Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
alphamale86

2024 Compare and Contrast

Recommended Posts

I like to read the forums but I was surprised 2024 doesn't have a general forum where we can discuss all the bids in one thread. I understand the need for individual threads but we are bound to start comparing the Bids as we get deeper into the process.

As of now July 10th

Baku Boston Budapest Hamburg Paris Rome are all openly on the table. Toronto is showing signs that they want to join the field and we are still waiting to see what South Africa decides in a bid cycle that, at first, to me, looked solid for them. Throw in the other hidden bids that have until September 15th to reveal themselves and we have an interesting group of contenders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

South Africa's not bidding for 2024. You'll see them for 2028.

There won't be anymore becuz they would've spoken up by now if they're getting into the race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised some of the NOCs haven't paid attention to recent trends in the selection of host cities.

In a time when visiting bidding cities is restricted, the Olympics are far more likely to be awarded to a city with international recognition ... and a country is far more likely to be successful if they offer their most celebrated internationally renowned city. A bid from a second-tier city gives the impression of a half-hearted attempt.

Tokyo, Rio, London, Beijing, Athens and arguably Sydney, were all NOCs bidding with their best choice in the eyes of the wider world.

I believe that the US and German bids for 2024 are really missing a chance ... voting for an Olympic host needs international appeal ... very different to any domestic considerations.

Even before I've seen any of the proposals by those bidding, I can't see how either Hamburg or Boston could possibly overcome the appeal of Paris, Rome, or even Budapest!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stu, pleasure to see you again.

I think that as long as Paris gets to the final vote, the IOC would be stupid to not award France the Games. After 1992, 2008 and 2012 and with France not hosting since 1924 it has to be Paris. I do not think the French will come back from a fourth lose.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised some of the NOCs haven't paid attention to recent trends in the selection of host cities.

In a time when visiting bidding cities is restricted, the Olympics are far more likely to be awarded to a city with international recognition ... and a country is far more likely to be successful if they offer their most celebrated internationally renowned city. A bid from a second-tier city gives the impression of a half-hearted attempt.

Tokyo, Rio, London, Beijing, Athens and arguably Sydney, were all NOCs bidding with their best choice in the eyes of the wider world.

I believe that the US and German bids for 2024 are really missing a chance ... voting for an Olympic host needs international appeal ... very different to any domestic considerations.

Even before I've seen any of the proposals by those bidding, I can't see how either Hamburg or Boston could possibly overcome the appeal of Paris, Rome, or even Budapest!

What do you though, when your "best renowned city" is not interested, like in the U.S.' case where New York wanted no part of bidding for 2024 in the end. Although, the USOC still coulda went with Los Angeles, but didnt.

Germany had the option to go with Berlin, but chose not to go with them for whatever internal reason(s). I wouldn't necessarily say that it's a "trend" that the Games are going to big Alpha cities, it just so happens that the IOC appears to be still be lucky enough to draw them to bid, at least in the Summer category. If they're not there, then, as in the case of the 1996 race, then that's where 2nd-tier cities have a shot. As usual, it all depends what the IOC actually has on the table. As for Budapest, they're a non-starter, unless of course their only competition was Baku-koo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stu, pleasure to see you again.

I think that as long as Paris gets to the final vote, the IOC would be stupid to not award France the Games. After 1992, 2008 and 2012 and with France not hosting since 1924 it has to be Paris. I do not think the French will come back from a fourth lose.

Thanks :wub:

I agree, Paris already seems like an obvious choice.

What do you though, when your "best renowned city" is not interested

You don't waste time and money by bidding for something you have no chance of winning. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't waste time and money by bidding for something you have no chance of winning. :)

I agree. At this point, the USOC should just drop this in the light of what has become the debacle of Boston 2024. However, with that said, hindsight is always 20/20.

Paris (& even South Africa) was still an unknown quantity when the USOC started vetting U.S. cities for a 2024 Olympic bid two years ago. The French, at the time, were still lukewarm at best, for a fourth attempt on a bid for various reasons. And the mayor there pretty much saying a 2024 Olympic bid was out of the question.

