Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Regarding an earlier post from this thread today, why is Vancouver and Tokyo being lumped in the same boxas Athens, Sochi, and Rio??

Tokyo's three years away, and is in one of the most efficient cities on the planet.

I've only heard Vancouver be compared to Salt Lake City and Lillehammer in terms of success. 

No mention of Turin/Torino??  It seems to be the least talked about games, and some of their then/newly constructed venues have already shut down. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Los Angeles did not hint it wouldn't accept 2028, the bid committee said it would. It. I'd again. Quaker, go floss your teeth with a penis and calm down with all your fabricated statements. There's a distinct difference between LA won't bid again, especially because it's not easy to ask the private business community again for 60 million, but nowhere did he say he would not accept 2028. And you know why? Because unlike Paris, the guys at the helm aren't windy bitches, they're men, something you could learn about. But nooooo. You're a queen. 

And you're a..   eh, not worth it at this point, we all know what you are and who you can't stand.  Also, do yourself a favor and never go into politics.  Windy bitches?  It's funny that you're are rattled by us "Paris groupies" and now you think the same thing about their committee.  I'm sure that's not a biased view at all.

You're right it's not easy to ask the private business community to pony up $60 million for another bid (probably a moot point anyway).  You know what's easy?  Asking the private business community to pony up another $60 million where - according to you - it will result in a surplus that could measure into the billions.  Of course, only in your head is that possible.  The rest of us on this planet know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RuFF said:

And this my friends is why there will be a double award. Parisians don't have it in them to go at it again, and Paris absolutely deserves to host an Olympics. A double award has absolutely nothing to do with Los Angeles, it's about Paris. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Paris is headed for an upset. But the IOC cannot afford to lose Europe. LA would be ok without hosting the Olympics, and people would move on. In time LA would be back, but. It Paris. The French ego is just too strong. 

Why-the-fuck-Are-you-so-stupid-meme-8741

You actually think the double award is about Paris and not LA?  That's one of the dumbest things you've ever said, and you've set a pretty high bar there.  The IOC has 2 strong bid cities right now (no matter how much you want to make it about 1).  They want both of them to walk away with something.  You're right that the IOC can't afford to lose Europe.. finally you get it after we've been saying that to you for months now!

And would LA really be okay without the Olympics?  The first opportunity after Atlanta that the USOC was pursuing another Olympics, LA was ready to jump into the mix, and at the time it was less than 20 years since 1984.  Yea, that really sounds like a city okay without an Olympics!  Of course LA would be back in short time.  If it wasn't Wasserman and company, someone else would come up with the vision and push it forward because that's always what happens in LA.  The IOC could reject them and they'd be back in short time.  I'd bet the farm on that (again, moot point since it's a hypothetical we probably won't see play out).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, RuFF said:

That song must be from your time Barron. I've never heard it. 

No; Ruff.  You've just been living in a cave.  Anybody with a little exposure to mid-20th century French culture has heard of this chanson.  Don't show your lack of culture, Ruff. 

 

 

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

1 hour ago, RuFF said:

That song must be from your time Barron. I've never heard it. 

LMFAO, anyone with small culture knows this song from Edith Piaf (One of the most recognizable voices from France) and even if they don't, at least they know the biopic starring Academy Award winner Marion Cotillard

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take issue with the 'continues to' because most of the things you've called Paris out on have been storms in teacups and they had a very successful evaluation visit by all accounts.

But I agree that's a deeply unimpressive answer from Hidalgo to BBC's Dan Roan. First time I've really heard 1924 referenced that explicitly from someone within the bid, and that's not a path they should go down. Wasserman's answer was a non-answer really but it was better than hers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rob. said:

But I agree that's a deeply unimpressive answer from Hidalgo to BBC's Dan Roan. First time I've really heard 1924 referenced that explicitly from someone within the bid, and that's not a path they should go down.

While I agree that it's not really in Paris' best interest to start talking about the Centennial, it's still a subtle remark compared to L.A.'s incessant chimes about how they're the IOC's answers to everything, & the nuances that they'd be stupid if they didn't pick them.

5 hours ago, Rob. said:

Wasserman's answer was a non-answer really but it was better than hers.

I think his response of "we wouldn't accept it (2028) in a losing scenario" is hysterical. If you lose the 2024 vote, then there's nothing you can do about it other than accept it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops LA Bid Committee Forgot Subway Cost

Someone goofed and omitted infrastructure costs as part of the LA Olympics bid.

