Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 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

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."

For the record, I'm NOT a big LA24 booster, i kinda think it's a little nonsensical and unimportant to be bidding, and probably ill-timed. As for the IOC being demanding about what host-cities can do for them....that's probably too true, and look where that's got them and how many great cities are not even willing or able to bid.

I mean lets see how this goes, it's looking more like Rome may collapse now, and since LA is in i....what the hell.....maybe everyone else will have unforeseen issues..you never know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the IOC being demanding about what host-cities can do for them....that's probably too true, and look where that's got them and how many great cities are not even willing or able to bid.

I mean lets see how this goes, it's looking more like Rome may collapse now, and since LA is in i....what the hell.....maybe everyone else will have unforeseen issues..you never know.

Well, & yet the irony is despite even all that, the IOC still has four great cities that are willing to bid right now. And one of those cities had cold feet before they got in the pool. But then fully immersed themselves with both feet planted. And another one of those (guess which one) is always willing to bid. But between Paris & L.A., neither are promoting too much as to which city can spend the most money & meet the IOC's 'demands', but rather it's necessities. And Nacre merely demonstrated which city of the two can meet some of those indispensable qualities better.

But until Rome decides to bow out, they're still in, as well. Besides, it's not like Rome has great chances anyway. Their withdrawal would only tilt the balance moreso Europe's way really. And as far as unforeseen issues, who's to say that L.A. couldn't have any of those either. You never know. It seems that L.A. (or at the very least it's vocalists) is/are riding on the high that simply bcuz they had a successful Games back in 1984 that they can seemingly do it again. But that's much easier said than done.

The Games are literally 25-30x's more expensive now than when L.A. last hosted. And that's just a modest cost & not even going into mind blowing Sochi/Beijing style expense. At least the Europeans are looking at it more realistically, & despite some cities running away, some others are still willing to invest in the true costs of the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had you read Paris candidature file, you would have known that Paris included from the start in its plans the entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity....

As for the colors, they are part of Paris 2024 visual identity... Unveiled before LA 24 launched its logo and tag line.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Budapest, LA, Paris, and Rome are all very much incredible and influential cities. The IOC is so lucky to have these four to choose from. I don't have a single doubt in my mind that either one of the four will be a giant success.

Being an LA native, and being born post 84' Games, and a direct beneficiary of thr LA84 foundation I am in a unique place and situation. When the rest of the world sees the Olympics as vehicle for financial ruin, I see a city that not only thrived because of them, but played a pivotal role in saving the Olympic movement.

LA and the Olympics have a very unique relationship that's hard to deny...for better or worse, like it or not, they are a match made in heaven in a very strange way.

While other cities are voting or considering referendums, LA is not only ready or willing, it's downright eager.

The Olympics have left a giant mark on this city and vice versa.

Call me a "booster" if you'd like, but it's not without it's reason.

Mass transit projects alone are not enoigb as it would fall terribly short of Paris, but if in 1984, without a single mile of rail, LA pulled it off in a spectacular fashion, imagine what it would do with over 120+miles of rail.

Not just that, the city is getting not one, but two new stadiums, both independent of tbe games, and one which just so happens to be the most expensive and technologically advanced stadium in the world.

I get it. The IOC is euro centric. There are tons of reasons why everyone wants Paris to win, but LA is also working on making an offer that will be hard to deny.

We may all disagree on the LA24's approach and angle, and that's ok, but its

A work in progress.

Rickshaws, anyone?? B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you talk about them?

Paris' Strengths:

  • beauty and history
  • culture (fashion, food, literature, etc)
  • perfect summer temperatures and humidity for outdoor sports (better than LA for the athletes)
  • better dedicated Olympic sports venues (track and field, track cycling, tennis, etc)
  • government financial support (a new aquatics center, village, etc)
  • better mass transit system
  • geopolitical factors are working strongly in favor of Europe and against a bid from the USA

Los Angeles' Strengths:

