Which one will win and what is the vote difference?

[baron-pierreIV]

I say Sweden by 6 votes.  

Edited June 3, 2019 by baron-pierreIV

[Nacre]

Italia

[mountainboarder_530@yahoo.]

Italy by 10

[Hightowerio86]

Milan by 3

[Quaker2001]

My heart says Sweden by about 5.  My head says Italy by even less than that.

Either way, I think we're looking at a pretty tight vote.

[Hansfromdenmark]

The bookmaker "Unibet" has Stockholm as clear favorite. 

The odds are 1,50 for Stockholm
And 2,40 for Milan-Cortina

So interesting that the most of you inhere thinks it goes to Italy… Well not a lot has answered yet, but still

[Nacre]

A well-supported Swedish bid would beat out Milan's mediocre bid. But . . .

1.  Stockholm has not signed the host city contract.
2. The quoted budget for the Stockholm + Are + Sigulda bid is much lower than they will actually need to spend to host the games.
3. The Swedish people don't particularly want the winter Olympics.

[Maximf83]

From everything i see it seems like choosing sweden might bring them a Denver situation in a few years (what does leasing the venues even mean?? isn't that what usually happens?)

The smart move and i believe the move that will happen will be Milan 2026

[Hansfromdenmark]

But isn´t a cheap games something the IOC need big time? So if Stockholm has a low budget games I think the IOC will appreciate that. 

I guess that Stockholm don´t think the budget is much lower than needed, so what if they actually can make it for that kind of money?

[baron-pierreIV]

5 hours ago, Hansfromdenmark said:

But isn´t a cheap games something the IOC need big time? So if Stockholm has a low budget games I think the IOC will appreciate that. 

I guess that Stockholm don´t think the budget is much lower than needed, so what if they actually can make it for that kind of money?

The thing is, Sweden hasn't hosted an Olympics since, well, 1956 -- altho that was only one sport.  Now, if Sweden had, say, worked with the Lillehammer folks, perhaps they may have gotten a better view of a more accurate budget, projected like 30 years later.  Are Latvia's costs included in the Stockholm-Are figures?  

2026 will be decided by:

- do we give it to a winter country that's never hosted a WOG? or

- let's be safe and give it back to someone's who's  hosted 2x before, and one just 20 years ago??

Edited June 4, 2019 by baron-pierreIV

[Ikarus360]

Italy will win. As much as I would love a scandinavian winter games, Milan-Cortina is the least risky one considering the fact they always had government support from the very beggining and almost 90% of Milan wants the games. I'm not sure if the IOC wants to gamble it on a city which still has relatively not enough support and where the government only gave its approval at literally last second.

There's still the possibility they will risk it for the sake of the New Horizons thing, but I don't see it happening now with all the ordeals the olympic movement is facing at the moment. Better to pick the safest choice if I was them.

[Hansfromdenmark]

Why does bookmaker so believe completely the opposite? with Stockholm as big favorite? 

And yes, the swedish government vere late, but there hardly was a government. It tooked months for them to make a goverment after an election in the fall. So the focus was not on the Olympic but getting a government together! 

I still believe Stockholm is the best choice for IOC. But time will show

[Quaker2001]

9 hours ago, Maximf83 said:

From everything i see it seems like choosing sweden might bring them a Denver situation in a few years (what does leasing the venues even mean?? isn't that what usually happens?)

The smart move and i believe the move that will happen will be Milan 2026

What is a "Denver situation?"  What happened in 1972 bears little to no resemblance to what's happening now in Stockholm, so the 2 are not comparable.  And on a website like this, we should be smarter than to try and draw a correlation between the 2 and understand what happened back then rather than to create a broad definition.

Yes, there are concerns with the Stockholm bid that may give voters reason to pick Milan-Cortina instead.  I would like to think those voters will do their due diligence however rather than to say "we can't pick Stockholm, because Denver."

2 hours ago, Ikarus360 said:

Italy will win. As much as I would love a scandinavian winter games, Milan-Cortina is the least risky one considering the fact they always had government support from the very beggining and almost 90% of Milan wants the games. I'm not sure if the IOC wants to gamble it on a city which still has relatively not enough support and where the government only gave its approval at literally last second.