Now, in less than a year, the French have made a complete 180, full force. Who really would've expected that even as recent as a year ago. It was looking quite unlikely TBH, at that time. Not to mention, at that point, no one expected that the USOC would've really underestimated their ultimate nominated choice.

Boston 2024 now suffers with very low citizenry numbers, the bid went from "walkable" Olympics, to unwalkable now, with the new revision plan in an attempt to win over public support in a statewide effort. Not to mention a lot of construction that would still be required for a Boston Olympics in comparison to Paris.

It's plausible why the USOC chose Boston; First Summer Olympics in the very populated northeast, in the prime-time U.S. Eastern time-zone. But the main issue with them I think is that the USOC really didn't have a proper gauge as to what the potential problems with a Boston bid would've brought. Not to mention, that I still believe (even though some have disagreed), the USOC was probably still leery over L.A.'s "been there, done that" aspect, so they bypassed them.

Still, if Boston's bid was indeed solid, & Paris was not in the picture (again, which was all but a certainly not that long ago), I'd say that Boston could've held their own very nicely against Hamburg & a weak Rome bid (ie stagnant Italian economy, very spread-out venue plan, etc). In a scenario like that, I wouldn't have described Boston as 'no chance of winning'. But that's not how reality is now. Paris has indeed come out to play literally running outta the gate. Boston's bid is indeed in shambles, that even Hamburg & Rome would still have the upper-hand, that it seems pretty much suicidal for the USOC to continue with this. It's even foolhardy for Toronto, regardless of all the "buzz" that's coming from there bcuz of the ongoing Pan Ams. But if they still want to 'waste time & money', hey, that's their deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've said it here for the past 2 years.. there would be no shame in the USOC spending all that time and energy vetting out potential candidates, picking one, and then saying whether or not it's worth putting them up for a bid. And given what we've got, forget the specter of the competition, the bigger point is that the USOC chose poorly. Fine, but at this point, they should own up to that and save themselves 2 years of heartache. Is it possible Boston could win this? Sure, but it's tough to imagine a confluence of events that would allow that to happen, particularly if Paris is their competition and they have anything resembling a strong bid. I can understand the motivation on the part of the Boston folks and the USOC that they've gone this far and they don't want to pull the plug, but it would seem prudent for them to realize what they're up against and decide to fight again another day rather than fight this fight when the odds are stacked against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I feel that Paris started to bid because they knew the competition wouldn't be anything like what it was in 2012. And as said before, I think that's why the USOC chose Boston, because they didn't think Paris would bid and then expected to be like in 1996. Does Boston get a chance against Paris? Not really, but as an American city, it still kind of does. I would absolutely hate it if they chose Boston over Paris, but well, I don't get a say in this, do I? I still think it's unlikely. No, the biggest threat to me is not Rome (Italy hosted Olympic Games in 2006 and yes, they're kind of going bankrupt). Hamburg is, to me, the one that could get those Games. Yes, they have to build pretty much everything from scratch unlike Paris, but the German economy is in much better shape than the French one is. So if they feel like spending billions and billons for the Games, let them go for it (and I'm talking about at least 10-15 billion, much like London in 2012). So I really don't know honestly, I understand why people think Paris is a frontrunner but I feel like Hamburg could get those Games somehow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I feel that Paris started to bid because they knew the competition wouldn't be anything like what it was in 2012. And as said before, I think that's why the USOC chose Boston, because they didn't think Paris would bid and then expected to be like in 1996. Does Boston get a chance against Paris? Not really, but as an American city, it still kind of does. I would absolutely hate it if they chose Boston over Paris, but well, I don't get a say in this, do I? I still think it's unlikely. No, the biggest threat to me is not Rome (Italy hosted Olympic Games in 2006 and yes, they're kind of going bankrupt). Hamburg is, to me, the one that could get those Games. Yes, they have to build pretty much everything from scratch unlike Paris, but the German economy is in much better shape than the French one is. So if they feel like spending billions and billons for the Games, let them go for it (and I'm talking about at least 10-15 billion, much like London in 2012). So I really don't know honestly, I understand why people think Paris is a frontrunner but I feel like Hamburg could get those Games somehow...

