IOC Executive Board Recommends Calgary, Milan-Cortina and Stockholm 2026 Olympic Bids To Move Forward – Erzurum Is Out

[GBModerator]

IOC President Thomas Bach said Thursday that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Executive Board has recommended 2026 Olympic Winter Games bids from Calgary, Stockholm and Milan-Cortina move forward as candidates.  Outsider bid from Erzurum in Turkey will be eliminated from the race. The decision was made at the IOC’s Executive Board meeting in Buenos Aires, […]

The post IOC Executive Board Recommends Calgary, Milan-Cortina and Stockholm 2026 Olympic Bids To Move Forward – Erzurum Is Out appeared first on GamesBids.com.

View the full article

[mountainboarder_530@yahoo.]

wow  i freely admit i was not expecting Erzurum to be eliminated.  so i guess Agenda 2020 is for real.  All of the eggs in the Calgary basket.  all of them.  

[Quaker2001]

[baron-pierreIV]

I'd be really surprised if Milan-Cortina pulls it off.   I mean Calgary and Stockholm are sooooo unsure at this point -- or at least, what? November 13? 

But if 2026 goes to Italy again, it wouldn't be all that strange, repeat-time wise.  There were only 12 years between Innsbruck 1964 and 1976.  And then, of course, you have the 20-22 year gaps between Squaw Valley - Lake Placid - Salt Lake.  So,it could happen. 

Edited October 4, 2018 by baron-pierreIV

[FYI]

2 hours ago, mountainboarder_530@yahoo. said:

wow  i freely admit i was not expecting Erzurum to be eliminated.  so i guess Agenda 2020 is for real.  All of the eggs in the Calgary basket.  all of them.  

I thought that this wasn’t getting announced until Monday. But anyway, is it really a “wow” that Erzurum got cut?

1. Political & economic instability. 

2. Located in a volatile region.

3. The massive cost to bring the area to Olympic competition & accommodation standards, which would’ve spelled the opposite of all their “New Norm & Agenda 2020” talk.

4. The rumors that were already forming about possibly involving Sochi (of all places) to help out Erzurum.

5. They never really laid out all of their venue plans TBW.

So no, not really a wow that they were let go. A wow would’ve been if the IOC had included them, just for the sake of including them for fear of literally not having anyone else to chose from on 2026 Election Day. They called it out appropriately this afternoon.

 

[FYI]

7 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

I'd be really surprised if Milan-Cortina pulls it off.   I mean Calgary and Stockholm are sooooo unsure at this point -- 

At this point, though, it all looks so deja-vu. For 1988, we also had just Calgary, Falun/Are & Cortina in the fray. And now for 2026, we have Calgary, Stockholm/Are & Milan/Cortina. What are the odds? Can history repeat itself here. We shall see, at least by next month anyway. 

[Olympianfan]

2 hours ago, FYI said:

At this point, though, it all looks so deja-vu. For 1988, we also had just Calgary, Falun/Are & Cortina in the fray. And now for 2026, we have Calgary, Stockholm/Are & Milan/Cortina. What are the odds? Can history repeat itself here. We shall see, at least by next month anyway. 

In that race Cortina got the lowest amount of votes but will it be like the 2018 race? Where the they only needed the one ballot, Milan Italy the Annecy of this race, Calgary the Munich of this race and Stockholm the PyeongChang of this race the bridesmaid's country of the 1994, 1988 race eg 2010, 2014 the country yet to host the Winter Games, If Calgary fails I don't see them coming back in 2030 and the Canadian Olympic Committee might work on Toronto Canada 2032, Toronto Canada getting the 2030 Commonwealth Games could be good for the 2032 bid.

Denver have a public vote on the 2030 Denver bid in 2020 if they pass the vote it could be Denver 2030? It could work out with Stockholm Sweden 2026 - Denver USA 2030 - Almaty Kazakhstan 2034. 

[hektor]

The IOC has taken the risk to have no candidate at all in a few months...

[baron-pierreIV]

9 hours ago, FYI said:

At this point, though, it all looks so deja-vu. For 1988, we also had just Calgary, Falun/Are & Cortina in the fray. And now for 2026, we have Calgary, Stockholm/Are & Milan/Cortina. What are the odds? Can history repeat itself here. We shall see, at least by next month anyway. 

Wow, miGod, wasn't aware of that.  Also almost a repeat of the 1924-2024 head-to-head between Paris-LA-(and Amsterdam in the 1924 race).  Funny how the IOC is sounding like a broken record but with fallback options approaching zero.  You'd think they'd now want a permanent home, at least for the WOGs?  