There's still the possibility they will risk it for the sake of the New Horizons thing, but I don't see it happening now with all the ordeals the olympic movement is facing at the moment. Better to pick the safest choice if I was them.

At this point, the new horizons concept is meaningless IMO.  The question is does the IOC want to return to a country they fairly recently visited with a bid that still leaves a lot of questions.  Milan-Cortina may be safer than Stockholm, but it's hardly an ideal option, even in a scenario where that IOC has less than ideal options to choose from.

2 hours ago, Hansfromdenmark said:

Why does bookmaker so believe completely the opposite? with Stockholm as big favorite? 

And yes, the swedish government vere late, but there hardly was a government. It tooked months for them to make a goverment after an election in the fall. So the focus was not on the Olympic but getting a government together! 

I still believe Stockholm is the best choice for IOC. But time will show

Bookmakers generally aren't trying to predict an outcome.  Their goal tends to be to split the money in such a way that they make a profit no matter who wins.  So those odds are more a reflection of who people are betting on rather than which city they think will be chosen.

[Hansfromdenmark]

10 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Bookmakers generally aren't trying to predict an outcome.  Their goal tends to be to split the money in such a way that they make a profit no matter who wins.  So those odds are more a reflection of who people are betting on rather than which city they think will be chosen.

Yes there you have a point. But that means that most people think it goes to Stockholm. And that for a reason.

[StefanMUC]

Stockholm very narrowly

[munichfan]

Yeah, it's probably gonna turn out really close. Hoping for Sweden, however. I just don't see how building a bunch of new venues rather than using the existing ones in Torino will help the IOC's reputation.

[Sir Rols]

Stockholm. Comfortably

[StefanMUC]

4 hours ago, munichfan said:

Yeah, it's probably gonna turn out really close. Hoping for Sweden, however. I just don't see how building a bunch of new venues rather than using the existing ones in Torino will help the IOC's reputation.

Nor the wonderful thought of going to bed with morally and soon also financially bankrupt Italy under the new Duce.

[thatsnotmypuppy]

I think an imperfect Swedish bid will be better long term for the IOC than another Italian winter games.

Stockholm by 11 or so.

Edited June 12, 2019 by thatsnotmypuppy
I'm a bit dim.

[Hansfromdenmark]

1 hour ago, thatsnotmypuppy said:

I think an imperfect Swedish bid will be better long term for the IOC than another Italian winter games.

Stockholm by 11 or so.

I totally agree on that.

[Quaker2001]

10 hours ago, thatsnotmypuppy said:

I think an imperfect Swedish bid will be better long term for the IOC than another Italian winter games.

Stockholm by 11 or so.

I agree as well, but there are risks that come with choosing Sweden.  I don't think they are as dire as some here want to believe, but it needs to be a well-managed bid.  If they have their act together, everyone involved will be fine.  If not, then that may not be the best look for the IOC.

[yoshi]

The big problem with that call is assuming the IOC will a) think long-term at all & b) be willing to take that risk of public opinion/binational hosting with Sweden. I hope I’m wrong, as I want to see Stockholm win, but I think Milan will win easily, by 20-25 votes.

[TorchbearerSydney]

Too many unknowns and complications in the Swedish bid (popular support? all levels of government support? 2 country games? etc)- the IOC will opt for the easier choice. Understandable.

[thatsnotmypuppy]

The IOC needs to show that their exhaustively talked about Agenda 2020 can translate to the Winter Games - which is a far less important event when compared with the Summer Games.

The IOC can gamble with Stockholm/Are safe in the knowledge that if it does in fact all go to sh*t they can call on a previous host to step in with minimal notice (SLC, PC, China again). Yes - that's not ideal but is worth the chance.

Milan/Cortina is not as good of a showpiece for the 'New IOC'. Now is the time to show how flexible they are willing to be.

[olympian]

i'd say a razor thin one with Stockholm prevailing.