That's absurd. The USOC wanted to put their best city forward regardless of what other cities they would be going up against. What difference would it make if Paris was there or not? For whatever reasons, the USOC thought Boston was their best bet. It's not as if they would have picked a different city knowing Paris was there. That's a very empty argument. And even though the USOC obviously made what's turning out to be a foolish decision so it's fair to question their thought process, the idea that they would have chosen a different city based on Paris makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the biggest threat to me is not Rome (Italy hosted Olympic Games in 2006 and yes, they're kind of going bankrupt).

Well, not only that. But outta Paris, Hamburg (which hasn't hosted) & Rome, the Italian capital is the one that's hosted the Summer Olympics most recent outta those three.

Hamburg is, to me, the one that could get those Games. Yes, they have to build pretty much everything from scratch unlike Paris, but the German economy is in much better shape than the French one is. So if they feel like spending billions and billons for the Games, let them go for it (and I'm talking about at least 10-15 billion, much like London in 2012). So I really don't know honestly, I understand why people think Paris is a frontrunner but I feel like Hamburg could get those Games somehow...

Remember when you were arguing with "agenda 2020" in the other thread the other day? Well, spending "Billions & billions" would go against that, wouldn't it? So how is that a positive for hamburg when taking your original argument into account.

Yes, the German economy may be better than France's ATM (but Japan's economy was also not that robust when Tokyo won 2020), but that doesn't mean that Germans would be more willing to frivolously spend so much just bcuz they can.

On the contrary, the Germans seem to be pretty prudent when it comes to spending (or loaning out) money.

To use your words, "the IOC would be sending the wrong message" by choosing a bid like hamburg's in accordance to 'agenda 2020'. IMHO, this is Paris' to lose in so many variables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I feel that Paris started to bid because they knew the competition wouldn't be anything like what it was in 2012. And as said before, I think that's why the USOC chose Boston, because they didn't think Paris would bid and then expected to be like in 1996. Does Boston get a chance against Paris? Not really, but as an American city, it still kind of does. I would absolutely hate it if they chose Boston over Paris, but well, I don't get a say in this, do I? I still think it's unlikely. No, the biggest threat to me is not Rome (Italy hosted Olympic Games in 2006 and yes, they're kind of going bankrupt). Hamburg is, to me, the one that could get those Games. Yes, they have to build pretty much everything from scratch unlike Paris, but the German economy is in much better shape than the French one is. So if they feel like spending billions and billons for the Games, let them go for it (and I'm talking about at least 10-15 billion, much like London in 2012). So I really don't know honestly, I understand why people think Paris is a frontrunner but I feel like Hamburg could get those Games somehow...

But if the USOC was in it to win it, why would they pick a lesser-tier city even with the circumstances?

Oops, didn't read the second page! Ignore that^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does one celebrate Bastille Day? Do you eat cake?

Quirkily, one of the best Bastille Day celebrations outside France takes place in Budapest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baku Budapest Boston Paris Hamburg Rome

I agree that as of now Paris is the one to beat. Most stable choice.

Baku, however, proved that they could host a large scale event like the Euro Games and to me would show that the 2020 initiative isn't just a sounding board to gain interest for possible hosts.

Someone earlier had made a comment that the major countries should send their major cities to compete because of the trend of major cities winning but I disagree when it comes to countries like Germany and the USA. one of their little known cities is still on the same footing of some other countries' major cities financial and infrastructure wise so I actually think Hamburg has as good a shot as any.

