Jump to content

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

2 -stadium Ceremonies concept first floated in Chicago 2016.  Shot down (by IOC); proved untenable.  

LA does not even have a Ceremonies team in place 7, let alone 11 years away from 2028.  2-stadium concept NOT going to happen.  And running the torch from the Coliseum to CofC very old-fashioned idea.  

Its LA. They can pull a ceremony out lf their ass if they had to.

If there is on thing its not short on is event production/management companies or staff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The thing you LA boosters just can't seem to understand is that the IOC only cares about what the host city will do for "the Olympic movement." The sports federations are not interested in urban devel

Sigh! I've tried not to get too involved in the tit-for-tatting in the whole LA debate. And tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and allow that you're a passionate and blinkered supporter of LA

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 Olympi

10 minutes ago, yoshi said:

Why wouldn't you use the Coliseum? Especially if it's renovated by the Games - seems like a bit of a betrayal of LA's great Olympic history tbh :/

I'm sure there are other reasons... but an extra 100,000 @ ($800?) a pop = $80 million buckaroos has something to do with it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, JesseSaenz said:

170K Spectators between the two stadiums, that's a lot of ticket sales. Lol. 

And you know they will sell out.

I just hope they're really transparent with spectators about what is going on and each venue.  They don't want to sell tickets to buy who think they're there for the ceremonies, but instead it's only "viewing and entertainment."  I agree though if they can sell out both stadiums (and I'm sure they can), why not use both.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zekekelso said:

I'm sure there are other reasons... but an extra 100,000 @ ($800?) a pop = $80 million buckaroos has something to do with it. 

Why stop at 2 stadia?  Why not a dozen across the country?  Why not @ all past Olympic host cities?  :blink:   I mean, you could raise $500 million that way . . .  or not.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

2 -stadium Ceremonies concept first floated in Chicago 2016.  Shot down (by IOC); proved untenable.  

LA does not even have a Ceremonies team in place 7, let alone 11 years away from 2028.  2-stadium concept NOT going to happen.  And running the torch from the Coliseum to CofC very old-fashioned idea.  

Do you know for sure it was "shot down" by IOC, or is that just a guess?  I thought the bid changed the plan on its own accord.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Why stop at 2 stadia?  Why not a dozen across the country?  Why not @ all past Olympic host cities?  :blink:   I mean, you could raise $500 million that way . . .  or not.  

Ok slow your roll.

They are pretty clear on that. One is to pay homage to the Coliseum, site of the 1932 and 1984 Opening ceremonies, and the other, is to show the future of LA.

My only concern is that they paint a very rosy picture of the distance between the two. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to this article in the Daily Breeze, the IOC has known about LA2024's 2-stadium Opening/Closing Ceremonies plan for months, so it's no surprise to them.

http://www.dailybreeze.com/events/20170116/la-2024-plans-using-both-coliseum-and-new-inglewood-stadium-for-olympics-opening-closing-ceremonies

I guess LA2024 wants to give live spectators and the TV viewing audience the quintessential LA razzle-dazzle.

What do you guys think, might this proposal backfire for LA2024, in light of the IOC wanting to keep costs down so that the next host city wouldn't feel pressured into one-upping the previous host city?

Although, this 2-stadium Opening/Closing Ceremonies thing might already be accounted for in LA2024's budget that was released some time ago.

Edited by ejaycat
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Why stop at 2 stadia?  Why not a dozen across the country?  Why not @ all past Olympic host cities?  :blink:   I mean, you could raise $500 million that way . . .  or not.  

In fact it is a perfectly reasonable idea to have "celebration sites" across the country. The organizers could presumable make $15m per NFL stadium used if they can get enough local volunteers in each city to put on a decent show, so they could get $500 million. Edit: I mean by using stadiums and arenas throughout the USA.

The problem, though, is that only one stadium can host the official opening ceremony with the athletes and the IOC delegates. Hopefully that is made clear to the people buying tickets.

Edited by Nacre
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, GBModerator said:

Do you know for sure it was "shot down" by IOC, or is that just a guess?  I thought the bid changed the plan on its own accord.

I seem to remember there was comment from the IOC that it was ". . . a bit too much" (in so many words); and Chicago, being sensitive to IOC comments, quickly took it off the table.  The IOC shows up in full force at the main stadium; so I don't know how this multi-stadium idea picks up traction.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zekekelso said:

I'm sure there are other reasons... but an extra 100,000 @ ($800?) a pop = $80 million buckaroos has something to do with it. 