You can put this in the politicians and the local Olympic Bid Committee sometimes don’t reveal all the information needed for public consumption file. The Los Angeles Olympic Bid Committee which wants the 2024 Summer Olympics claimed it didn’t need any public money to stage the event. That is false. The city of Los Angeles is committing $250 million in the event of cost overruns and California will throw in a quarter of a billion dollars as well for cost overruns. Then there is the matter of security. The LA Olympic Committee is not paying for that either. American taxpayers would be on the hook for security and no one knows what that entails. But here is a clue. There were more troops on the ground in Utah in 2002 for the Salt Lake City games than in Afghanistan where an international force was trying to disrupt terrorists training facilities in a war which is still going on.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti went to Washington asking Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, the wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, to fast-tracking $1.3 billion for a subway project. Garcetti thinks that the Purple Line, with a stop at UCLA for the Athletes’ Village along with the judo and wrestling sites, is not going be ready in time for 2024 Olympics. Garcetti and the LA Bid Committee knew that the subway is going to require public money and was going to be built anyway. Now there will be an extra burden on taxpayers to get the project done as quickly as possible. Los Angeles voters approved the Purple Line construction last November. The Olympic bidding is filled with the underestimation of actual costs, poor projections and in some cases flat out lies. That’s another reason so few cities want the Olympics event. It costs far too much money.

Los Angeles and Paris are bidding for the 2024 Games.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportstalkflorida.com/featured/oops-la-bid-committee-forgot-subway-cost/amp/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, FYI said:

Oops LA Bid Committee Forgot Subway Cost

Someone goofed and omitted infrastructure costs as part of the LA Olympics bid.

You can put this in the politicians and the local Olympic Bid Committee sometimes don’t reveal all the information needed for public consumption file. The Los Angeles Olympic Bid Committee which wants the 2024 Summer Olympics claimed it didn’t need any public money to stage the event. That is false. The city of Los Angeles is committing $250 million in the event of cost overruns and California will throw in a quarter of a billion dollars as well for cost overruns. Then there is the matter of security. The LA Olympic Committee is not paying for that either. American taxpayers would be on the hook for security and no one knows what that entails. But here is a clue. There were more troops on the ground in Utah in 2002 for the Salt Lake City games than in Afghanistan where an international force was trying to disrupt terrorists training facilities in a war which is still going on.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti went to Washington asking Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, the wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, to fast-tracking $1.3 billion for a subway project. Garcetti thinks that the Purple Line, with a stop at UCLA for the Athletes’ Village along with the judo and wrestling sites, is not going be ready in time for 2024 Olympics. Garcetti and the LA Bid Committee knew that the subway is going to require public money and was going to be built anyway. Now there will be an extra burden on taxpayers to get the project done as quickly as possible. Los Angeles voters approved the Purple Line construction last November. The Olympic bidding is filled with the underestimation of actual costs, poor projections and in some cases flat out lies. That’s another reason so few cities want the Olympics event. It costs far too much money.

Los Angeles and Paris are bidding for the 2024 Games.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportstalkflorida.com/featured/oops-la-bid-committee-forgot-subway-cost/amp/

 

I didn't know Sport Talk Florida are sleeping agents of Paris 2024 Olympic bid lol (Sarcasm).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, FYI said:

Garcetti thinks that the Purple Line, with a stop at UCLA for the Athletes’ Village along with the judo and wrestling sites, is not going be ready in time for 2024 Olympics. Garcetti and the LA Bid Committee knew that the subway is going to require public money and was going to be built anyway. Now there will be an extra burden on taxpayers to get the project done as quickly as possible.

 

Oh dear, what a dilemma. If only there were some way to award LA the 2028 Games this year so they wouldn't have to hurry the subway ...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FYI said:

I think his response of "we wouldn't accept it (2028) in a losing scenario" is hysterical. If you lose the 2024 vote, then there's nothing you can do about it other than accept it.

It really depends how they do it. There was an article on ITG last week (I think) saying they could change it so members vote for both 2024 and 2028 at the same time. That way it won't look like a consolation prize, it'll look like a considered vote. And actually, it could throw up some interesting dynamics if they do this e.g. an Italian might've voted for LA2024 maybe to give Rome (yes, I know) a chance but with a double-vote they could vote for Paris 2024 because it'd be in their interest to put the European host earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FYI said:

Oops LA Bid Committee Forgot Subway Cost

Someone goofed and omitted infrastructure costs as part of the LA Olympics bid.

