And then there were Five...

[baron-pierreIV]

Official drawing of lots to determine the order of the Candidate Cities throughout the process by the IOC Executive Board is scheduled for 8-10 December 2015 per 2024 Candidature Procedure document

It'll take them THREE days to make the draw???

[hektor]

Who knows ? maybe they use a sloth ?

[woohooitsme83]

^It helps keep the suspense!

[munichfan]

Well,we're talking about Switzerland. No need for sloths

[Daze]

...and the there were four.......

What now?

Will the Hamburg result rise the chances of any of the other bids?

Who is the one with the biggest chances right now?

Well I don´t know. I don´t know which city I should back now, cause I really don´t care if LA, Rome or Paris wins. Everyone would host brilliant games.

If Hamburg would be in I would cheer for LA more than the other cities , to keep chances of European SG in 2028 high. But now it doesn´t matter anymore.

[StefanMUC]

...and the there were four.......

What now?

Will the Hamburg result rise the chances of any of the other bids?

Who is the one with the biggest chances right now?

Well I don´t know. I don´t know which city I should back now, cause I really don´t care if LA, Rome or Paris wins. Everyone would host brilliant games.

If Hamburg would be in I would cheer for LA more than the other cities , to keep chances of European SG in 2028 high. But now it doesn´t matter anymore.

While I also don't really care as long as it won't be Orbán 2024, I'm beginning to think that it's going to be LA after all, despite the IOC's need for a European Olympics. All those sentimentalities about Paris in the last few weeks are understandable, but when it comes down to hard facts, I don't expect to be much in between Paris and LA. I have this odd feeling LA will make it.

[FYI]

^See, I'd say the opposite is true (like I just said in the Paris 2024 thread). The only thing I can see standing in Paris' way now is Paris itself.

[Rob2012]

One fewer potential spoiler, but I still see this as Paris'. Hamburg's exit is a shame for the interest in this race, and for Germany's ongoing Olympic hosting ambitions (which now seem dead in the water).

[hektor]

There is going to be pressures from the local opposition groups to get referendum in other bid cities, and in particular in Paris. I fear a contagion.

Edited November 29, 2015 by hektor

[Roger87]

^See, I'd say the opposite is true (like I just said in the Paris 2024 thread). The only thing I can see standing in Paris' way now is Paris itself.

Yep. If somehow Rome also implodes, Paris will have almost a freeway for the European votes.

[Olympian2004]

There is going to be pressures from the local opposition groups to get referendum in other bid cities, and in particular in Paris. I fear a contagion.

Very true. As I pointed out in the Hamburg 2024 thread, I see that danger, too. Hamburg's voters have not only dealt a heavy blow against their own nation's prospects of hosting the Olympic Games, but sent also a very strong message to other democratic countries bidding for the Games or other major sports events.

[Rob2012]

Paris should ignore Germany and look to Britain.

[stryker]

Hasn't Paris already said there will be no referendum? I can't see them holding one.

[FYI]

None of the other four cities remaining are planning referendums. So the IOC (& Bach) should sleep better at night. At least for now, anyway.

[Athan]

Although Paris and LA seem to be stronger and favourites to get 2024, I wouldn't rule out Rome and Budapest yet.

Italy has traditionally been one of the most influential countries within the IOC and if they forget about the Games spread throughout the country that they had originally said and focus on the city of Rome, I think they can present a very interesting project. Otherwise, I agree that their chances would be very low against more compact bids from Paris and LA.

On the other hand, Hungary is the most successful country at the Olympics yet to host. They usually send more than 150 athletes to each Summer Games and have always been among the 15 best ranked teams in the medals table with the only exception of Beijing 2008. Also, they are recurring hosts of many European and world championships, especially in water sports, so they are not unknown at all to the international federations.

That said, as of today it still looks to be Paris's to lose.

[Roger87]

I agree Rome is still the dark horse of the race.

Budapest... They need to be alone to win. Not only the prospect of an Olympics in Hungary will be worse in results than Greece but also it has more cons in a logistical manner.

[Olympian2004]

Very true, Roger. Olympic Games (maybe even in a somewhat scaled down "Agenda 2020" size) are probably a bit too big for a rather small country like Hungary with all its economic, social and now even political hardships.

And regarding what you, stryker and FYI, said about the lack of a referendum in Paris and the other cities: Well, that doesn't necessarily mean that Thomas Bach can sleep well now. Boston had no referendum either - but bad polls and bad karma, and therefore already pulled out of the race. Who says that this couldn't happen to the other cities as well on that long stretch until September 2017 when the host city vote will take place? As Hektor said: There could be a contagion, a discussion in the other four cities (or only some of them) whether hosting the Games really is such a good idea if already a strong city like Hamburg with an actually quite sustainable Games plan (apart maybe from the financing issue) pulls out of the bid race.

