Jump to content

Toronto Star on the withering short list for 2022


jawnbc
 Share

Recommended Posts

My only issue is that the games would become completely corporate if that happened. You would have Coca Cola on the back of every athlete and the medals would have the Nike symbol on them. Unless a company is truly charitable towards the games (which logically is not gonna happen), you're going to see product placement everywhere that'll ruin the atmosphere previous games have had.

An example being Atlanta, where they relied heavily on corporate sponsorship for funding, but were criticized by the European IOC members as having "a general atmosphere of commercialism" that undermined IOC sponsorship in favor of their (Atlanta) own so they could pay for the games. Sure, the government only gave them so much so they had to rely on corporate sponsorship and ticket sales, but the results show that sometimes this isn't the best plan of action.

Except LA84 was totally privately funded and those Games were quite free of commercialism. If you put the right checks and balances in place, I don't see this as a problem. As I've mentioned in the past, my father coordinated his company's sponsorship of the Games. There were very strict guidelines regarding commercialism and branding. It worked well and everybody was happy. Atlanta threw those restraints out the window and it was a disaster. It's is entirely possible to have privately funded Games without allowing the sponsors' brands to take over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, you guys do watch the Olympics, don't you? Why worry about CocaCola on every jersey, other than it might clash with the Reebok, Puma andRalph Lauren labels already there? No advertisers in stadiums? Please, I believe you mean no non official Olympic Sponsor advertising

There's no sponsorship to be seen except on jerseys. Some of the triathletes in London had to tape over the Nike logo on their sunglasses for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^But there certainly are a lot of private individuals in the Los Angeles area. I highly doubt all of them would bounce off in this situation. You don't know how committed some are, and/or how free-load-y others are.

Scratch tha., there are tons of possible-private-funders EVERYWHERE

*that

The issue is not that everyone in the USA would go bankrupt, but rather that the organizing committee itself. Let's say that Los Angeles gets the games and then the sponsor revenue turns out to be insufficient to cover total costs. Who pays for the remaining debt?

Consider what would have happened in Montreal in 1976 if the government were not responsible for cost overruns. There would have been dozens of lawsuits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except LA84 was totally privately funded and those Games were quite free of commercialism.

Not really. In fact the torch relay was almost cancelled by the Greeks because it was so commercialized. They finally relented, but held the lighting of the flame in secret as a protest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. In fact the torch relay was almost cancelled by the Greeks because it was so commercialized. They finally relented, but held the lighting of the flame in secret as a protest.

Did you see any of the torch relay? I did. I don't even know who sponsored it. Show some proof of LA's out of control commercialism please. A picture of sponsor logos plastered all over the torch, torch bearers uniforms, accompanying vehicles, etc. You can't make this claim unless you can show evidence of rampant commercialism in action.

Considering the Games had just about zero commercial influence prior to 84, it's hardly surprising that some would balk at the change. But the reality is that LA looked and felt far less commercial than present day editions of the Games despite being entirely privately funded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you see any of the torch relay? I did. I don't even know who sponsored it. Show some proof of LA's out of control commercialism please. A picture of sponsor logos plastered all over the torch, torch bearers uniforms, accompanying vehicles, etc. You can't make this claim unless you can show evidence of rampant commercialism in action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great. Where exactly is this commercialism run amok? I sure don't see it.

Notice how AF doesn't respond when he gets proven wrong? Such an arrogant prick.

You're the prick. I read one thread at a time. Just saw this.

I haven't been proven wrong at all. Sorry. Look at pictures of more recent torch relays. Not so different. This is not corporate brands taking over the Olympic Games. Not by a long shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's London's torch convoy: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/22/article-2148129-1332948C000005DC-585_468x300.jpg

Doth mine eyes deceive me or is that a Coca-Cola truck?! LA did nothing over the top at all. It was new at the time, but it's been taken to much greater extremes since then and nobody gives it a second thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. In fact the torch relay was almost cancelled by the Greeks because it was so commercialized. They finally relented, but held the lighting of the flame in secret as a protest.

Not so. It's in my book. Explains the whole story between LAOOC and the Greeks who were reneging on the deal. The lighting in Olympic was still carried out but only because Samaranch had to resort to some under-handed trick to get LA a true Olympic flame; and the-then Communist mayor of Olympia was going to be exposed as someone who didn't keep his word...which is why an Official Lighting was indeed held. But LA dispensed with the usual, prolonged Greek portion of the relay and just whisked the flame away to New York. Lillehammer 1994 did a similar thing with their 1994 'Greek' flame. It's all there on pp. 95-96 in my book (and taken from Ueberroth's own bio).

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great. Where exactly is this commercialism run amok? I sure don't see it.

You're the prick. I read one thread at a time. Just saw this.

I haven't been proven wrong at all. Sorry. Look at pictures of more recent torch relays. Not so different. This is not corporate brands taking over the Olympic Games. Not by a long shot.

Hey, you're the one who called my post one of the dumbest things you've ever read, and this website has Tony and GCL on it. I was very offended by that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great. Where exactly is this commercialism run amok? I sure don't see it.

AT&T was the main sponsor, and had its logo on runner's uniforms provided by Levi's. GMC provided vehicles and had "GMC Trucks" displayed prominently on them. It's true that there's no logo on the actual torch, though. But there wasn't one in Atlanta either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, you're the one who called my post one of the dumbest things you've ever read, and this website has Tony and GCL on it. I was very offended by that.

I'm sorry but REQUIRING heads of state to campaign for their Olympic bids at the IOC vote? That's really stupid and will only feed the IOC's self-importance. It doesn't make any sense and I think you're bright enough to see that. I expect stupidity from others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice pin for London's torch relay. Everybody count the corporate logos! http://www2.lichfielddc.gov.uk/olympictorch/files/2012/01/Olympic-Torch-Relay-logo-small1.jpg

Nobody's saying that Olympics haven't had corporate influence since Los Angeles. But Los Angeles started it in 1984. That doesn't make them bad. It's just the downside of corporate sponsorship. From the perspective of other countries it's nicer to have the host government kick in another $5 billion so they don't have to see any ads. Corporate sponsors are a no-brainer for the host country, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AT&T was the main sponsor, and had its logo on runner's uniforms provided by Levi's. GMC provided vehicles and had "GMC Trucks" displayed prominently on them. It's true that there's no logo on the actual torch, though. But there wasn't one in Atlanta either.

The "commercialization' claimed by the Greeks was the selling of the Youth Legacy Kilometers -- not the sponsorship. Those dumb Peloponesians sort of understood the concept that certain companies had to pay for the logistics of the run. BTW, the Sarajevo 1984 torch had "Mizuno" on it.

The Hellenic Olympic Committee was quite picky in those 1980-84 years. They got miffed with the Russians because Moscow 1980 objected to having the HOC patch sewn on the "heart area" of the uniforms for the Greek runners; and so played hardball with the Russians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but REQUIRING heads of state to campaign for their Olympic bids at the IOC vote? That's really stupid and will only feed the IOC's self-importance. It doesn't make any sense and I think you're bright enough to see that. I expect stupidity from others.

Thank you AthensFan. I apologize for calling you a prick. I was just angry. I don't really feel that way towards you.

As for the issue at hand, I think we also have to realize that the leaders shouldn't be above the Olympics. If the country wants to go to all the trouble of an Olympic bid, it should be a presidential duty of the president to support the country on the world stage, like he would at any other summit or meeting. Obama meets with the NCAA Fencing Champions and the Miami Heat for crying out loud. That doesn't seem all that important to me. The presence of a government official also allows for relationships to be built between the IOC members and the host government.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...