Edited October 5, 2018 by baron-pierreIV

[Olympianfan]

28 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Alan Abrahamson, FYI and Quakers favorite, put out a piece where he bluntly states that what the IOC really wants is Stockholm. He also points out that Calgary has no story. 

https://www.3wiresports.com/articles/2018/10/4/ioc-drops-to-three-for-2026-while-signaling-clearly-it-wants-stockholm

If Calgary votes NO and the Italian and the Sweden bids remain until ballot time I don't think the IOC would do a double award, So that means the 2030 Winter Games at the 2023 IOC session could be a vote between two Asian cities Almaty Kazakhstan and Sapporo Japan if the USOC and LA 2028 is still funny, 

It might just be a good chance to go to Almaty Kazakhstan they have a compelling story over Sapporo Japan and the IOC might want the USA to host the 2034 Winter Games to get more money after the NBC deal is off from 2032, Stockholm Sweden 2026 - Almaty Kazakhstan 2030 - USA 2034?

[Quaker2001]

1 hour ago, RuFF said:

Alan Abrahamson, FYI and Quakers favorite, put out a piece where he bluntly states that what the IOC really wants is Stockholm. He also points out that Calgary has no story. 

https://www.3wiresports.com/articles/2018/10/4/ioc-drops-to-three-for-2026-while-signaling-clearly-it-wants-stockholm

And of course, he couldn't help himself but to mention that LA should have had 2024 and that Paris is still dealing with budget control issues.

Once we move past the personal bias, he's not wrong about 2026, especially with Calgary.  What is their motivation?  We're less than a decade removed from Canada's last Olympics.  A return to Calgary reeks of "well, Toronto doesn't have their act together and LA just got theirs, so let's go for a Winter Olympics before the United States gets another one."  That plus the lack of compelling candidates.

Yea, if the IOC had their druthers, they desperately want Europe.  That's what they wanted for 2022 until Oslo rejected them for an Olympics that would have practically been handed to them.  For all the histrionics with Italy, they're also a recent host who may or may not have have their act together.  Of course, as the story goes, "you can't always get what you want."  And the big problem for the IOC is that they have very little control over who does or doesn't stay in the running moving forward.

[Quaker2001]

So to recap what it looks like to throw darts at a dart board...

On 9/14/2018 at 8:58 AM, Olympianfan said:

The IOC might work to lobby the Swedish government to have the 2030 games I think they will be more open to have the 2030 games then have Almaty Kazakhstan for the 2026 winter games so the Islamic world will not freak out about Turkey getting kicked out of the race this would be the best Public relations move by the IOC, Double award Almaty Kazakhstan 2026 - Stockholm Sweden 2030. 

On 9/18/2018 at 9:24 AM, Olympianfan said:

If the USOC says NO and Sweden say NO then the only logical thing to do is go and ring up Almaty Kazakhstan and get them to host the 2026 Winter Olympic and Paralympics Games.

On 10/3/2018 at 1:37 AM, Olympianfan said:

Get rid of the Turkish bid next week then work on Calgary Canada 2026 and Stockholm Sweden 2030 double award deal then we could be all good for the Winter Games.

10 hours ago, Olympianfan said:

Denver have a public vote on the 2030 Denver bid in 2020 if they pass the vote it could be Denver 2030? It could work out with Stockholm Sweden 2026 - Denver USA 2030 - Almaty Kazakhstan 2034. 

1 hour ago, Olympianfan said:

It might just be a good chance to go to Almaty Kazakhstan they have a compelling story over Sapporo Japan and the IOC might want the USA to host the 2034 Winter Games to get more money after the NBC deal is off from 2032, Stockholm Sweden 2026 - Almaty Kazakhstan 2030 - USA 2034?

[FYI]

10 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

And of course, he couldn't help himself but to mention that LA should have had 2024 and that Paris is still dealing with budget control issues.

I know, I just  when I read that crap yet again - it’s like he just can’t stop regurgitating that bitter pill over & over again that Paris got theirs before L.A. & how the IOC would’ve been “better served” with his version. :-/

And as much as he also enjoys to harp that L.A. would “reset” the Olympic Movement - L.A. going “first” wouldn’t have changed absolutely nothing with what’s going on now with the 2026 race or Paris going “second” with “excercising budget concerns”. Never mind also that no other city can really replicate L.A.’s plans to ‘reset’ anything, let alone the Olympics.

But anyway, back to 2026 - for as much as some people were making too much a big deal about Stockholm & their distance to Are & that the IOC would never go along with their plan & that’s it’s Calgary’s “for the taking”, well here it is, the IOC really wants Europe for 2026, & in this case, specifically Sweden (just as much as they wanted Europe for 2024, specifically Paris in that case).

