Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yea, I think at this point it's no secret that Paris is doing this. This is the most direct evidence but Sun Day? Really? I think the writing is on the wall here. That said I'm inclined to believe Paris is displaying very poor sportsmanship. Not only does it "seem" like cheating, but the whole argument that if we don't win we won't bid again flies in the face of the Olympic Movement.

Yea, I don't think LA2024 needs to do that. LA can stand on its own merits.

For what it's worth, Paris can stand on its own merits as well. Has Paris2024 known that they wouldn't have a need to do something like this. You would think that LA2024 would have done this first with all the talk that Paris is the front runner.

If anything this reinforces that Paris has a weak marketing strategy. And I guess they know it, too.

Holy confirmation bias, Batman. Why do I get the feeling that if this was LA organizers checking out Paris venues, you would be praising them for being smart for checking out the competition.

Tell us.. how is this cheating or poor sportsmanship (seriously, what the hell even qualifies for that in an arena that has for years been marred by political and corruption scandals)? What writing is on the wall here? Do you think any of this is going to matter when the votes are cast? No one is going to remember this. I can see the argument where it seems like LA has a better handle on their marketing efforts than Paris does. But I want to hear that from a neutral observer. Not someone who is looking for any excuse to point out what LA is doing right and Paris is doing wrong. I know we here are always looking for fresh news and discussion points, but this is largely a non-story. It's something to report and then a week from now, no one will remember it. Just like no one will pay any mind to the Sun Day thing which for some reason you're still obsessed over.

  • Like 1
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

I'd be more concerned about a city that didn't check out the competition. No matter who you are, there's always something to learn.

Agreed. Case in point, the Coliseum. In order to make that work for athletics, there's going to be a temporary conversion involved there. Wouldn't be a bad idea to look in on a stadium that has done something similar, whether it's another Olympic bidder or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is, this is not industrial espionage of some top secret commercial in confidence plans for a closed bid commercial tender. This is checking out the opposition in a public bid where all plans are available for the public to see. Probably just checking out the lay of the land. See what's working effectively. Getting hands on with all these unique apps and technologies connecting the youth of LA to the conversation.

Edited by Rolski Polski
Link to post
Share on other sites

A new theory from someone on Skyscrapercity:

Interesting. It has been an open secret that the IOC was first amazed and then fascinated by the technical and media prowess of the LA sites and proposals, extending their trip and scheduling multiple additional meetings with techies and marketing people to hear more about it.

Just as a guess, I would think that the IOC has decided that LA has formulated the technical, marketing and financial template for future Olympics and wants to give others a chance to learn from it, either for 2024 or for later bids.

What makes it a bit odd is the apparent rudeness of the French in not informing the US committee of the trip.


If anyone else fancies piling in on this one, you're welcome.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1874381&page=37

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those sneaky little Persians, it's very rude that they wouldn't notify LA officials they were coming and have a bit of lunch or something.

The woman from the French consulate who was repeatedly filmed wining and complaining about being filmed looked like a fool who was hiding something. and then she walk to and put her hand over the camera lens saying "what are you doing".....like some slimy politician. It's not a big deal but they were acting like they knew they were doing something wrong.

While it appears there is no rule violated by the French, on its website the International Olympic Committee states,

"The cities must refrain from any act or comment likely to tarnish the image of a rival city or be prejudicial to it. So far no further comment the French Consulate or the bid committee."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC's reporting seems a little over the top but Angela Evans appears to do a good job faking that the bid committee isn't annoyed.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Members-of-the-French-Consulate-Scouts-for-Olympic-Venues-383374231.html

54784985.jpg

But I guess you're right about the good job of faking since apparently JANET Evans has managed to convince you her first name is Angela. Not like she's a well-known former Olympian or anything.

