Jump to content

Recommended Posts

...the skateboard thing is sorta true....those guys are fanatical and dedicated. The sport is dying for respect...I just don't know if the IOC takes them seriously. Just too many old people....the Olympics is not JUST uncool, they are out of touch. I think it's too late.....and too many old people holding on to the past.

I.E. ...

paris2024-baumann-run.jpg?resize=768,511

Edited by paul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, RuFF said:

I think there is a reason LA people emphasize this. First, it's not really a forecast of whether each individual venue will produce a profit when the vast majority of proposed venues are currently active producing a profit. Then there is this other fact that goes mysteriously missing from your doubt. The United States has a significantly larger sporting industry that any other country on earth, and its privately run, producing a profit. The stakes in the US lie on individuals, and not the government. Then there is this. The pent up demand of stakeholders in the US ready to dump loads of private money in a games that is right here in the US. Why do you think ticket prices are projected to be higher than Paris? 

You can have your doubt. I don't doubt it. And as a matter of fact I believe the profit will be in the Billions. 

I mean.. wow.  Tough to tell right now if you're just trolling or just that stupid.  Profit in the billions?  The initial budget projections talked about a surplus of about $161 million.  But you think things will go so well that they'll measure profit in the billions?  What expenses are we not going to count to make that happen.  Let alone what the federal government will be providing in security, less we're not counting that against the budget and what's considered profitable.  And for comparison's sake, the last Summer Olympics held in the United States spent $32 million on security.  Tokyo is project to spend $1.6 billion.  That's how costs have ballooned since 1984.  LA's budget is over $5 billion, with more than $1 billion in venue infrastructure.  When they're counting on revenue to come from the IOC and have created contingency funding to protect the city (which has basically said they're okay being on the hook for cost overruns), expecting profits in the billions is hoping that things not only go as smoothly as possible, but better than expected.  Good luck with that, and remember that unlike 1984 when LA was the only city in the running, this time they actually have to earn it.

You're right that there's a lot of private enterprise when it comes to sports in the United States.  But who exactly are these stakeholders who are going to call up the LA organizers and say "here, please take my money"  Businesses (think Coca-Cola in 1996) will spend that money unless they think they'll get something out of it.  NBC has already pledged their money to the IOC, so it's not like that contract will change, even though they'd certainly benefit from a US-held Olympics.

And let it be said, even though you will choose to hear whatever you want regardless of what anyone says.. I don't doubt that an LA Olympics would do well.  I think they can make a profit, but their plan is not without risk.  I have said that repeatedly even though it's easier for you to say I oppose you and tell me I have doubts and I'm missing what the beer goggles are showing you.  But - and I know you hate to hear this, but you know it's true - it's still on the IOC to choose a city.  And this being a game of politics still leads me to believe it'll be Paris 2024, no matter how solid LA's bid looks.  In truth, if you weren't so enamored with LA, you'd realize Paris has a pretty solid plan themselves that shouldn't be so easily dismissed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Sorry, i can't be there to read that blowhard novel. However, LA is not about to tout profit. And a private bid is not in the business of losing money. So if YOU think it's a money loser that's great, and that would fly in a government funded bid (Paris). But that's the difference, it's private. So if you're so confident I'd ask you this. Would you put your own money on the line if you knew, over and over again, that what you are putting your money in would lose money? You're stupid, so you probably would. But LA's business community is not in the business of losing money. That's a huge difference that LA2024 will tout. Private is important because private people carry a burden, their own money. So yea, you can argue that LA will be on the hook, because the city would be. But before it does that it is asking private money to put their balls on the table first. So if the knife has to fall they have an incentive t make sure it doesn't fall on their balls. But, you're a woman... so you and your pals wouldn't understand. 

And you're a trolling homophobic sexist asshole (wow, you called me a woman.. I'm so offended).  Sorry that 3 paragraphs is too much for you to read, although when it comes to your hero Alan, I'm sure that's no problem  And probably be masturbating the full way through it.

I can't argue with this level of stupid anymore when you're making up what you think I'm saying and arguing against it.  LA and their backers are investing in the Olympics hoping they'll make money.  Maybe they will.  But maybe they won't.  How many people, including a lot of really smart people, have made investments they were sure would pay off and lost money on it.  You can't just say LA isn't in the business of losing money as if that prevents them from messing this up.  Things can easily go south on them.  They ARE on the hook.  That's not open to interpretation.  It's an indisputable fact.

But whatever.  You are dangerously fucking stupid.  Speaking of getting your balls cut off..

59c8f0a4064036d80fc59f9782c0e17d_stupid-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

And you're a trolling homophobic sexist asshole (wow, you called me a woman.. I'm so offended).  Sorry that 3 paragraphs is too much for you to read, although when it comes to your hero Alan, I'm sure that's no problem  And probably be masturbating the full way through it.