  • celebrities and the global film industry
  • warm and sunny with beautiful beaches and little chance of rain at outdoor venues (better than Paris for most fans)
  • better multipurpose arenas
  • cheaper and more sustainable (IE using dorm rooms instead of an expensive new village)
  • better highways
  • the USA provides half of the IOC's total revenue
Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, most of those points (if not all of them), have already been discussed ad naseum on these forums. So at this point, touching upon them yet again is just going around in circles for all involved. It's not like any of those shed any new revelation on the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're eager - you'd host the Olympics any time, with open arms. Europe - particularly France - has reservations, but is willing to have one more go, to see if there's still any chance. With every argument the LA fans make about how much they love the games, & are eager to bid time & time again, & they'll never fall out of love with the games, you're making the argument for Paris 24-LA 28. There's no risk in rejecting LA 24 - they'll be back again & again. There's a huge risk in rejecting Paris - it would surely be France's last try, & quite possibly Western Europe's too. As I've said before about this, the IOC are in the rare position where they can have their cake & eat it - why wouldn't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as snap chat I don't think the point is what people post on it. Perhaps, staying in line with creatives and start ups, LA24 is utilizing it not for the posts, but to underscore that LA is a breeding ground for start ups, creatives, and the penetration to a certain audience that brings.. And how that may be something LA can do FOR the Olympic Movement. Sure, one could argue that these companies would do that for any city anywhere in the world but this is one place LA has an upper hand. The infrastructure, culture and creative talent located in one place that supports this industry.

NBC announced a partnership with Snapchat for Olympic highlights this summer from Rio. Why do you suppose they're doing that? Pretty sure it has nothing to do with where either company is based. Don't think there's any narrative NBC is trying to underscore there. Perhaps they view Snapchat as a useful marketing tool to engage with their audience rather than for some indirect benefit that you seem to be looking for with the Olympic bid.

LA isn't using technology for the sake of using technology. They're doing it with a purpose. They partnered with this specific company for a reason and that reason is probably not because they're based in LA. If the LA2024 folks are trying to impress the IOC, then why this company? What does it offer? HOW does it help engage with that audience the IOC wants to reach? Most people don't know and probably don't give 2 shits where the company is based. That's not the point. LA doesn't have an upper hand because Snapchat is there. The idea that LA is in a better position than other cities because they're home to a company like Snapchat is nonsense. Good for the city that they have a booming tech industry, but that doesn't help anyone here unless that can be applied and made useful. I can see how Snapchat is the type of vehicle that can help accomplish a goal. That's why it's significant, IMO. Not because it's in LA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Los Angeles' Strengths:

  • cheaper and more sustainable (IE using dorm rooms instead of an expensive new village)

I don't aggree with this point.

The village that will be built is not wasted money. It will be used after the games (the need is 70000 new appartments per year)

So, what should be compared is:

- LA: the needed money to change dorm rooms in an olympic village and back to dorm rooms.

- Paris: the additionnal money compared to appartments built from scratch

And at the end, there will be a legacy (new sustainable housing) for Paris.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't aggree with this point.

The village that will be built is not wasted money. It will be used after the games (the need is 70000 new appartments per year)

The villages are always built at a loss, even in cities with high demand for housing like London and Vancouver. It would be used, but it would still be a loss of money for the people of France.

I think that the IOC would prefer a new village to dormitories. But a new village will be tres cher.

Edited by Nacre
Link to post
Share on other sites

Budapest, LA, Paris, and Rome are all very much incredible and influential cities. The IOC is so lucky to have these four to choose from. I don't have a single doubt in my mind that either one of the four will be a giant success.

Being an LA native, and being born post 84' Games, and a direct beneficiary of thr LA84 foundation I am in a unique place and situation. When the rest of the world sees the Olympics as vehicle for financial ruin, I see a city that not only thrived because of them, but played a pivotal role in saving the Olympic movement.

LA and the Olympics have a very unique relationship that's hard to deny...for better or worse, like it or not, they are a match made in heaven in a very strange way.

While other cities are voting or considering referendums, LA is not only ready or willing, it's downright eager.

The Olympics have left a giant mark on this city and vice versa.

Call me a "booster" if you'd like, but it's not without it's reason.