This certainly does seem like a parallel with 2022 & Oslo. If Sweden’s National government for some strange reason at this point does a complete 180 - 2026 would absolutely be theirs. And that shouldn’t come as some surprise or some revelation like it’s being billed in the article. Of Calgary, Milan & Stockholm, Sweden is the most compelling case (a true, European winter sports power that’s never hosted the Winter Olympics before) , even in an era where a lot of other viable & desirable cities are still dropping out like flies from wanting to host the Games. 

[rio2016man]

The IOC and Bach were stung, and badly, by Oslo’s exit from the 2022 race

[Quaker2001]

21 minutes ago, rio2016man said:

The IOC and Bach were stung, and badly, by Oslo’s exit from the 2022 race

Yes, that's a direct quote from the Abrahamson story

[FYI]

How does Calgary stack up with the other finalists for the 2026 Olympics?

Experts offer their views on the bids from Canada, Italy and Sweden

What began as a robust group of potential host cities for the 2026 Winter Olympics has been reduced to three remaining candidates.

On Thursday, the IOC approved Calgary, Stockholm and a combined Italian bid involving Milan and the northern alpine region of Cortina d'Ampezzo to move forward with bids for the 2026 Winter Olympics.

What began as a robust group of potential host cities for the 2026 Winter Olympics has been reduced to three remaining candidates.

On Thursday, the IOC approved Calgary, Stockholm and a combined Italian bid involving Milan and the northern alpine region of Cortina d'Ampezzo to move forward with bids for the 2026 Winter Olympics.

The bidding process has seen multiple cities drop out, including Sapporo, Japan and Sion, Switzerland because of political opposition and concerns about unknown costs. 

The IOC will announce the winning city in September 2019. 

So who will win?

CBC Sports reached out to three experts familiar with the Olympic bidding process to help evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the remaining three candidates. Robert Livingstone runs the website Gamesbids.com and follows the process closely. Lisa Delpy is the director of the sport management program at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., and has written extensively about the bidding process. Dave Doroghy is an international sports marketing executive who was involved in the successful Vancouver 2010 and London 2012 Olympic bids.

Here is their analysis on the pros and cons of each bid:

Calgary

Pros: Calgary's bid has a number of things going for it. First off, supporters of the bid have been working on it longer than the competition. Also, Canada is a winter nation with a strong track record of hosting the Olympics and there are existing facilities from Calgary's 1988 Winter Games and Vancouver's in 2010. 

Livingstone: "It's a very well-organized project that's been going on for two or three years, which is a lot more than we can say with the other bids. There's a lot of confidence, there's facilities in place in Calgary [that would be upgraded or renovated] and a chance to build on a Olympic legacy that still resonates from 1988. The potential legacy is a valuable legacy. They don't anticipate white elephants."

Doroghy: "Canada has a great reputation for hosting great Olympic Games. It's a safe destination to go to. The IOC and world look upon Canada as a nation that can not only organize Winter Games but do it with a great spirit. It all boils down to government backing and the degree to which the federal, provincial and municipal governments will get behind it. In Canada, the federal government backing of $1.5 billion and the statements made to date by the provincial government all seem very positive when it comes to government backing — and that's important."  

Cons: The Calgary bid has a number of things working against. It is holding a plebiscite (referendum) on Nov. 13 that will ask Calgarians if they want to continue pursuing the Games. It's non-binding, but an overwhelming result on either side will go a long way toward shaping political decisions going forward.

And a vocal opposition group, No Calgary, has mobilized and is diligently working to shape public opinion ahead of the November vote.

Beyond that, there is the familiarity factor.

Delpy: "The problem is now, OK, you've had 2010, you've had 1988, and then you have 2026. That's a lot of Winter Olympics in one country. Also, the problem with Calgary is you have an opposition group that's pretty strong. Also, Canada is hosting the 2026 World Cup. So there's a lot of concern about the money you're going to have to upgrade."

Doroghy: "The positive that Canada has hosted fantastic Games can also work as a negative. Many people are asking is it fair to have an Olympics for the fourth time in such a short period. The Games can't keep being awarded to the same countries over and over again."

Stockholm

 PROS: The bid has strong support from the Swedish Olympic Committee and proposes very little in terms of new buildings and facilities. It also has an advantage within the IOC, according to Delpy: Sweden’s Gunilla Lindberg is a longtime member of its powerful executive. 

Delpy: "Right now I see it as the strongest bid. They're known for winter sports. So Sweden typically does well in the Winter Games. They also have the climate and they have the mountains. Stockholm has the hotels and it's known for tourists as a popular destination."