Why would the "live feed" stadium cost $800 a pop. If it wasn't at the REAL DEAL stadium, I'd only pay $80 fricken dollars, TOPS! I could get the same affect at the local bar, or restaurant, with big TV screens covering the action, for far, FAR cheaper, & with dinner & drinks included.

57 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Why stop at 2 stadia?  Why not a dozen across the country?  Why not @ all past Olympic host cities?  :blink:   I mean, you could raise $500 million that way . . .  or not.  

Lmfao, yeah. The pseudo stadia ceremony Games lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a Los Angeles city-wide celebration, not a country-wide or past-Olympic-hosts celebration.  

If this were to come to fruition, I'm pretty sure that people would know which stadium would be holding the main ceremonies.  For the opening ceremonies, people at both stadiums would be getting live entertainment, and seeing two cauldrons being lit.  For the closing ceremonies the stadia's roles would be reversed, in that the Coliseum would be the main ceremony stadium.  I'm sure it'd be a much different experience than seeing it on TV at a sports bar. :P

Edited by ejaycat
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zekekelso said:

I'm sure there are other reasons... but an extra 100,000 @ ($800?) a pop = $80 million buckaroos has something to do with it. 

You think people are paying $800 a pop to sit in a stadium that's not actually where the Opening Ceremony is.  $100 maybe if there's events and entertainment there, but even that's a stretch.

38 minutes ago, Nacre said:

In fact it is a perfectly reasonable idea to have "celebration sites" across the country. The organizers could presumable make $15m per NFL stadium used if they can get enough local volunteers in each city to put on a decent show, so they could get $500 million. Edit: I mean by using stadiums and arenas throughout the USA.

The problem, though, is that only one stadium can host the official opening ceremony with the athletes and the IOC delegates. Hopefully that is made clear to the people buying tickets.

Yea.. no.  $15 million per stadium?  For what.. to watch a feed of the Opening Ceremony with a few volunteers?  Not likely.  Maybe some arenas could host viewing parties, but even that's a stretch.  You're not generating $500 million with that and even if you could, that's gross revenue, not net revenue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all starting to sound very Beijing/Sochi-type, OTT extravaganza. For all the "L.A. has all the venues ready to go (& the village at USC) to keep 'cost' down", so they can then just turn around & splurge it all on double-ceremonies, "city-wide celebrations". :rolleyes: And for someone who keeps saying that they don't care one way or another if L.A. gets the Games, you sure get pretty defensive about it. :P

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

 You think people are paying $800 a pop to sit in a stadium that's not actually where the Opening Ceremony is.  $100 maybe if there's events and entertainment there, but even that's a stretch.

That's pretty much what I said a few moments ago. $80 tops. But then of course someone else chimed in with, but its gonna be a "city-wide celebration", with ceremony action at both stadiums & two caldrons being lit. 

But even if thats the case, if the action is going to be "split" between the two stadiums, then you CAN'T expect to charge $800 "a pop" at both stadiums. Who wants to pay FULL price for only HALF the action?! Then of course you have to start factoring in the logistics & security costs for BOTH stadiums. Nah, this is just sounding more ridiculous by the minute! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, RuFF said:

I dislike the idea myself, but I can also see it happening. I agree that it appears over the top, but I can also understand that LA has that privilege of being able to spend on the experience rather than construction. I can easily see that going either way in people's minds.

43 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Guess how much people pay to park at the Coliseum to watch a live Rams game? You guessed it, $100.00. 

Welcome to the New LA.

Yes, to see an actual football game.  Let's see how long that novelty lasts considering what an awful team the Rams are.  Depending on where you live in LA, probably a lot cheaper (and more convenient) to take an Uber to and from the game.  Or, yes, take the train, if that actually works for you.

