Oslo 2022 - No Major Weaknesses

[GBModerator]

Oslo's bid for the 2022 Winter Olympic Games does not have "any major weaknesses" in its plan, according to a review by external experts DNV

View the full article

[Tony E Loves Architecture]

Lack of a Modern Ceremonies Venue. People argue that Ceremonies aren't important, but the IOC thinks differently.

[Lord David]

I and most disagree. If their ski jumps can't be used and no suitable stadium is present, they can always build a temporary venue downtown or in a park or something like that.

[baron-pierreIV]

Well, what about the 'been there-done that' factor? The IOC isn't compelled to always go back to the old reliables. What about new places that want to host as well? What a phony, self-serving report.

[Palette86]

Tony,why is the content of ceremony so important to the bidding process? Will IOC evaluate it 2015? I can't understand what you mean.

[stark]

Only weakness is that the rest of bidders haven't host winter olympics yet. Norways does.

[Ikarus360]

Baron, if the other bids aren't very realistic/good enough, what other choice do they have? Tokyo was also a been there done that thing and the IOC didn't seemed to care much about it when you had two bids from a country in a big economic crisis/doping scandal and other one located near to a country plunged onto a war and ruled by a guy whose megalomania is around Putin's level.

Plus, they did the new frontier thing already with Rio, which is already plagued with delays and low support from the population (at least that's what seemed to be in June) so they had to go with a traditional choice. The current scenario is very similar to the 2020 bid. Pyeongchang was the new frontier and we're not sure how that will play out. Sochi is plagued of corruption and scandal already. I think it's very obvious what they're going to do.

[FYI]

^He doesn't wanna listen to any of that. You can say it all you want 'til you're blue in the face, but it won't matter. Which is strange for someone who is usually pragmatic when it comes to these Olympic bidding things.

[baron-pierreIV]

Oslo to change bid name to nOslo 2o22!

[Quaker2001]

Well, what about the 'been there-done that' factor? The IOC isn't compelled to always go back to the old reliables. What about new places that want to host as well? What a phony, self-serving report.

That's all well and good, but which of the bids that doesn't have a 'been there-dont that' factor is better than Oslo? Does the IOC really want Lviv or Almaty? They have 6 bids they're presented with. That's what they have to work with. Yea, they were in Norway in relatively recent memory. So unless 1 of those new frontiers is more compelling, Oslo is a pretty nice fallback.

[baron-pierreIV]

Oslo is a pretty nice fallback.

That's how I assess the Oslo bid -- a mere fall/back-up...but wouldn't be my first choice.

[Quaker2001]

That's how I assess the Oslo bid -- a mere fall/back-up...but wouldn't be my first choice.

Then what is your first choice? You have to deal with the available options here. We know how you feel about the distance issue with Stockholm, so you've ruled them out already. Of the other four, who would you take? Sometimes the IOC isn't going to get the bid(s) they want to see and has to go with a bid that otherwise wouldn't be their first choice.

[baron-pierreIV]

Then what is your first choice? You have to deal with the available options here. We know how you feel about the distance issue with Stockholm, so you've ruled them out already. Of the other four, who would you take? Sometimes the IOC isn't going to get the bid(s) they want to see and has to go with a bid that otherwise wouldn't be their first choice.

If I would vote and pick, Krakow would be my first choice. Haven't looked closely at Almaty but they deserve a close look too.

[FYI]

He's all for Krakow. Which could be a dark horse, but I'm still not so sure that they'd be able to convince the IOC, depending on what they're offering.

The way I see it:

Stockholm - the most compelling, but still traditional option.

Oslo - traditional, safe, reliable, previous host option (much like Tokyo 2020).

Krakow - maybe potential dark horse.

Beijing - the insurance policy.

Almaty - non-compelling, much over-rated applicant.

And Lviv - the non-starter.

[baron-pierreIV]

2015 is the Year of the Dark Polish Horse per the Astrolympic Calendar.

[Sir Rols]

If I was rating my wishlist:

Stockholm - I'm sure i don't need to explain why

Krakow - nice new locale

Oslo - only reason I'm not super keen is my Swedish sympathies - if they win the Swedes can forget about it for a decade or two.

Almaty - exotic - I do see them as a future WOG host, but not this soon

Lviv - don't think positively or negatively about it. Don't factor them in much to my considerations at all.

Beijing - just totally turned off by the idea. Beijing and the WOGs is taking it a metropolis too far IMO.

[baron-pierreIV]

The Swedes (if they make the Short List) and the Norwegians will tear each other apart. And would the Swedes line up behind Oslo's bid if they don't make the Short list or are dropped before Oslo in the final voting?? Who will benefit?

[Quaker2001]

If you're advocating for Krakow, I'm guessing then you don't care the bid includes a venue and a sport held in another country? I know that's not a first as Salzburg proposed using Königssee as their sliding venue. One might construe that as a bigger weakness than that a country hosted a highly successful Olympics just 20 years ago.

[baron-pierreIV]

If you're advocating for Krakow, I'm guessing then you don't care the bid includes a venue and a sport held in another country? I know that's not a first as Salzburg proposed using Königssee as their sliding venue. One might construe that as a bigger weakness than that a country hosted a highly successful Olympics just 20 years ago.

I guess u have not been reading up on all the threads. It is PERFECTLY legal -- just never been actualized. Given the right set of circumstances, maybe it'll work this time. Who knows?