Livingstone: "Building a couple of new venues that they need and the fact it's a strong winter sports country that has never hosted the Winter Olympics is a plus."

Cons: There is no government backing at this point.

Livingstone: "They have zero government interest in it — none at any level. Nobody wants to talk about it, which is a big problem because they need all levels of government to provide guarantees."

Doroghy: "The government is not backing this bid but despite this, the Swedish Olympic Committee continues to move forward with the application. Government support is key because it says that no matter what goes wrong, where we go off the rails, the government will be there with a guarantee. That doesn't exist in Sweden right now. It is safe, a great tourist destination and a chance for the IOC to return the Olympics to Europe, but there doesn't seem to be the strong commitment needed from the Swedish government."

Cortina d'Ampezzo and Milan

Pros: Italy has a strong Olympic tradition having hosted both Winter and Summer Olympics previously.

Livingstone: "They have that Olympic tradition. They have the infrastructure. Cortina hosted the 1956 Games and the facilities would obviously have to be upgraded, but they have a start there. Milan can definitely host a lot of the ice events as they've got arenas there and other infrastructure. Across the region, they have ski facilities. They wouldn't have to build too much. And they are that traditional winter atmosphere the IOC is looking for and it's in Europe and the IOC really wants to be there. So that's a big plus."

Cons: Italy's financial issues are a concern for the IOC.

Livingstone: "They're just so disorganized and so embedded in politics that it's hard. The Rome bid for the 2020 and 2024 Olympics didn't make it to the end because politics got in the way and they lost support. There's no answer to whether the IOC will support something that doesn't have financial backing from the federal government. There are just too many question marks and based on experience with Italy, there's a possibility it won't survive."

Delpy: "The Italian Olympic Committee is very wealthy, but it has no government money. You know Italy is having a hard time right now. Also, Turin 2006 was kind of a bust in terms of spirit and organization. So there's questions in terms of the IOC having confidence they will be able to pull it off successfully."

Rankings each city's chances

Delpy:

1. Stockholm
2. Calgary
3. Cortina D'Ampezzo /Milan

Doroghy:

1. Calgary
2. Stockholm
3. Milan/Cortina D'Ampezzo

Livingstone:

1. Milan/Cortina D'Ampezzo
2. Calgary
3. Stockholm

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4851009

[FYI]

Interesting to note, that each of the three experts, all pick three different choices. Also, notice how they didn’t ask a so-called other ‘expert’.  

 

[Ikarus360]

 

22 hours ago, FYI said:

This certainly does seem like a parallel with 2022 & Oslo. If Sweden’s National government for some strange reason at this point does a complete 180 - 2026 would absolutely be theirs. And that shouldn’t come as some surprise or some revelation like it’s being billed in the article. Of Calgary, Milan & Stockholm, Sweden is the most compelling case (a true, European winter sports power that’s never hosted the Winter Olympics before) , even in an era where a lot of other viable & desirable cities are still dropping out like flies from wanting to host the Games. 

It could potentially happen soon. Swedish PM Stefan Loven was ousted after a vote of no confidence by the parliament, and is now leading a caretaker govt. This happened after the recent general elections, where none of the two major parties got the majority and the controversial SD party got a lot of votes, essentially becoming the third most important party now. 

https://www.thelocal.se/20180925/swedish-prime-minister-stefan-lofven-confidence-vote

Sweden is currently trying to form a new government now. There is a possibility the center-right party forms govt with SD, but everyone is afraid of this possibility as SD is known for being an eurosceptic, rather racist party.

[thatsnotmypuppy]

Was there no official report released?  The IOC normally love to publish long-winded articles...

[Ikarus360]

Why bother. This whole race has been a big joke, even compared to the last two races. An official report would either sound fabricated or make the IOC look even more stupid at this point tbh. 

[Nacre]

On ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 11:06 AM, Quaker2001 said:

Once we move past the personal bias, he's not wrong about 2026, especially with Calgary.  What is their motivation?  We're less than a decade removed from Canada's last Olympics.  A return to Calgary reeks of "well, Toronto doesn't have their act together and LA just got theirs, so let's go for a Winter Olympics before the United States gets another one." 

There are lots of reasons for Canada to host another winter Olympics instead of a summer games in Toronto.

1. Canada is really, really good at winter sports. It would likely "own the podium" again in a 2026 Calgary games. Meanwhile Canada would finish 16th-32nd at a Toronto summer games.
2. The winter games are better for tourism than the summer games. Calgary would get a slight tourism benefit from hosting the winter Olympics, while Toronto's tourism economy would almost certainly be hurt by hosting the summer games.
3. Calgary has much more need for the winter venues than Toronto does for the summer venues. Even if they wanted to refurbish the ski jumps it would "only" cost $500,000 CAD per year in maintenance. Conversely Toronto would have to waste $15-25 million CAD per year maintaining an Olympic stadium. Moreover if Calgary decides to build a large new arena that would end up being used by the Flames, while there is no obvious tenant for an Olympic stadium in Toronto unless the Blue Jays moved into a new athletics-to-baseball converted stadium. 

