zekekelso Posted April 11, 2014 Report Share Posted April 11, 2014 $5 billion is cheap??? That's what Sochi will do to you. That's 10x what Calgary cost 25 years ago. Yeah, things cost more. But this is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 You can't really go by Calgary 1988, since the Winter Games weren't nearly as large back then as they are today. Turin 2006 almost cost that much & Vancouver 2010 was a bit more at over $6 Billion. Sochi 2014's initial budget was $12 Billion. Let's also keep in mind, they had absolutely nothing on the ground, so of course they were gonna have to spend more. But I think the IOC seriously underestimated the potential of cost overruns & corruption when it came to the Russians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulsa Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Oslo is the only viable bid for 2022. I don't understand why China bid so soon after 2008 and moreover after Pyeongchang 2018. Why Beijing, China doesn't have better place to practice winter sports in their country ? Lviv is over. Almaty sound too much like Sotchi and it's in middle of nowhere. Krakow seems not strong enough. Sotchi was a fail, Pyeongchang will be a fail... Oslo is a chance to IOC to save WoG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord David Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Almaty is not viable? Ok so it's too soon after Sochi, but given their existing infrastructure, they're clearly viable. The real thing that's letting them down is that High School grade bid book. They better step it up Candidate Stage when they're selected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Almaty is not viable for one simple reason.... it's in Kazakhstan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 vi·a·ble ˈvīəbəl/ adjective capable of working successfully; feasible. Almaty is viable from a technical standpoint. It may not be popular, it may be unelectable due to the fact that it is in Kazakhstan (though I'm not stipulating to this), but Almaty absolutely is a viable Olympic host. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Almaty is not viable for one simple reason.... it's in Kazakhstan. If Oslo and Krakow were to drop out, I think we'd learn very quickly how "viable" Almaty is. Pretty unlikely they'd win in a full field, but like Athens said, their viability for hosting an Olympics is a different question than whether or not they could win an election, just like all the cities in the United States that are viable hosts for an Olympics, but have no shot at winning an election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 If Rio is anything to go by, "viability" is underrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Almaty is viable from a technical standpoint. It may not be popular, it may be unelectable due to the fact that it is in Kazakhstan (though I'm not stipulating to this), but Almaty absolutely is a viable Olympic host. if you want to get all semantic, Almaty's BID isn't viable because it ain't going to get Almaty selected as host city. Note: if Oslo and Krakow both drop out, the IOC with either reopen bidding (Calgary 2022 here we come) or hold their nose and go to Beijing. The Olympics aren't going to be held in Kazakhstan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 if you want to get all semantic, Almaty's BID isn't viable because it ain't going to get Almaty selected as host city. Note: if Oslo and Krakow both drop out, the IOC with either reopen bidding (Calgary 2022 here we come) or hold their nose and go to Beijing. The Olympics aren't going to be held in Kazakhstan. Then you should have should Almaty won't win because it's in Kazakhstan. Almaty's viability as an Olympic host and their electability are 2 completely different things altogether. And no, the IOC would not re-open the bidding in that scenario. The would ask a recent host to step up (hello Vancouver), not ask a new city that didn't bid in the first place to try and put a bid together and go through the whole process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Then you should have should Almaty won't win because it's in Kazakhstan. Almaty's viability as an Olympic host and their electability are 2 completely different things altogether. And no, the IOC would not re-open the bidding in that scenario. The would ask a recent host to step up (hello Vancouver), not ask a new city that didn't bid in the first place to try and put a bid together and go through the whole process. You win the grammer award. 10,000 points for you. Hopefully we'll never learn what the IOC would do if stuck with no remainging bids from cities it would give the games to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 If other bidders withdraw, leaving only Beijing and Almaty, I believe the IOC would vote and either Beijing or Almaty would host. I don't see them opening up for other bidders. The only way they would return to a recent host would be if they had no alternative (i.e. no viable bids to choose from). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 And some people say that I'm the "anti" Almaty one lmfao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 And some people say that I'm the "anti" Almaty one lmfao. That I'm saying Almaty could be a viable bid, does that make me an Almaty lover? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulsa Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 The problem with Almaty is Kazakhstan... It won't be popular destination for WoG, of course you have mountains, snow... But what about money support ? I don't know. Innsbruck had been choosen in 1976 after Denver has abandoned. Only Vancouver or Salt Lake City could host quickly WoG in 2022 if there is a problem with the others Bids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 The problem with Almaty is Kazakhstan... It won't be popular destination for WoG, of course you have mountains, snow... But what about money support ? I don't know. Innsbruck had been choosen in 1976 after Denver has abandoned. Only Vancouver or Salt Lake City could host quickly WoG in 2022 if there is a problem with the others Bids Quickly is not an issue here though. We're still more than a year away from the vote. Like zeke said, hopefully we'll