Boston... They need to bow out. They need to bow out now because quite frankly I think they are about to go the way of Chicago and NewYork and there won't be any revenue dispute to blame for their failure to win. the USOC had earlier said they weren't going to put forth a bid unless they thought they had a good shot at winning. I think they thoroughly misjudged this cycle and should have just gone with the city with the most support. Yeah I am an LA supporter but truth be told even though it has it's own issues the people of LA are accustomed to major show pieces coming to town and wouldn't mind another. I get it the USOC wanted to try something new but really and truly this was not the year for them to try untested cities. I say drop the bid or switch to LA but you're in a sinking ship with Boston.

Rome is interesting. it went from Front runner for 2020 to drop out. Now that it is returning for 2024 I think the fact that it dropped out due to financial reasons last cycle will cause voters to think twice.

Budapest you're a great city but I don't see it happening for 2024

At first I thought this was South Africa's year but I think the implications into the FIFA scandal that SA bought the 2010 World Cup will cause SA to stay low for awhile on the international sports bidding scene at least till the allegations blow over, which would be great for the US if they had a solid city bidding for 2024. I think the race would have been between the USA and France without a SA bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that was me. But if we check closely the nature of USA and perhaps Germany in relation to other countries, it's a clear difference. When I said major cities need to compete at the SOG is related to the essence for many countries. Especially related to centralist governments (Like France or China), the major cities (Especially the capitals for example) are the cards, because they offer the finantial resources, the infrastructure, culture, the people and political will. Even in many federal states, this is also a reality (Like Mexico, Russia or Canada).

USA is different because this nation was founded as a full federation with many circles of power and balance among the regions and states. Germany has also this anomaly, especially for history. Remember, this was a country divided in two and Western Germany built new centers of power in different cities. Germany, USA and perhaps South Africa are exceptions, but the rule stays in many countries, the major cities are the candidates for the SOG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh don't get upset guys. The problem is we don't understand understand each other and don't agree on many things, which is fine! You misinterpreted what I said when I wrote that the USOC chose Boston because they didn't know Paris would bid. I said Boston but it would have been LA or SF, it would have been exactly the same. I was talking about an american in general. I agree that they chose poortly by picking Boston. But would have LA stood a better chance against Paris? Yes probably, but they wouldn't have won those Games in the end either, just because I think that their last Games were not so long ago. The USOC saw an opportunity for a bid with 2024 that they didn't see with 2022 (shame).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does one celebrate Bastille Day? Do you eat cake?

Quirkily, one of the best Bastille Day celebrations outside France takes place in Budapest.

Fireworks, military parade on the Champs-Elysées, Firemen's ball... We don't do special dinner or anything. It's more about watching a nice fireworks at the end of day (and not working on that day) ;) It's definitely not called Bastille day in French. We don't particarly think of this day as they day we took the Bastille down. And actually this national day was chosen to celebrate an other even that happened the 14th of July...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

South Africa's not bidding for 2024. You'll see them for 2028.

There won't be anymore becuz they would've spoken up by now if they're getting into the race.

Istanbul and Doha could be there, they don't need to speak out, just apply quietly and wait for the official IOC announcement to "surprise" other bidders.

As for South Africa, it seems like Durban, but they're too focused on their surefire 2022 Commonwealth Games to even consider 2024. The short gap between would be havoc on venues and test events. We wouldn't want to see a Commonwealth Games full of construction still to be finished for an upcoming Olympics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that was me. But if we check closely the nature of USA and perhaps Germany in relation to other countries, it's a clear difference. When I said major cities need to compete at the SOG is related to the essence for many countries. Especially related to centralist governments (Like France or China), the major cities (Especially the capitals for example) are the cards, because they offer the finantial resources, the infrastructure, culture, the people and political will. Even in many federal states, this is also a reality (Like Mexico, Russia or Canada).

USA is different because this nation was founded as a full federation with many circles of power and balance among the regions and states. Germany has also this anomaly, especially for history. Remember, this was a country divided in two and Western Germany built new centers of power in different cities. Germany, USA and perhaps South Africa are exceptions, but the rule stays in many countries, the major cities are the candidates for the SOG.

