% of the world-class venues in our Games Plan already built or planned as permanent facilities, we are ideally positioned to deliver a sustainable Olympic Games.

Q: Cost overruns have been a big issue with recent and future Olympics, i.e. Sochi and Tokyo. What measures would you put in place to control spending?

Wasserman: LA 2024 is committed to hosting a profitable and fiscally responsible Games. With the 1932 and 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games both producing surpluses, we have proven that we are ready for that responsibility. The LA 2024 budget is prudent, realistic and designed to protect taxpayers. Even with our $400 million contingency, $150 million insurance premium, and conservative revenue estimates, our budget still produces a projected surplus of more than $160 million.

Q: What are the biggest issues facing your bid?

Wasserman: All cities bidding to host the Olympic Games will face challenges but we are working closely with the IOC to learn from past experiences and deliver a plan which keeps these challenges to a minimum. Issues for previous hosts of Olympic Games have often been related to the construction of venues and Games-time infrastructure but we have designed a Games Plan that takes advantage of the existing infrastructure we already have built or planned in the city.

Q: How would you classify your chances in the race for the 2024 Olympics?

Wasserman: The 2020 Olympic race is very competitive and ultimately it is up to the IOC members to decide which city would host the best Games. But we are confident that if we can effectively communicate the assets of our bid to the IOC membership, they will see that L.A. is ideally positioned to deliver a new watershed moment for the Olympic Movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodger Stadiums Parking Lot is screaming, take me. I'd love to see that lot developed. There is giant potential and the views of a new downtown and beyond would be amazing. Link it up to Chinatown Station or Union Station and I think we have a winner. The Piggyback Yards need to be added to the river in a natural form as possible. Adding riverfront property to downtown LA would change the face of the city and spur development to address the city's housing shortage.

Where would Dodger fans park if they developed that area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where would Dodger fans park if they developed that area?

Nowhere. Let them depend on mass transit like the rest of the world's stadiums to get to the games.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been rumors of building a stadium in Chavez Ravine a while back, so if they can sacrifice some parking space to fit an entire NFL stadium there, I don't see why they can't put some building towers there.

BTW, there are already shuttles that run from Union Station and Dodgers Stadium on game days. Also, I think it would be more likely that the Crenshaw would extend upward instead of creating a new line altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nowhere. Let them depend on mass transit like the rest of the world's stadiums to get to the games.

It's unreasonable to expect all fans to use mass transit in Los Angeles. I think the only baseball stadiums in the USA where the majority of fans use mass transit are Yankee Stadium and Fenway Park. Even the Mets have a sea of parking next to their stadium.

That said, they can develop the area and provide some parking garages too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's unreasonable to expect all fans to use mass transit in Los Angeles. I think the only baseball stadiums in the USA where the majority of fans use mass transit are Yankee Stadium and Fenway Park.

Majority of San Francisco Bay Area fans use Muni, BART, CalTrain and ferries to go to AT&T Park and the As in Oakland. A few hundred cars also park close by.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's unreasonable to expect all fans to use mass transit in Los Angeles. I think the only baseball stadiums in the USA where the majority of fans use mass transit are Yankee Stadium and Fenway Park. Even the Mets have a sea of parking next to their stadium.

That said, they can develop the area and provide some parking garages too.

Well of course not all fans should be expected to take mass transit to a football or baseball stadium. There are exceptions of course like for those who are handicapped and have the correct permit to park in those certain spots. In the case of a football game, those that have tickets to tailgate should be allowed to park at the games. But I do think the majority of the spectators should rely on public transportation to get to the games, and the city's mass transit system should be able to accommodate that.

As was just mentioned in the previous posts before this one, some cities already do provide mass transit options to get to stadiums. Houston also has a light rail system that goes to Reliant/NRG park, which is where the Houston Texans play. It's heavily used for games as well as during the 3 weeks that the Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo is here. But also during the years that the Reliant/NRG stadium was being built, a park & ride system was created during the time the Rodeo went on, and it worked great and perhaps other cities should implement that system on the day of a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Los Angeles to be first 2024 bid city to present at crucial IOC Session in Lima

Los Angeles 2024 will be the first bid city to give its presentation to the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Session in Lima in 2017 while Paris will be the last of the four candidates to stake their claim for the event after lots were drawn at the Executive Board meeting here today.

Los Angeles, Rome, Budapest and Paris was the outcome of the lot-drawing to determine the order in which the cities will present their respective bids at the Session in the Peruvian capital, where the host for the 2024 Olympics and Paralympics will be chosen.

They will also present in that order at every major meeting between now and the Session.

While it gives no advantage to either bid city, the drawing of lots for the crucial meeting will see the two favourites present to the IOC's members either side of Rome and Budapest.

...

http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1032392/los-angeles-to-be-first-bid-city-to-present-at-crucial-ioc-session-in-lima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about that but ok. To be honest the more that the Olympic movement is tarnished by referendums, sporting scandals, fifa's and all the negative publicity sport has been getting, the more the 2024 games become Los Angeles' over Paris'. As Bach continues to open his mouth the shoe is sliding into LA in minor ways that Paris isn't fitting. That's just personal opinion but I'm going to predict now, that Paris is looking at another upset.

Where did this guy come from?????????? :blink: Rewriting tried and true formulae???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about that but ok. To be honest the more that the Olympic movement is tarnished by referendums, sporting scandals, fifa's and all the negative publicity sport has been getting, the more the 2024 games become Los Angeles' over Paris'. As Bach continues to open his mouth the shoe is sliding into LA in minor ways that Paris isn't fitting. That's just personal opinion but I'm going to predict now, that Paris is looking at another upset.

Don't understand the logic or content of this post.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about that but ok. To be honest the more that the Olympic movement is tarnished by referendums, sporting scandals, fifa's and all the negative publicity sport has been getting, the more the 2024 games become Los Angeles' over Paris'. As Bach continues to open his mouth the shoe is sliding into LA in minor ways that Paris isn't fitting. That's just personal opinion but I'm going to predict now, that Paris is looking at another upset.

Dream on....

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...