Everyone seems to be jumping on the story behind the story here. That leaders from the Paris 2024 committee came to LA to check out their venues is not a story. That they set it up through the French consulate and didn't tell the LA 2024 folks is noteworthy and maybe there's something to it, but the media has spun this into something where it seems like the French did something sordid and the LA folks perhaps are trying to bite their tongue when they really want to say "WTF Paris2024," not for what they did, but for how they did it. And now you have the video that makes it seem worse, so this whole thing seems way worse than it would be if the media didn't jump to sensationalize it. If the LA committee is annoyed, it's because they're being asked to answer for this when really it's not something they need to be involved with. If everyone went about their business, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

IMO, wrap this one up in the time capsule of things we think are important when they happen but will soon be forgotten about when the next thing we think is important happens. None of which will actually influence the final vote.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that the Paris 2024 committee visiting LA to scope out some venues is a big deal story either, just an interesting anecdote to what I feel has so far been dull/almost non-existent coverage of what's going on with the bid cities' efforts in pursuing the 2024 Olympics.

As far as I know, NBC-4 in LA is the only TV station that got "exclusive video" of these French people checking out Pauley Pavilion at UCLA. I don't think it's a coincidence that NBC is the network that has been/will be showing the Olympics.

Incidentally, I rarely watch NBC/Channel 4; in fact, growing up, my family hardly watched channel 4, except that period in the 1980s when I watched "The Cosby Show."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those sneaky little Persians, it's very rude that they wouldn't notify LA officials they were coming and have a bit of lunch or something.

The woman from the French consulate who was repeatedly filmed wining and complaining about being filmed looked like a fool who was hiding something. and then she walk to and put her hand over the camera lens saying "what are you doing".....like some slimy politician. It's not a big deal but they were acting like they knew they were doing something wrong.

While it appears there is no rule violated by the French, on its website the International Olympic Committee states,

"The cities must refrain from any act or comment likely to tarnish the image of a rival city or be prejudicial to it. So far no further comment the French Consulate or the bid committee."

It's interesting too that the rest of the tour was canceled once they were caught... while I take this as compliment, makes wonder what is driving this. Making sure that their proposed venues are equal or better, maybe???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gawd, it's truly a tempest in a teapot. It's better to know your competition than not to. Besides, Paris has NOT commented at all on LA's venues -- merely visited them.

i agree that is better to know your competition than not to but, just by the way they made their visit I wouldn't expect Paris to make any comments on LA venues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Its clearly inappropriate in the complex journey of an International Olympic Committee (IOC) Games bid campaign. But its not specifically against the rules an odd omission in bid ethics regulations that are extremely restrictive to the point that one bid can barely mention another unless its in a glowing context."

So now, you are legislating gaps in IOC rules? :rolleyes: Good on ya!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

For all my LA supporters the gap between Paris and LA is getting much smaller. I just returned from France for Euro Cup and it is not a pretty sight. The transportation strikes which were already a notorious part of French culture is causing havoc all through France both air transport as well as ground and the constant bomb threats are becoming too numerous to ignor. These Euros are not the show piece they thought it would be in actuality it's displaying a lot of the weaknesses Paris as a city needs to overcome.

A lot of IOC members from around the globe are in France now to watch and are seeing this first hand

Now granted LA is not hosting anything as major though Copa America could be considered a low budget version but the added fact that the Parisian contingent was caught checking out the LA venues doesn't bode well. I think Paris is starting to sweat and like I said early on in this thread some people coronated Paris way too early

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to second alphamale86. I think Paris is in for an upset and the alleged gap is probably non existent at this point. Of course things can change. A not so fantastic Rio games may continue to push this race in LA's favor, too.

Explain. How would a sub-par Rio games specifically be an advantage to LA over the competition?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when the Italians would critique the Greeks all up & down when bidding for the 2004 Olympics. How the Greeks were so disorganized & "didn't know" how to host major events (as if they had any room to talk). Needless to say who got those Games. And while Athens, by a legacy standpoint, fell short (& that was mainly due to them wasting away half of their lead-time). Those Games were still hosted with no major issues. So this should be less of an issue where the French are concerned & who are in a much better position to take this on than the Greeks ever were.

The real deal will be when the IOC 2024 Evaluation Commission conduct their bid visits & then publish THEIR findings in the Final Evaluation Report. That's when I'll start to pay attention about who will be "the best host", instead of listening to some very bias L.A. armchair 'Trump'eters.

And likening France to Brazil is almost laughable. I'd actually venture to say that California & Brazil are more liken to each other than France & Brazil are. Superiority complexes don't bode well with the IOC, either.