Germany didn't really only develop this federal structure because of the post WWII division though. It only for the first time became a single entity in the late 19th century, before it was always a pattern of tiny kingdoms, duchies, principalities or even free cities like Hamburg was for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany didn't really only develop this federal structure because of the post WWII division though. It only for the first time became a single entity in the late 19th century, before it was always a pattern of tiny kingdoms, duchies, principalities or even free cities like Hamburg was for some time.

Yep. Italy could have been the same if it wasn't for the centralizarion of the monarchy during "Il Risorgimiento" and posterior dicotomy North-South.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baku, however, proved that they could host a large scale event like the Euro Games and to me would show that the 2020 initiative isn't just a sounding board to gain interest for possible hosts.

Budapest you're a great city but I don't see it happening for 2024.

Yeah, but let's take a really good look here. Baku would still need to further upgrade/expand those facilities that they used for the Euro games to be able to handle Olympic capacities.

And even still, hosting these Euro games is still not the same as hosting the really big one, the Olympic Games. Which have twice the number of athletes, four times the number of countries, & a ten-fold of spectators, media, officials & dignitaries, which would require much more infrastructure that Baku just doesn't have, nor needs. In that sense, agenda 2020 would be a big fail in this instance.

Baku got the Euro games cuz they were the sole bidder. I seriously doubt that they would've got them anyway if any other credible European cities were in the picture. And even when they were the only pick, ten of the 48 voters did not vote for them. Go figure. That's what it would take as well for the IOC to even take a good look at them. And even then, they'd be torn.

I actually give Budapest more of a chance simply bcuz it's not Baku-koo. I seriously doubt either of them will make the short-list anyway, when you still have a good crop of other European cities on the roster.

At first I thought this was South Africa's year but I think the implications into the FIFA scandal that SA bought the 2010 World Cup will cause SA to stay low for awhile on the international sports bidding scene at least till the allegations blow over, which would be great for the US if they had a solid city bidding for 2024. I think the race would have been between the USA and France without a SA bid.

That's neither here nor there. South Africa already gave signs that they weren't bidding for 2024 long before the FIFA scandal broke out. Them chosing to remain low is more of a pragmatic nature than it is anything else. Especially when now they have their total focus on this 2022 Commonwealth games bid apparently to be a better platform for an Olympic bid later on.

If anyone in the IOC should be worried about vote buying, looks like again Baku would be the one to look out for, or better yet, not look at. A smallish city & country that's practically controlled by an authoritarian regime, that's so desperate to get their name out into the world.. yeah, that sends red flags right there in that category.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but let's take a really good look here. Baku would still need to further upgrade/expand those facilities that they used for the Euro games to be able to handle Olympic capacities.

And even still, hosting these Euro games is still not the same as hosting the really big one, the Olympic Games. Which have twice the number of athletes, four times the number of countries, & a ten-fold of spectators, media, officials & dignitaries, which would require much more infrastructure that Baku just doesn't have, nor needs. In that sense, agenda 2020 would be a big fail in this instance.

Baku got the Euro games cuz they were the sole bidder. I seriously doubt that they would've got them anyway if any other credible European cities were in the picture. And even when they were the only pick, ten of the 48 voters did not vote for them. Go figure. That's what it would take as well for the IOC to even take a good look at them. And even then, they'd be torn.

I actually give Budapest more of a chance simply bcuz it's not Baku-koo. I seriously doubt either of them will make the short-list anyway, when you still have a good crop of other European cities on the roster.

That's neither here nor there. South Africa already gave signs that they weren't bidding for 2024 long before the FIFA scandal broke out. Them chosing to remain low is more of a pragmatic nature than it is anything else. Especially when now they have their total focus on this 2022 Commonwealth games bid apparently to be a better platform for an Olympic bid later on.

If anyone in the IOC should be worried about vote buying, looks like again Baku would be the one to look out for, or better yet, not look at. A smallish city & country that's practically controlled by an authoritarian regime, that's so desperate to get their name out into the world.. yeah, that sends red flags right there in that category.

And Doha in that list :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×