For Calgary in particular the motivations are obvious: to serve as a jobs program for its citizens, to renew its prestige as a winter sports tourism destination, to inspire civic pride and to attract businesses to the city. Whether those things are worth the cost is up for debate, though.

Edited October 7, 2018 by Nacre

[thatsnotmypuppy]

1 hour ago, Nacre said:

For Calgary in particular the motivations are obvious: to serve as a jobs program for its citizens, to renew its prestige as a winter sports tourism destination, to inspire civic pride and to attract businesses to the city. Whether those things are worth the cost is up for debate, though.

The jobs argument is a bit of a fallacy.  There will be a few admin jobs for the majority of the preparation phase - larger amounts of workers won't be needed until 2023/2024.  Yes - new venues will bring a few years work - but a new Flames arena does not seem bid dependent.

As for attracting business - that hasn't really been the case in recent hosts.  If anything a city in pre-Games construction mode is a turn off for business.

Civic pride - just get your damn hockey team back up to a decent standard.  Sorted  

Winter sports - Calgary is already a world reknown training destination.  The provincial governement needs to actively attract more world championships etc.

[FYI]

No 'Plan B' for 2026 Olympics if more potential hosts drop out, IOC says

Bids from Calgary, Stockholm, Milan-Cortina all facing obstacles

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has no backup plan for the 2026 Winter Games if more cities drop out of the race, IOC President Thomas Bach said on Saturday.

Calgary, Stockholm and an Italian bid involving Cortina D'Ampezzo and Milan made the IOC shortlist this week — with Turkey's Erzurum dropped — but all three bids face major obstacles that could potentially end their candidacies.

"There is no Plan B and we will not enter into any speculation," Bach told reporters when asked about what the IOC would do if more cities dropped out ahead of next year's vote for the 2026 Games host.

Calgary has planned a non-binding plebiscite in November which could bury the Canadian bid to host the winter Olympics for the second time since 1988 as early as next month.

The Italian bid and Stockholm have both struggled with getting crucial government support for their projects, while Torino pulled out of the Italian bid over project differences.

Three other cities — Austria's Graz, Switzerland's Sion and Japan's Sapporo — have dropped out in recent months, scared off by the size and cost of the Games or after facing strong local opposition to the bids.

Cutting costs to attract future bidders

Bach said although there was a need to continue with cost-reducing measures for the Olympics, especially the Winter Games, there was still strong demand for them.

"We have more than a dozen sports who would like to join Olympic program," he said in Buenos Aires ahead of the opening ceremony of the Youth Olympics.

"Quite a number of interested cities, big number of interested cities [for the 2032 Summer Games]. We should not be worried for the future."

Indonesia, North and South Korea and India, among other, have expressed an interest in bidding for the 2032 Olympics.

Tokyo will stage the 2020 summer Games, Beijing will host the 2022 winter Olympics while Paris and Los Angeles will organize the 2024 and the 2028 summer editions respectively.

"What is true is we have to continue our efforts, particularly with regard to winter sports, to be more flexible in order to reduce costs, avoid construction of sports facilities that have no legacy," Bach said.

The IOC will no longer demand the construction of new sliding centres for luge and bobsleigh for future Olympics — apart from Beijing 2022 — as it looks to cut costs and make the Games more attractive to potential hosts.

"The same goes for the ski jumping. There is no need for further [new] ski jumping venues for the Olympics," he said. "We have made good progress in this respect."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4853680

 

 

 

[FYI]

Of course that headline should read: no plan B.. just “yet”, anyway. Please, like they’re not gonna do anything if all three of these remaining bids falter along the way. Yeah, sure. 

Although to be fair, Sapporo did not withdraw for the usual reasons that most of the other cities have lately. They’re dealing with internal isssues. And they still want the 2030 Winter Games.

[Ikarus360]

I wonder if the IOC is just waiting for one of the candidates to drop off, then pull a 2017 all over again going "Bah screw this and lets give the 2026 and 2030 games to the last remaining two cities". 

Calgary is the most obvious choice, unless, like i said before, the new swedish govt which should be formed pretty soon does a 180° and suddenly supports the games (i'm not really sure if the SD and Centre Right party support the olympics so if anyone knows about what's their position about it, please let us know)