Explain. How would a sub-par Rio games specifically be an advantage to LA over the competition?

Yeah, I'd like to hear the McRuff-ism behind that one, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to get out of your head that Agenda 2020 is about cutting costs. It's about planning around what's best for a city. I'm not convinced the LA dorm plan is as great an advantage as you like to think. Sure, it may work for LA, or more specifically, UCLA. In most other cities a new housing development is rarely a white elephant. If that's what works for Paris, or Rome, or Budapest, it's not a great burden or black mark.

That said, clearly the Paris bid has not had the best of weeks. But that's nearly totally to do with what's been happening in the stands and outside the stadiums of Euro 2016, and their unions. The storms in teacups like Frenchmen taking in the LA sights are really neither here nor there in the ledger. Making such a big deal about that, or the colour palettes use in their marketing materials, seems to smack more of insecurity and an obsession with what Pari is doing vis-a-vis LA.

Edited by Rolski Polski
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're speaking of Paris as if it's a third world city. Paris has more facilities than the Paris bid of a decade ago which received one of the highest technical scores any bid has ever got. You're straw clutching by almost hoping for a weak Rio Games and patronising those who point this out.

Edited by Rob.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as Paris doing due diligence, I don't buy into that. I think it's pretty obvious that they won't be going back with greater confidence either as just visiting LA's site indicates a lack of it. Everyone here might feel confident about Paris, but Paris 2024 sends a clear message, it's not confident of itself.

Whilst you seem to be placing your hopes on Rio slipping up to boost LA. Gotta say you're really oozing confidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, I am not comparing Paris to a third world city. Comparing it to LA, there is greater risk. Sure, not all housing is a white elephant and gets sold, but still, there is risk. Having to build housing from scratch regardless of the reason is risk, and having to sell it has risk, finance it, have legacy, the whole thing is risk regardless of where it is and for whatever reason. And it's just absent in LA. Granted, you can't fully eliminate risk as a giant earthquake might make LA break off into the Pacific (bs), but the risk is substantially lower. And the pay off for taking on that risk is minimal.

It's one thing to highlight a clear point of differentiation and tout its benefits to LA. It's a totally different thing, though, to point to a model for athlete accommodation that has been generally successfully and uncontrovercially used for every modern Olympics since 1936 and claim that it's risky and flawed.

At this point it's not hopes. I think Rio has vastly already spelled it out.

That seems to be sailing awfully close to schadenfruede, and wanting them to fail so you can score a debating point, to me.

Two years ago, Brazil was getting exactly the same sort of press, and fears, and scaremongering, ahead of their World Cup. Many hosts of major events like the games and the World Cup do. And Brazil's turned out to be one of the better World Cups. Don't dance on their grave prematurely.

Edited by Rolski Polski
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who has been in the bidding process (irrespective of the business) knows that it is a competitive one and that benchmarking one self against the competition is part of bidding 1-0-1.

I admit that Paris would have been smarter to inform LA 2024 of its visit, which would have avoided the whole drama but It is indeed due diligence and it is not against the rules neither in spirit nor formally.

And make no mistake, all candidates will visit each other... Some in smarter ways than others...

As for the IBC, Paris one is already existing compared to the one in LA that is still to be built: I can hardly see how LA is less risky in this area.

Using an existing campus such as UCLA to host the Olympic Village certainly presents some huge assets (quality of accommodation, quality of existing sport facilities...) but might also present some operational challenge.

Finally I am confused: is Paris overconfident or under confident?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so I don't believe Rio will have any impact whatsoever on the 2024 race but in general Euro's will. Before we even got to this point many of you included FYI "Trump'ed" Paris ability to stage large sporting events namely the Euros as an advantage. Well I've been on the ground at said Euros and it is proving to show Paris' vulnerabilities. It's not just the fans it's the cities ability to handle all aspects of these large events and it's proving to be difficult for them.

And as for the whole Legacy arguments both La and Paris are well established major cities both come with already constructed facilities so I still don't buy the argument that Paris has an advantage because they have to construct 1 or 2 venues and thus leaving an Olympic legacy. One can easily say that LA is building off of its established Olympic legacy as they're reusing some previous Olympic spaces. All in all like Rob, I believe, said "Paris is not a third world developing nation that needs the olympics for infrastructure it's already there.