You can put this in the politicians and the local Olympic Bid Committee sometimes don’t reveal all the information needed for public consumption file. The Los Angeles Olympic Bid Committee which wants the 2024 Summer Olympics claimed it didn’t need any public money to stage the event. That is false. The city of Los Angeles is committing $250 million in the event of cost overruns and California will throw in a quarter of a billion dollars as well for cost overruns. Then there is the matter of security. The LA Olympic Committee is not paying for that either. American taxpayers would be on the hook for security and no one knows what that entails. But here is a clue. There were more troops on the ground in Utah in 2002 for the Salt Lake City games than in Afghanistan where an international force was trying to disrupt terrorists training facilities in a war which is still going on.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti went to Washington asking Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, the wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, to fast-tracking $1.3 billion for a subway project. Garcetti thinks that the Purple Line, with a stop at UCLA for the Athletes’ Village along with the judo and wrestling sites, is not going be ready in time for 2024 Olympics. Garcetti and the LA Bid Committee knew that the subway is going to require public money and was going to be built anyway. Now there will be an extra burden on taxpayers to get the project done as quickly as possible. Los Angeles voters approved the Purple Line construction last November. The Olympic bidding is filled with the underestimation of actual costs, poor projections and in some cases flat out lies. That’s another reason so few cities want the Olympics event. It costs far too much money.

Los Angeles and Paris are bidding for the 2024 Games.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportstalkflorida.com/featured/oops-la-bid-committee-forgot-subway-cost/amp/

Who the heck is SportsTalk Florida?

Anyway, there's nothing necessarily new here.  We knew about the contingency funding, the security costs, and the recent news about the money for the subway line.  That all said, it's not totally out of line to note where additional costs lie and how the claim of this being a fully privately funded endeavor isn't necessarily accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rob. said:

It really depends how they do it. There was an article on ITG last week (I think) saying they could change it so members vote for both 2024 and 2028 at the same time. That way it won't look like a consolation prize, it'll look like a considered vote. And actually, it could throw up some interesting dynamics if they do this e.g. an Italian might've voted for LA2024 maybe to give Rome (yes, I know) a chance but with a double-vote they could vote for Paris 2024 because it'd be in their interest to put the European host earlier.

Huh.  Never thought of doing it that way -- but that could be the solution -- a preferential vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Anybody else with half a brain cell would have seen it as we'll take 2028 only if we are also winners (I.e. A greater contribution from the IOC). A far better response that Anne Hidalgo's, who sounded like a total airhead. 

No, he was being "wishy-washy". But since you like to perform anal-lingus to everything wasserman & abratrollson have to say, then you only see & hear what you wanna see & hear with that "half a brain cell" that you have, which that is also questionable if you even have that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RuFF said:

One thing Garcetti is doing well is leveraging taxpayer funds to get federal New starts funds. He would have done this anyway and the Olympics would be just one more way of leveraging those funds. Even if LA were awarded 2028, Garcetti would leverage taxpayer funds for the Sepúlveda Pass Line, and use the Olympics as an excuse for them. For the next 30 years any opportunity any Mayor of LA would leverage the Olympics to receive matching federal funds. This is a non story.

Of course it's a "non-story", cuz now this is going against all the BS that L.A. is going to be a "privately ('California') funded" bid (that "doesn't need Washington", but actually they do), so now the L.A. spin queens have to put a new spin on it to fit their two-faced, hypocritical bias narrative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ FYI 

It seems like you just twist everything to try to create some false narrative that LA has a crap bid? You are piling on every comment or news and non news-bit and stiring it round till it's part of your prefered perspective. No offense but we get it.......YOU think the LA bid is one of the worst ever and a total fantasy. 

I think you are one of the very few who feel that way. 

I think the IOC is the problem party, not Los Angeles or Paris. But Paris certainly plays into the old IOC hosting narrative more traditionally than LA. There is more risk there of what we know always happens, but can the IOC afford to take the risk of not siding with Europe when many in their backyard are rejecting them. 

Paris will be London at VERY best, and did London stop the wave of European cities deserting the IOC? I think LA has a great potential to do what they say they will do.....it's a fantasy to pretend LA is anything but an amazingly appealing bid. 

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...