I can't argue with this level of stupid anymore when you're making up what you think I'm saying and arguing against it.  LA and their backers are investing in the Olympics hoping they'll make money.  Maybe they will.  But maybe they won't.  How many people, including a lot of really smart people, have made investments they were sure would pay off and lost money on it.  You can't just say LA isn't in the business of losing money as if that prevents them from messing this up.  Things can easily go south on them.  They ARE on the hook.  That's not open to interpretation.  It's an indisputable fact.

But whatever.  You are dangerously fucking stupid.  Speaking of getting your balls cut off..

59c8f0a4064036d80fc59f9782c0e17d_stupid-

Q, it's really not worth getting upset over.  S/he's just trolling.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RuFF said:

Paris continues to be on top of its game by having fanfare and media at its evaluation. The showing up in LA, also having a sun campaign, and now this. Its bid is using tantrums and depending on geopolitics, 100 years and that sentiment to win its bid.

LA lost to Boston, came back with slick and refined marketing, promises the lower risk of the two bids and greater revenue. It's been quiet out of respect to Paris' Evaluation, followed the rules for the evaluation, accepted that a double award may be appropriate for the movement, and as the Mayor said LA keeps coming back, being the clear underdog, with a smile and a can do attitude and a history like no other Olympics before or after of producing a profit.

Awarding Paris the games is the equivalent of giving the bronze medalist a gold because of who (where) they are, or because you feel sorry for them because they keep losing, or because they're cheating and using performance enhancing drugs. 

Ask the folks in Rio how that worked out for them.  That's how this game is played.  It's not won on technical merit alone, no matter how much you want to convince yourself that's the case.  It's a good think you're not working for LA2024 if that's your take on Paris.  The spin you're trying to put on this is all sorts of ignorant.  LA is not some plucky underdog when it comes to the Olympics, no matter what Garcetti says.  And Paris is the equivalent of a drug cheat?  If you're counting on all these things to tilt the scales in LA's favor, don't hold your breath.

And then there's this.  Your move, Donald.  If this was reversed and the US president was going to be there and the French president was not, you know you absolutely wouldn't shut up about how big it is for the LA bid over Paris' bid for 1 leader to be there and the other not to be.  This is huge for Paris and you can be damn sure it may just be worth a vote or 2.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, A-Money1983 said:

However, I can't help but think of Obama's 2009 trip to Copenhagen.

 

I don't think that I had to do with the reason why Rio was awarded the Olympics, but it didn't serve as a magic formula either.

Obama was actually competing with this guy

240px-Lula_cropped.jpg

The Cinderella Story of south America and the charismatic uncle of Brazil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RuFF said:

LA lost to Boston, came back with slick and refined marketing, promises the lower risk of the two bids and greater revenue. It's been quiet out of respect to Paris' Evaluation

Editor, InsideTheGames, on the lies LA's team were spinning to journos last week:

But I guess if they were quiet out of respect this week that's all good?

The rest of your post? -_-

5 hours ago, FYI said:

^Getting desperate, are you. :rolleyes:

I'm wondering if he's a paid Paris shill. He's doing about as good a job at promoting LA as Jim Jones did for Abuja.

Edited by Rob.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A-Money1983 said:

However, I can't help but think of Obama's 2009 trip to Copenhagen.

I don't think that I had to do with the reason why Rio was awarded the Olympics, but it didn't serve as a magic formula either.

It was a (full) different race, with different dynamics back then. Obama was actually the last (& virtually at the last minute), of the *four* (not two) bidding citie's world leaders, to confirm that he was going to Copenhagen. So that didn't sit well with some. Then, some didn't like the aspect that ("newly superstar") Obama, at the time, was more than likely, overshadowing the IOC's very own session & causing "delays" bcuz of Obama's security detail. And then add to all that, Obama didn't even stay for the actual vote. He just swooped in, spoke, shoke some hands, then swooped right back out before any ballots were cast. So that didn't sit well either with some.

Obama going to Copenhagen was one of those "damn if you do & damn if you don't" scenarios. Cuz if he hadn't gone, then you can bet your last dollar that Chicago's loss would have been pinned on that. Then you have where in the case of Brazil, their charasmatic president was making a compelling case before the IOC to finally award South America an Olympics. For 2024, as some have mentioned already, will be likened to 2012, where you have a charasmatic & energetic Blair (Macron) make his case in front of the IOC. And L.A. will have "Trump". If he even goes at all. Which probably the L.A. bid team are probably giving the hints, just stay away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RuFF said:

Paris continues to be on top of its game by having fanfare and media at its evaluation. The showing up in LA, also having a sun campaign, and now this. Its bid is using tantrums and depending on geopolitics, 100 years and that sentiment to win its bid.

