Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
zekekelso

Article on Exploding Costs - From 2001

Recommended Posts

Great find, Zeke. It really puts the out of control spending in perspective. In just 12 years the Games became 25 TIMES more expensive.

People were appalled by 2 billion in 2002. Now we're looking at 50 billion in 2014. It's disgusting. There must be a dramatic change. This is ridiculous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a good find!

Sochi ought to be a huge anomoly - at least i hope so. I think it's more true to say one Winter Olympics (and associated infrastructure) cost 25 times more than SLC than expect this to be the norm from now on.

Still, I don't think it's unfair to say the costs have at least doubled or tripled in that time, if Vancouver is to be the more realistic benchmark for a modern Winter Games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I don't know how they're spending so much. It's the Winter Games, for gosh sakes." - said Dick Pound.

Well, what do you have to say these days, Richard?! lol :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, wasn't it because of extra security after 9/11?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am not at all surprised by that article and the figures. What Romney cut from Ceremonies (well, the whole Image portfolio though headed by Scott Givens, the Eccles had to pony up in $8 million (of which $6 mil went to infrastructural improvements/additional seating at Rice-Eccles; the belated $2 mil covered the cauldron costs to about $750,000 & the remainder for an improved sound system). But was surprised to learn that a new village was built at Fort Douglas which then became dorms for UoU; that part I knew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, wasn't it because of extra security after 9/11?

9/11 happened only five months before Salt Lake 2002. Salt Lake Olympic organizers had said that their security efforts were already a top priority & their plans didn't really heed (nor allowed enough time) to completely overhaul any strategies. If anything, there might've been some tweaks involved, but nothing of significance that would've accounted for extra big spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Critics have to understand that all of Sochi's Venues were new builds. I don't think it's possible to downscale Modern Olympics. In the long run, the benefits show. Great Legacies, Infrastructure and Memories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Critics have to understand that all of Sochi's Venues were new builds. I don't think it's possible to downscale Modern Olympics. In the long run, the benefits show. Great Legacies, Infrastructure and Memories.

They do? Are Russia and Sochi likely to get a return on the $50 billion they spent? I doubt it. Legacies and infrastructure are great. But if Sochi is all about the memories, then they spent a lot of money for a 2 1/2 week long party and not much else. The Olympics should leave a better mark than that on a city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's too soon to say how successful Sochi's legacy will be, but the venues were destined to be new builds when they bid, and at that time their budget was said to be only $12bn. The very real suggestions of bungs and backhanders swallowing up huge amounts of their budget doesn't fill me with much hope that they'll see $50bn worth of benefits either.

As I said though, Sochi is a gross, gross anomoly, but even without it we'd still be talking about increasing costs over the last decade.

Security is a factor in that and the biggest black hole in normal Olympic budget because you ain't getting that money back. I wonder how much London's security budget would've been had we hosted, say, in 2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Critics have to understand that all of Sochi's Venues were new builds. I don't think it's possible to downscale Modern Olympics. In the long run, the benefits show. Great Legacies, Infrastructure and Memories.

There was no need to give the Olympics to a city where *everything* had to be built from scratch. And nobody forced to build those new venues the way they were built.

What's the long run anyway? What do we know if there's a great legacy for Sochi, at this point in time? No evidence either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's too soon to say how successful Sochi's legacy will be, but the venues were destined to be new builds when they bid, and at that time their budget was said to be only $12bn. The very real suggestions of bungs and backhanders swallowing up huge amounts of their budget doesn't fill me with much hope that they'll see $50bn worth of benefits either.

As I said though, Sochi is a gross, gross anomoly, but even without it we'd still be talking about increasing costs over the last decade.

Security is a factor in that and the biggest black hole in normal Olympic budget because you ain't getting that money back. I wonder how much London's security budget would've been had we hosted, say, in 2000.

That I agree with entirely. Just like Beijing didn't raise the bar for future Summer Olympics in terms of spending, so too will Sochi be an outlier. It's a valid point that costs for hosting an Olympics have skyrocketed in the past decade, but that also includes 2 Olympics that were an exception rather than the new rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we throw Sochi out, we are at the point where Almaty is braggging (bragging) that they have lots in place and can put on the games for a cheap $5billion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, & who are they kidding. Like Madrid, Almaty's "cheap" package would surely balloon, as modest Olympic budgets usually do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said though, Sochi is a gross, gross anomoly, but even without it we'd still be talking about increasing costs over the last decade.

Yeah, but try telling that to the cities that are running away from bidding & mainly citing Sochi's gross anomaly, instead of citing Vancouver's & London's more practical models.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Critics have to understand that all of Sochi's Venues were new builds. I don't think it's possible to downscale Modern Olympics. In the long run, the benefits show. Great Legacies, Infrastructure and Memories.

Dude, you're only 17...Best you get yourself down to the library and check out Olympic Legacies. Especially since 1968. It doesn't make good reading for some and they include Mexico City, Montreal, Athens...The dream turning into horrible reality.

If you want examples of correct planning, look to Sydney 2000...which iz what you're beloved London 2012 organizers did even when costs well and truly balloned out. Ask mom and dad about it, you were too young to notice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Sochi's Janitorial unions and Babushka Brigades induced Chairman Putin to build all those sports palaces so they would have guaranteed job security for life...w/ or w/o events!!

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...