never be left with a scenario where it's just Beijing and Almaty (and maybe Lviv gets brought along if there's no Oslo or Krakow there), but I don't know if we'd see the IOC come asking for Vancouver or Salt Lake more than 7 years out from the Olympics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 That I'm saying Almaty could be a viable bid, does that make me an Almaty lover? Nah, just an Almaty sucker! :-D :-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 The problem with Almaty is Kazakhstan... It won't be popular destination for WoG, of course you have mountains, snow... But what about money support ? I don't know. Money is not a problem for Almaty. It is a wealthy region in an oil-rich nation. Olympic sponsors probably won't be particularly excited about it, but c'est la vie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulsa Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Money is not a problem for Almaty. It is a wealthy region in an oil-rich nation. Olympic sponsors probably won't be particularly excited about it, but c'est la vie. If they have oil they can spend a lot of money but the last oil-countries than have been chosen to host an event are Russia with Sotchi and World cup and Qatar... I think IOC doesn't want to do more mistakes and to down its image with this kind of countries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olympic Fan Darcy Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 If they have oil they can spend a lot of money but the last oil-countries than have been chosen to host an event are Russia with Sotchi and World cup and Qatar... I think IOC doesn't want to do more mistakes and to down its image with this kind of countries Ah yes, instead let's go to the country with the image of awful human rights abuses, sweatshops and sex slavery, air pollution substantially above the reccomended level for humans, all the issues with Tibet. etc etc. The problem with Almaty is Kazakhstan... It won't be popular destination for WoG, of course you have mountains, snow... But what about money support ? I don't know. Seriously? Ask anyone back in 2007 before Sochi won the games I would bet money that a lot of people have never heard of, or traveled to Sochi. Same thing goes for Pyeonchang. At least Almaty was the former capital of Kazakhstan and more people will have heard of the location. Also wouldn't worry about money for oil rich Kazakhstan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulsa Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Ah yes, instead let's go to the country with the image of awful human rights abuses, sweatshops and sex slavery, air pollution substantially above the reccomended level for humans, all the issues with Tibet. etc etc. Seriously? Ask anyone back in 2007 before Sochi won the games I would bet money that a lot of people have never heard of, or traveled to Sochi. Same thing goes for Pyeonchang. At least Almaty was the former capital of Kazakhstan and more people will have heard of the location. Also wouldn't worry about money for oil rich Kazakhstan. I'm not sure if a lot of person have already heard about Almaty, it's not in a famous part of world for tourism but the problem is Kazakhstan is not Korea or Russia, they don't have the same kind of lobbying power and it's in a region where you have nothing to develop winter sports excepted for local people. It's too far from everything. The main market for winter sport are in Europe, North America and Japan... They other countries are not meaningful to develop winter sport and winter tourism. Sotchi is already a ghost city, Pyeongchang is already in a bankrupt... I'm not sure if WoG will be profitable in Kazakhstan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Seriously? Ask anyone back in 2007 before Sochi won the games I would bet money that a lot of people have never heard of, or traveled to Sochi. Same thing goes for Pyeonchang. At least Almaty was the former capital of Kazakhstan and more people will have heard of the location. Seriously. The issue is that it is in Kazakhstan, not Korea or Russia. Here's one way to look at it. Lonley Planet produces guide books for just about any country people want to visit. I think they have them for something like 80 different countries. There is no Lonley Planet Kazakhstan. And there's a reason for that. If there is no dedicated Lonley Planet guide for your country, you aren't hosing the Olympics. Good things about Kazakhstan: 1. They have money they are willing to spend hosting the Olympics 2. It's better than Kyrgyzstan 3. It's a lot better than Turkmenistan 4. ??? (that's all I've got) These countries have the worst of soviet-style totalitarianism combined with Muslim intollerance. They have practically no tourist infrastructure. They ain't hosting the Olympics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Seriously. The issue is that it is in Kazakhstan, not Korea or Russia. Here's one way to look at it. Lonley Planet produces guide books for just about any country people want to visit. I think they have them for something like 80 different countries. There is no Lonley Planet Kazakhstan. And there's a reason for that. If there is no dedicated Lonley Planet guide for your country, you aren't hosing the Olympics. Good things about Kazakhstan: 1. They have money they are willing to spend hosting the Olympics 2. It's better than Kyrgyzstan 3. It's a lot better than Turkmenistan 4. ??? (that's all I've got) These countries have the worst of soviet-style totalitarianism combined with Muslim intollerance. They have practically no tourist infrastructure. They ain't hosting the Olympics. If things go to **** (like things appear) then they will host. They have money, they have support, they have infrastructure. Their always on time and appear to be a reliable partner for the movement. We all say we want the games to 'go back to basics', whats more basic then the world gathering in a small country to celebrate humanity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanMUC Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Kazakhstan is not a small country by any meaning of the term "small". And I don't want to celebrate humanity in a post-Soviet oil&gas autocracy, thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.