LA lost to Boston, came back with slick and refined marketing, promises the lower risk of the two bids and greater revenue. It's been quiet out of respect to Paris' Evaluation, followed the rules for the evaluation, accepted that a double award may be appropriate for the movement, and as the Mayor said LA keeps coming back, being the clear underdog, with a smile and a can do attitude and a history like no other Olympics before or after of producing a profit.

Awarding Paris the games is the equivalent of giving the bronze medalist a gold because of who (where) they are, or because you feel sorry for them because they keep losing, or because they're cheating and using performance enhancing drugs. 

LMFAO. This is getting desperate for your part (Considering Abrahamson's tantrums and bias has been discovered by the press). Anyway, just for information, the last two times Paris was in contention, these were the technical qualifications:

2008 Summer Olympic Race

2012 Summer Olympic Race

In both races, Paris got high qualifications in every aspect (Hence it was the best technical bid of 2012 race hands down), so saying Paris is favorite just for sentimental and geopolitics factors is simple a stupidity. You're constantly downplaying Paris, as it was Doha or Baku to poor Los Angeles, however, it's a nice schadenfreude the current shade. Keep trying desperate.

OTT, related to Lula da Silva, even the American press loved him for that moment. Even with Obama in line, Lula representates that CInderella story which the IOC really likes

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Roger87 said:

LMFAO. This is getting desperate for your part (Considering Abrahamson's tantrums and bias has been discovered by the press). 

Yep lol. Only "tantrums" here are from Abratrollson & Truffgina. 

12 minutes ago, Roger87 said:

Anyway, just for information, the last two times Paris was in contention, these were the technical qualifications:

2008 Summer Olympic Race

2012 Summer Olympic Race

In both races, Paris got high qualifications in every aspect (Hence it was the best technical bid of 2012 race hands down), so saying Paris is favorite just for sentimental and geopolitics factors is simple a stupidity. You're constantly downplaying Paris, as it was Doha or Baku to poor Los Angeles, however, it's a nice schadenfreude the current shade. Keep trying desperate.

Absolutely - but Truffgina is too stupid to realize that, since their "everything is so fantastic in L.A." googles are on way too tight. Thus blocking bloodflow to Truffs puny brain & where then her idiotic hallucinations begin.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A-Money1983 said:

However, I can't help but think of Obama's 2009 trip to Copenhagen.

 

I don't think that I had to do with the reason why Rio was awarded the Olympics, but it didn't serve as a magic formula either.

It's not about a magic formula. Marcon is going to be in Lima. That alone is obviously not going to put Paris over the top. But it's certainly going to help matters, particularly if it's a close vote, not to mention who his counterpart is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, A-Money1983 said:

I'm guessing Putin's 2007 appearance/English presentation  in Guatemala City had a factor in landing the Sochi Olympics.

That, and the fact that was a world power that only hosted once, and it was marred by the boycott.

Yep. People tend to forget but there was a time which Putin had the respect and goodwill of the West (Berlusconi and Schroeder wanted to make the EU's application process to Russia). 2007 was the last stage of goodwill. But also like FYI mentioned, Russia has another factors in consideration

Still, in some races (Especially the tight ones), leaders really matter alongside narratives, geopolitics, resources and goodwill. It's part of a full machine. Ex.: Part of the reason which Athens was selected it was thanks to this woman - Dora Bakoyannis, which completely changed the perception of the Greeks to the IOC (After the fiasco of 1996 race), especially comparing the arrogant Rome mayor

Dora_Bakoyannis_cropped.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention - Olympic bids have many elements and the "plus" are key to win. Not any city in modern times won only for one factor alone. Everything is part of the campaign machine. As mentioned wisely by Quaker, Macron alone won't be the sole factor to win, but it can be (one of) the plus factor(s) which helped Paris to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still brings a smile, even twelve years on....

Quote

Macron will be hoping he is more successful than the last French President to attend the IOC Session on behalf of a bid from Paris.

Jacques Chirac was partly blamed for helping the city lose its campaign for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games to London following an ill-advised remark about Finnish food. 

It not only upset the two IOC members from Finland but also led to a public row at an IOC reception with then British Prime Minister Tony Blair's wife Cherie, who was there on behalf of London 2012, on the eve of the vote in Singapore. 

According to London 2012 chairman Sebastian Coe, Chirac was so angry he left the event without talking to any IOC members, who he had been there to meet.

The next day London beat Paris by four votes. 

http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1050400/french-president-tells-ioc-evaluation-commission-he-will-be-in-lausanne-and-lima-to-support-paris-2024

The bar has been set low for French Presidents. Macron will surely clear it, no trouble.

Edited by Rob.
Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...