And if they sell it right, then they would actually have 2 countries backing the event -- so, in terms of population reach, it would be Poland (38.5 mil) + Slovakia (5.5 mil); so conceivably the whole enterprise will play against a combined population of 44 million nearly matching Ukraine's 45 mil, if the Lviv bid moves forward. But it still puts the Krakow bid up there as the 3rd largest of the early 6.

[FYI]

Almaty - exotic - I do see them as a future WOG host, but not this soon

Just curious, how is a dreary, ex-soviet city like Almaty "exotic". Sochi is more exotic IMHO. I see nothing enticing about going to Kazahkstan, even in the future. If the IOC was still turned off, in what many considered to be Istanbul best chance after multiple previous tries with 2020. I can't see them being all that gung-ho over Almaty.

The Swedes (if they make the Short List) and the Norwegians will tear each other apart.

A Stockholm/Oslo showdown would be very much like the London/Paris 2012 showdown, or Athens/Rome 2004. One of them is going to wind up winning 2022.

[Quaker2001]

I guess u have not been reading up on all the threads. It is PERFECTLY legal -- just never been actualized. Given the right set of circumstances, maybe it'll work this time. Who knows?

And if they sell it right, then they would actually have 2 countries backing the event -- so, in terms of population reach, it would be Poland (38.5 mil) + Slovakia (5.5 mil); so conceivably the whole enterprise will play against a combined population of 44 million nearly matching Ukraine's 45 mil, if the Lviv bid moves forward. But it still puts the Krakow bid up there as the 3rd largest of the early 6.

Thank you for your usual condescending tone. Yes, I know it's legal, but is it not a weakness? Poland doesn't have everything they need for the bid, so they need to include another country? We've brought this up before.. this wouldn't be a joint bid. It would be Poland's bid with an assist from Slovakia. So I'm not exactly viewing it as a bi-national bid in that regard. Again, I have no problem with the set-up, although there's probably a couple of logistical issues (some more minor than others) that would come into play here. Either way though, I think it's going to be viewed as a weakness, so if Oslo is really that unappealing because of Norway's recent history, then maybe Krakow has the goods.

[Sir Rols]

Just curious, how is a dreary, ex-soviet city like Almaty "exotic". Sochi is more exotic IMHO. I see nothing enticing about going to Kazahkstan, even in the future. If the IOC was still turned off, in what many considered to be Istanbul best chance after multiple previous tries with 2020. I can't see them being all that gung-ho over Almaty.

I guess I just look back to the vibe as an historic crossroads of the Silk Road more than grim Soviet conglomerate. And at least Kazakhstan has a decent winter sports pedigree in terms of competing and hosting. I don't think it's to be sneezed at. I can get, though, that it doesn't exactly excite you, just as Tokyo or Madrid didn't fire up a lot of people's insignia thinks either.

[baron-pierreIV]

then maybe Krakow has the goods.

I wasn't condescending. That was merely your interp. It seemed like u had not read up on previous posts re the legality of bi-national winter bids, so I just mentioned it--not wanting to assume anything.

And it would be a recognition of the ex-Warsaw Pact countries who have come into their own, too. I mean Sarajevo was the last time a sort of semi-Commie country hosted a non-Russian Winter Games. So, with a Krakow Games, that'll put an end to all the Budapest, Bulgaria, Ukraine talk.

[FYI]

And if they sell it right, then they would actually have 2 countries backing the event -- so, in terms of population reach, it would be Poland (38.5 mil) + Slovakia (5.5 mil); so conceivably the whole enterprise will play against a combined population of 44 million nearly matching Ukraine's 45 mil, if the Lviv bid moves forward. But it still puts the Krakow bid up there as the 3rd largest of the early 6.

Population isn't everything if the bid isn't up to snuff in the first place, which remains to be seen in Krakow's case. Even Turkey's younger, virgin 77 million wasn't enough to entice the IOC to overlook Istanbul's 2020 big challenges.

And if we still want to talk about population, China trumps them all again with over 1.3 Billion never having hosted a Winter Olympic Games.

[Quaker2001]

And it would be a recognition of the ex-Warsaw Pact countries who have come into their own, too. I mean Sarajevo was the last time a sort of semi-Commie country hosted a non-Russian Winter Games. So, with a Krakow Games, that'll put an end to all the Budapest, Bulgaria, Ukraine talk.

You would think that having a Winter Games in Russia would put off Ukraine for awhile as well. That you have to qualify Commie countries to other than Russia maybe says something about where maybe they don't want to go for the next European Winter Games. Do they really want to go back to Eastern Europe so soon after Sochi? I realize the option to return to a more traditional site in mainland Western Europe isn't there, and Poland is certainly not Russia, but I don't know they need to go to Poland just to put off over Eastern European countries that much longer.

Population isn't everything if the bid isn't up to snuff in the first place, which remains to be seen in Krakow's case. Even Turkey's younger, virgin 77 million wasn't enough to entice the IOC to overlook Istanbul's 2020 big challenges.

And if we still want to talk about population, China trumps them all again with over 1.3 Billion never having hosted a Winter Olympic Games.

Looking at the 6 candidates for 2022, all things considered which country seems best suited to host a Winter Olympics? Probably Norway, population in the 5 million range. I know we get worked up a lot here on GB and it can be a factor, but for more than a few obvious reasons, that number only means so much with regard to Olympic hosting capability.