Mass transit projects alone are not enoigb as it would fall terribly short of Paris, but if in 1984, without a single mile of rail, LA pulled it off in a spectacular fashion, imagine what it would do with over 120+miles of rail.

Not just that, the city is getting not one, but two new stadiums, both independent of tbe games, and one which just so happens to be the most expensive and technologically advanced stadium in the world.

I get it. The IOC is euro centric. There are tons of reasons why everyone wants Paris to win, but LA is also working on making an offer that will be hard to deny.

We may all disagree on the LA24's approach and angle, and that's ok, but its

A work in progress.

Couldn't you reverse that sentence and say "There are tons of reasons why everyone wants LA to win, but Paris is also working on making an offer that will be hard to deny" and have that be equally true? There are 4 cities in the running (for now) and the IOC can only pick 1 of them. That means 3 are going to be denied. They're not going to look at any 1 bid and think "gee, how can we say no to them." The question is who they say yes to.

Yes, LA and the Olympics have an extremely positive history. That works both for and against them here. They were a match made in heaven in 1984. Would they been in 2024? The USOC obviously didn't think they were the right city having passed them over for 3 other cities before LA gets the nod. And unlike 1984, they have to earn it this time. If the rhetoric is that LA could repeat the success of 1984, who's to say Paris couldn't be equally successful? The Olympics could leave a mark on a city that doesn't already have one in recent memory.

The LA bid has its strengths. No one is denying that, even if the discussion here tends to become a back and back between the LA "boosters" and those who don't have their hopes set on a certain city. At the same time, don't lose sight of the fact that the other cities will be making a case of their own and possess their own strengths. Like you said, any of the 4 would likely be successful (which is debatable, but not the point), but the IOC still has to make a choice. Which cities' strengths and weaknesses add up to making them the best candidate by whatever measures, tangible or intangible, a pool of 100 or so voters will use to make their decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't aggree with this point.

The village that will be built is not wasted money. It will be used after the games (the need is 70000 new appartments per year)

So, what should be compared is:

- LA: the needed money to change dorm rooms in an olympic village and back to dorm rooms.

- Paris: the additionnal money compared to appartments built from scratch

And at the end, there will be a legacy (new sustainable housing) for Paris.

What he meant is that whereas it may take a few billion dollars to build a new village from scratch (and investors may never get their money back), just converting existing dorms to become a village is INFINITELY cheaper than building one from scratch. The villages will just be "leased" from UCLA and USC (and the other universities as well). So the universities will make money or break even. Adapting the dorms will probably just mean removing TVs and putting in an extra bed where a couch might be. A new coat of paint, etc., etc., are all part of maintenance. So there is really no money LOST in using existing dormitories. It's even better if new dorms are created (as in Atlanta and Salt Lake), so the Games get brand-new buildings but these are immediately amortized afterwards as fully functional dorms.

There is no comparison between using dorms and BUILDING a whole new Village. Even Rio now is lagging far behind its sales projections.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Olympics-related, but I just read the "green" comments.

Los Ángeles may not be the greenest large city in the US (and to be honest, I don't know which city that would be, and if any of you care to enlighten me, please do so, and being that LA is the 2nd largest city in the US, if there's a greener city, it would be either a much smaller city, or NYC ), but hey, we're trying:

From ABC7.com:

LAPD GOING GREEN WITH 100 BMW I3 ELECTRIC CARS

1377138_630x354.jpg

The Los Angeles Police Department unveiled a slew of electric cars Wednesday, making it the greenest

law-enforcement agency in the country. (KABC)

Wednesday, June 08, 2016 03:46PM
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES (KABC) --
The Los Angeles Police Department is adding 100 electric vehicles to its fleet, making it the greenest law-enforcement agency in the country, city officials said.

Mayor Eric Garcetti and LAPD Chief Charlie Beck drove up to City Hall in a new BMW i3. The fleet was enough to fill up most of the upper floor of the police department's parking structure.

The electric cars bring the city's fleet up to 199, making it the largest municipal electric-battery fleet in the country.