Paris in my opinion is squandering their front runner status they seem to be constantly playing a game of catch up or "what is LA doing? let's try that" The hashtag of their "sun day" celebration was ill advisided. Even if you've been doing it locally for years from a PR and Marketing standpoint, if your competitor has made that a sucsseful part of their branding even incorporating it into their logo then Paris needed to avoid the sun like the plague. The field trip to LA by major committee members was highly ill advised if you're going to spy be low key send a mid level official and a bunch of interns cause having 4 to 5 visible board members go just strikes desperation even if and I truly believe this, that is is probably common practice among all potential bidders through the past decades.

We stated before that the PR and Marketing game ways heavily on these things. I'm not calling it for LA now as that would be ridiculously premature but the wide ocean that was Paris' lead at the beginning of this thing has closed considerable and I'd say it's more due to the fact that Paris is faltering more so than LA is doing anything major.

Now all of these arguments might be mute as we all know the IOC is itching to get the games back in Europe but times are changing the global political outlook in Europe in general is changing and the thought of having a major Target like the games in the middle of Europe doesn't look as appetizing, sad to say but I can completely see some folks saying "Give it to the Americans and let them deal with the headache" Europe is not the same as it was back when Paris bid the last time even when Lomdon hosted. A lot has changed and though tragedy can strike anywhere in the world at any time from inside and out, one has to ask the question "which country becomes an easier accessable target? That's a simple logistical question IOC voters have to ask in this day and age sad but true. So I say they're more evenly matched now and it will be a much closer narrative than we think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And when they publish that report there will be something sticking out like a sore thumb in LA's bid, the lack of capital costs associated with an Athletes Village.

That may be, but it won't stick out like a "sore thumb" since that will be only ONE element of literally hundreds of points that the final evaluation report will cover. L.A. is still not without its own 'risks', either. Since all Olympic bids have that in one fashion or another. Not to mention, probably very few of the full IOC membership will actually even go through that very lengthy report with a fine-tooth comb. So that one element will be even more negligible by that final juncture.

Like I said, I am not comparing Paris to a third world city. Comparing it to LA, there is greater riskt.

Ummm, I beg to differ when you're saying things like this...

Just all around LA has less risk than Paris and the more Brazil reels in from digesting the games, the greater appeal less risk will be.

You may not be "comparing" but you sure as hell are likening France to Brazil which is far from actuality. France would be able to "digest" the Games much easier than Brazil did due to all of its existing infrastructure it already has. So while L.A. might be less of a risk than Paris (which in this particular contest is pretty negligible anyway) Paris is still much less of a risk than Rio ever was. Not to mention, we really don't know yet how much of a success (or maybe not) Rio 2016 will be until the day after the closing ceremonies. So you're just hyperboling here, as usual.

That's silly FYI. Californians aren't the ones that carry the cliche superiority complex..

Have you ever heard of that other cliche, though, of 'arrogant Americans'. So you're doing a pretty darn good job of dispelling that old cliche.

Granted, both budgets are likely to rise, but with a lower starting point in LA and huge pieces of the puzzle already covered (including the IBC), LA literally is the model for the games.

How is L.A. literally a model for the Games when L.A. is hands-on above & beyond all other cities out there according to you? If everyone else is "greater risk" I don't see how L.A. would be a template for anything when it comes to Olympic bids since everyone else would have to build more to equal what L.A. has to offer.

If anything, though, Paris is the closest equivalent to L.A. as you can get as far as less risk is concerned. So unless the IOC wants to permanently hold the Games in L.A., all this "L.A. is literally a model for the games" mumbo-jumbo is 'literally' a crock of sh!t!

Dick

That's been McRuff's MO since day one. So where have you been.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's been McRuff's MO since day one. So where have you been.

Nahhh....for the most part he's been alright if a bit OTT on LA and a bit too dismissive of its rivals. But new members who are only here to support their home city are nothing new on this forum. (it's how I started on here 13 years ago (!) )

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...