And three of those cities are in very open societies (and, as a matter of fact, also Hungarians have shown even under the Orban regime that they still like to protest whenever they see wrong developments in their country), so they are open to discussions and controversies. I don't dare to say at this point in time whether the four remaining bid cities will all still be in the race by the time the IOC makes its shortlist in 2016 or by the time it makes its final decision in 2017.

[FYI]

Well, that doesn't necessarily mean that Thomas Bach can sleep well now.

Well, that is why I went on to say "at least for now, anyway." Because yes, anything can happen between now & the time of the vote, but if no referendums are planned in any of the remaining four cities at this juncture, then why rock the boat. I'm sure the IOC would try & cross that bridge when/if the time comes. So for now, Bach I'm sure must be breathing a sign of relief, again, for the time being, that is.

Boston had no referendum either - but bad polls and bad karma, and therefore already pulled out of the race.

Boston didn't "pull out of the race" as much as the USOC moreso pulled the plug on them. And Boston did in fact have a referendum planned, but it was still another year away in November 2016. So that was another element as to why the USOC decided to cut their losses (in late July 2015) & pretty much told Boston, "we can't wait on you any longer to try & get your house in order", especially when the 2024 IOC application deadline was due in September 2015, & they wanted to have a more organized & feasible replacement ready to go by that time, cuz the USOC knew that if they still continued to have Boston as their 2024 candidate, the referendum planned for next year there would've failed & then they would've been up sh!ts creek without a paddle & would've been automatically out of contention for the 2024 Games anyway.

At least with Los Angeles, the odds of that happening are that much less likely. So far, their polling numbers are a dream in comparison as to anything Boston ever could've mustered up. Boston had very bad polling numbers right from the get-go. That was also another big part as to why the USOC initially choosing Boston as their candidate was so surprising to many. Boston already had the loudest & most visible opposition already in place than any of the other three U.S. 2024 finalists in the domestic phase.

There could be a contagion, a discussion in the other four cities (or only some of them) whether hosting the Games really is such a good idea if already a strong city like Hamburg with an actually quite sustainable Games plan (apart maybe from the financing issue) pulls out of the bid race.

And three of those cities are in very open societies (and, as a matter of fact, also Hungarians have shown even under the Orban regime that they still like to protest whenever they see wrong developments in their country), so they are open to discussions and controversies. I don't dare to say at this point in time whether the four remaining bid cities will all still be in the race by the time the IOC makes its shortlist in 2016 or by the time it makes its final decision in 2017.

Let's keep in mind, though, that Hamburg's bid officials blamed "external influences" on Hamburg's referendum defeat. And not so much on any 'sustainable' element. Perhaps many of the residents also believed that $12.5 Billion wasn't very 'sustainable' afterall. Perhaps they thought that against Paris & Los Angeles, there was no point anyway. So we really don't know for sure what were the reasonings behind Hamburg residents voting against it, & by a narrow margin, I might add, too. Not to mention, in Kiel, 2/3rds of the residents there APPROVED it! So to call any of this a "contagion" at this point in time, is quite premature, IMHO.

[rogerdown]

and then there were five again???

Something of nothing most likely. (Not even the stoy just the mention of a rumor)

https://t.co/Nq2QsYz4fP

Irish Times

There was a rumour going around the office this week that Dublin might be considering a late bid for the Olympics.

Not without some hope either. These are worrying times for the International Olympic Committee (IOC), and like the last items in the January sales, no reasonable offer would be refused.

Some people may need reminding that Dublin once did, in all seriousness, consider bidding before, mapping out a site in the docklands and planning a transformation of existing sporting facilities.

It was 1992, and Gay Mitchell, then lord mayor, established several working groups to help decide whether a bid was feasible: Price Waterhouse (as it was known then) declared it cost-effective and Mitchell’s conclusion – which he still stands over – was that Dublin could indeed make a credible bid.

Nor was he put off by claims from Olympic Council of Ireland president Pat Hickey that “we couldn’t even build the jacks”.

Only now, 24 years on, the burning question is not so much could we bid but should we? The IOC is still waiting on the bid documents for the next available summer Games, in 2024, with all submissions due by the February 17th deadline.

The rumour that Dublin is considering a late submission may be no more than that, although given Hickey’s now commanding role within the IOC, plus the fact our economy has gone from rags to riches again, would it be refused?

Farcical bidding

What is certain is that what used to be a frantic bidding process has turned somewhat farcical.