So yea, the opening ceremony.. I have no doubts they could try and make it happen.  Not sure what they're putting in the Coliseum that would justify people paying money to sit there.  And no, LA does not have the "privilege" of spending more on the ceremonies simply because they're not spending as much on construction.  If they want to spend more money, they're entitled to do that, but they're probably not going to do that unless they think they can generate that revenue.  More power to them if they think opening up the Coliseum accomplishes that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the budget they will set aside for Ceremonies, probably NOT going to happen.  Some of you don't know what it takes to stage proper Ceremonies.  Besides, you can control what goes on very well in one venue (with your 10-15,000 show performers (maybe 2,500 staff); the 9,000 est athletes; another 1,500 security forces; the 75,000 paying spectators, 300 buses to bring everybody in and out -- but also in a 2nd venue?   Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of hours spent VETTING the bkgds of the 12,000 or so people involved in the show.?  :blink:

And they are going to repeat all this at ANOTHER venue?  Very unlikely.  :wacko:  Not unless the Ceremonies budget will be doubled.  Don't forget there will still be a second set of Ceremonies, granted smaller, for the Paras that the same team will have to churn out.  

And which one will NBC and the other networks focus on?  I don't see it happening . . . other than sharing the Lighting moment with 3 locations.  I just don't see the IOC going for this over-the-top business in more than one location. 

Edited by baron-pierreIV
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JesseSaenz said:

They are pretty clear on that. One is to pay homage to the Coliseum, site of the 1932 and 1984 Opening ceremonies, and the other, is to show the future of LA.

My only concern is that they paint a very rosy picture of the distance between the two. 

My thinking also.

It's about 10km, which is far enough to take a significant amount of time, but nowhere near far enough to be run in parallel with the Parade of Nations, which remains the big entertainment challenge of opening ceremonies (unless the route is deliberately extended, and several key sites around the city are not visited until that evening).

Link to post
Share on other sites

LA scrapped the new Olympic village and came up with their excellent sports campus idea. That was a good decision based on the embarrassment of riches LA has at its disposal.

The two stadium ceremony idea is the opposite. We can't decide which of our many stadiums to use so we'll use two even though the idea will make for a less cohesive performance, confuse spectators, broadcasters and TV viewers, and undermine our central cost saving message. Go us!

Innovation for indecision's sake. Doesn't reflect well.

I don't mind them keeping their options open even after the bid is won but when the time comes to make a decision pick a stadium and get on with it. That's what you're paid for.

This is an open goal for Paris. This is uncharacteristically profligate and indecisive from LA whose bid thus far has been slick and well pitched.

Edited by Rob.
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FYI said:

This is all starting to sound very Beijing/Sochi-type, OTT extravaganza. For all the "L.A. has all the venues ready to go (& the village at USC) to keep 'cost' down", so they can then just turn around & splurge it all on double-ceremonies, "city-wide celebrations". :rolleyes: And for someone who keeps saying that they don't care one way or another if L.A. gets the Games, you sure get pretty defensive about it. :P

If this was directed at me, I still don't care whether LA gets the Olympics or not.  I wasn't getting defensive, I was just countering the "why stop at 2 stadia, why not make it across the USA or use the cities that hosted before?" comment.  I assume that comment was meant as sarcasm, but I was countering it with a "why would the LA bid committee pay for a US or international opening ceremonies?" type of thing.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob. said:

The two stadium ceremony idea is the opposite. We can't decide which of our many stadiums to use so we'll use two even though the idea will make for a less cohesive performance, confuse spectators, broadcasters and TV viewers, and undermine our central cost saving message. Go us!

 

I don't think it was indecision so much as a compromise to appease the city of LA.  I guess having the opening and closing ceremonies at a stadium that isn't in LA city limits didn't sit well with some LA city council people.  

Does anyone remember San Francisco's failed 2012 bid?  That plan was to use Stanford Stadium as the "centerpiece" Olympic stadium, which I thought was really odd, being that the opening/closing ceremonies and athletics/track and field would be 30+ miles away from the actual city of San Francisco.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

I don't think it was indecision so much as a compromise to appease the city of LA.  I guess having the opening and closing ceremonies at a stadium that isn't in LA city limits didn't sit well with some LA city council people.  

So simply bcuz of this do two ceremonies? Doesn't sound very compromising, as much as it does wasteful.

21 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

Does anyone remember San Francisco's failed 2012 bid?  That plan was to use Stanford Stadium as the "centerpiece" Olympic stadium, which I thought was really odd, being that the opening/closing ceremonies and athletics/track and field would be 30+ miles away from the actual city of San Francisco.  

Yes, & not just the stadium, but practically the entire bid was centered around "Palo Alto 2012", & which is precisely why it ultimately failed. 

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...