Read the rest here: http://abc7.com/news/lapd-going-green-with-100-bmw-i3-electric-cars/1377205/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paris' Strengths:

  • perfect summer temperatures and humidity for outdoor sports (better than LA for the athletes)

How is humidity a strength, and better for athletes?

Los Angeles' Strengths:

  • celebrities and the global film industry

How are these strengths?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How are these strengths?

For marketing purposes, it's advantageous to have internationally well-known individuals as opinion leaders.

But to be fair France has their fair share of those.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another shooting in the US (Orlando I believe). Some maniac killing at least 20 people in a gay club. Ruff, any thoughts?

Given that this is the "new normal" in the US and has been for the last decade, I don't see how it changes LA's chances. The situation hasn't changed since LA put in a bid, these things happen just as frequently as they did then. The frustrating and sad thing is few are willing, and nobody is able to enact laws that might change how things are.

Edited by Rob.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't legislate total safety, you can legislate to try to reduce frequency of incidents and availability of firearms and many nations have done so successfully. That the US doesn't want to do this is its lookout, but examples like Australia prove legislation can work when there is a national effort to get behind it. At the very least, the level of unreported "background" gun killings in the US (e.g.man picks up gun mid-argument and shoots wife) is far, far, far higher than in equivalent nations. It seems fantastical to believe reducing gun ownership wouldn't have an effect on that!

What I find shocking is the inability/unwillingness to even try. In the best case you reduce killings, in the worst case things carry on as the are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we could sit here for hours going on about how fuccked up the U.S. is. Unfortunately the current presidential election is likely only going to make things worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another shooting in the US (Orlando I believe). Some maniac killing at least 20 people in a gay club. Ruff, any thoughts?

Wow, are we seriously having this discussion? There was actually some decent dialogue going here and you're going to jump in with news of a terror attack in Orlando, 2500 miles away from LA. As if anyone believes you actually think this has anything to do with the Olympic bid and isn't about anyone else pointed out terrorist incidents in Paris, the actual city bidding for the Olympics, not just the country. But that's neither here nor there. As if a year from now, these individual incidents (this one in particular) will be on anyone's mind.

1 quick thought and then I'm hoping someone has something to say about Los Angeles or the Olympics and not something completely unrelated that belongs in the off topic thread, not here. The second amendment talks about a "well-regulated militia," and those rights granted by it are NOT unlimited. Not to mention those laws were written about a couple of centuries before automatic and semi-automatic weapons came into being. So those who want to cite rules adopted in the 18th century and apply them to modern times because politicians are either too scared or too invested themselves to do anything about it give us what we have now.

Either way.. can we all agree that both of these cities/countries bidding for the Olympics have issues with terrorism that they have to deal with and when it comes down to the vote, the overall picture may come into play rather than us over-analyzing the immediate aftermath of a terrible incident? As people on the internet tend to do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a problem with radical Islam (again) not the US constitution.

Another shooting in the US (Orlando I believe). Some maniac killing at least 20 people in a gay club. Ruff, any thoughts?

....kinda douchee of you to pop in so fast, this is another horrible radial Islamic terrorist event , similar but not as bad or organized as recent ones in Paris proper. If you want to play that game i think you might regret it.


Quaker above this post said it better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without going too much further off topic I think the resistance flies in the face of the core values of this country and the right to bear arms. It's the belief of many that a natural right is to be able to match the weapon of any perceived threat, even if that threat is your own country. And while I can understand the thought that it creates safer communities, and it very well does, there is still that God given right and natural instinct to self protect. Unfortunately there are two sides to that sword.

Yeah, two sides, and one side is fucking stupid. The right to bear arms was something written of its time and for its time and your Founding Fathers were wise enough to allow for constitutional amendments should circumstances change. The constitution was never intended to be the sacred, unquestioned document some now treat it as.

The reverence towards the gun in America is fucking weird. Everything else that is a danger to life - cars, explosives, dangerous chemicals etc retain strong regulations, licensing systems, and limits on availability because it's just common sense. With guns, this obvious thinking goes out the window and it becomes wrapped up in a quasi-religious argument about identity and liberty and what it is to be an American. Meanwhile, more and more people are killed.

Edited by Rob.
  • Like 3
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...