As things stand, only four cities are still bidding for those 2024 Olympics – Paris, Rome, Budapest and Los Angeles – and by the time the IOC make their final decision in Lima, Peru in September of next year, that race may well be further reduced.

That old five-ringed emblem has clearly lost much of its shine, and instead of cities dreaming of bidding for the Olympics it now feels like more of a nightmare.

The people of Hamburg certainly felt that way. Despite an estimated approval rate of about 60 per cent, Germany’s second largest city voted a resounding “nein” when putting their 2024 bid to a public referendum last November.

For IOC president Thomas Bach, this wasn’t only a brutal rejection by his own people, it’s also scared off any further German bids, for summer or winter Games, for a very long time.

The reasons behind that “nein” are telling: Hamburg’s anti-Olympic campaign, NOlympia, was adamant the estimated €11.2 billion cost of hosting the Games was far better spent on the needs of the population, especially given its central destination in the European migrant and refugee crisis.

Other non-sporting matters were partly to blame, including their still uncertain economy and increasing terrorist threats following the savage attacks in Paris a few weeks previous.

Yet Bach himself also conceded the decision “may have been influenced by regrettable incidents with regard to doping and corruption”.

Exorbitant costs

Whatever about the exorbitant costs the Olympics place on the host city, those damning reports of corruption within the Fifa (including Germany’s bid for the 2006 World Cup) and the IAAF, and more recently of match- fixing in tennis, haven’t done the IOC’s image any favour.

A statement from the No Boston campaign in the aftermath of the Hamburg vote certainly saw it that way: “Citizens across the globe are saying loudly and clearly that they have more important priorities than throwing a three-week party for the undemocratic, unaccountable IOC.”

Indeed, Boston helped set the trend here. This time last year the US Olympic Committee declared Boston its preferred choice to bid for the 2024 Games, only for all hell to break loose. Boston’s anti-Olympic sentiment became so strong that by July their bid was unceremoniously dropped, and Los Angeles was entered instead.

Fear of rejection

Meanwhile, other potential bidders for 2024, including Toronto, also cited a fear of public rejection for not entering the race.

Indeed in the aftermath of the Hamburg vote, David Luckes, the man behind the original London 2012 feasibility study, admitted those Games would never have happened had the UK carried out a referendum on the matter, because the “no” vote would definitely have won.

Whatever happy glow was left in the faces of the IOC in the aftermath of those London Games also faded fast. Last July, they found themselves with just two candidates for the 2022 Winter Olympics, after all six European bids dropped out.

Three cities – Krakow, Munich and St Moritz/Davos – rejected their bids by public referendum; Stockholm and Oslo dropped out through a combination of public and political apathy; while Lviv, Ukraine dropped out because of war.

The ghastly €37 billion price tag of Sochi 2014 didn’t help either, and in the end, the IOC was left to choose between Beijing and Almaty, Kazakhstan. (Beijing won, even though the nearest ski resort is a two-hour drive away.)

Now, with constant reminders of the budget challenges facing Rio this summer, plus the build-up to Tokyo 2020, the race to host the 2024 Games is entering the home stretch.

‘Risky bet’ The Paris bid has been kept low-profile, perhaps due to some lingering ill-feeling after London surprisingly beat them to the 2012 Games. The Rome and Budapest bids certainly aren’t going unchallenged. Rome withdrew its bid for the 2020 Games, having initially committed, and the Radicali Italiani party wants out of the 2024 race too, fronting the campaign “Roma 2024: A very risky bet”, also calling for a public vote.

Budapest isn’t quite at the finish line yet either. Earlier this week, Hungary’s supreme court blocked a proposed referendum on their 2024 bid, on the basis it’s too late to back down now.

However, opponents of the Budapest bid aren’t done yet, describing the decision as “illogical” and promising further opposition through the Budapest Electoral Board.

Of all which begs the question: if that rumour is true that Dublin might be considering a late bid for 2024, how would you vote?

If true I can only assume it would be for publicity if the city. Arguably not feasible in any way, never mind having any hope of beating Paris or LA

[FYI]

The IOC deadline for the 2024 Olympics was Sept 15th, 2015. So all the cities that submitted their intent by that date are in the running. No other cities can come on now, so this is a non-story.

[baron-pierreIV]

Dublin? They can't even host an IOC Session, and they want to go for the actual Games? Do they have a death wish?

[olympian]

do we know what the presentation order is?

[JO2024]

Yes:

1. LA

2. Rome

3. Budapest

4. Paris

[olympian]

Yes:

1. LA

2. Rome

3. Budapest

4. Paris

thanks