IOC President Bach Impressed By Australian PM’s Commitment To Olympic Bid

[FYI]

Talk about biting your nose off to spite your face type of mentality. That’s hardly ever a winning strategy, though. 

[FYI]

6 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Why the Summer Olympics are held in July, August despite heat

It's not just NBC.  Other broadcasters and sports federations have similar preferences for that window as well.

That was an interesting read. Damn the welfare of the athletes (which is what the IOC always rants about) & spectators as long as they can get every bit of revenue they can for their Olympic ‘investment’. 

6 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Prospective bidders are free to propose dates outside that window if they want.  That's what Doha did.  Yes, they got rejected, but mostly because the IOC said Do-haha to them, not necessarily because of the dates.

Do-haha! 

Exactly, the date argument was merely a smokescreen to deny Doha-ha for other real issues that the IOC couldn’t just come right out & say to them (depsite of what any other ‘naive’ bias bid supporter around here wants to say about it). 

[Roger87]

5 hours ago, FYI said:

Talk about biting your nose off to spite your face type of mentality. That’s hardly ever a winning strategy, though. 

Well, at least this won't be Mediterranean arrogance anymore  Unless Coates has Italian/Castillian roots.

[Roger87]

6 hours ago, thatsnotmypuppy said:

John Coates - the AOC chief - is famously anti-Melbourne (a recent challenger to his job was from there and tried to remove him using the backing of a bloc of local Melbourne members).

John has stated repeatedly he is not even willing to try to be flexible dates wise and that Brisbane is the only city the AOC will bid with in the future. Thus Melbourne - despite being arguably the most prepared city in Australia - will be locked out until after Coates f*cks off. Hopefully that will be sooner rather than later for a few reasons. 

Let's hope the best. There's still time to change the tide.

[Quaker2001]

6 hours ago, FYI said:

That was an interesting read. Damn the welfare of the athletes (which is what the IOC always rants about) & spectators as long as they can get every bit of revenue they can for their Olympic ‘investment’. 

Do-haha! 

Exactly, the date argument was merely a smokescreen to deny Doha-ha for other real issues that the IOC couldn’t just come right out & say to them (depsite of what any other ‘naive’ bias bid supporter around here wants to say about it). 

The IOC is still a business, so for any notion of altruism on the part of their organization's mission, I can't entirely fault them for being about making money.  The IOC has made it increasingly clear they'll say no to any bid for whatever reason they deem fit.  That's probably not a bid thing.  I doubt they'd reject Australia outright simply for proposing an October Olympics (although that seems like it's a moot point anyway), but it's something the IOC will have to try and put a value on.  If the numbers don't work out, then it's likely not going to happen.

[Olympic Fan Darcy]

6 hours ago, FYI said:

That was an interesting read. Damn the welfare of the athletes (which is what the IOC always rants about) & spectators as long as they can get every bit of revenue they can for their Olympic ‘investment’. 

Do-haha! 

Exactly, the date argument was merely a smokescreen to deny Doha-ha for other real issues that the IOC couldn’t just come right out & say to them (depsite of what any other ‘naive’ bias bid supporter around here wants to say about it). 

2 years on and you're still out here whinging about Melbourne being discarded. You call me naive because years ago I told you the IOC wouldn't bend the rules on the date issue for Melbourne and that they set the benchmark for that with Doha even if it was a smokescreen. You said Brisbane was stupid and that Melbourne would be the bid and the IOC would change the rules for September/October. We argued it over and over and yet here we are, the IOC Vice President and actual President praising the Brisbane bid, Melbourne not even in the picture. The timing rules not being changed.

 

It's been 2 years, you need to get over it. Seems you're the naive one after all. 

[FYI]

6 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

I doubt they'd reject Australia outright simply for proposing an October Olympics (although that seems like it's a moot point anyway), but it's something the IOC will have to try and put a value on.  If the numbers don't work out, then it's likely not going to happen.

You need to tell this to Darcy then, since it very clear that he enjoys to ‘misrepresent’ my posts, even though it’s obvious that I’m not the only one with this opinion. Maybe he’s ‘obscessed’ with me or something for whatever his reasons.

[Olympic Fan Darcy]

12 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Why the Summer Olympics are held in July, August despite heat

It's not just NBC.  Other broadcasters and sports federations have similar preferences for that window as well.

Prospective bidders are free to propose dates outside that window if they want.  That's what Doha did.  Yes, they got rejected, but mostly because the IOC said Do-haha to them, not necessarily because of the dates.

So this was a thing before the IOC became more flexible.  Still, at the end of the day, it comes down to a decision and a potentially a vote.  It's not an either/or whether or not proposing different dates is allowed or not.  The Aussies can do whatever they want in that regard and the IOC will put that to a decision if they think it's in their best interests.

Plus, remember about NBC.. they're locked in through 2032, but rights for the Olympics after that will be up for grabs.  So if Australia is looking at the 2036 Olympics, what will it to do the value of those rights fees (and not just from NBC, but from other broadcasters) if the Olympics are scheduled for September or October.  That's something the IOC voters will have to weigh the value of.

The NBC revenue is one of the most important incomes for the Olympics. The fact they haven't renewed for the games after 2032 is worrisome for any city that proposes hosting outside the proposed date window. If it looks like they'll be held outside their preferred window then that deteriorates the value for NBC and gives less income to the IOC. Why mess with that formula? Melbourne can go ahead with bidding outside the window but I doubt the IOC would be interested, especially when there's a city/region from the exact same country that is interested in bidding, within the right time frame and has the support of the head of the Australian Olympic Committee. 

 

Melbourne's out of the equation, not sure why people are still hung up on it. Just because FYI pathetically argues that Brisbane has the same international recognition as Leipzig (seriously?) or a population the same size at Kansas City doesn't matter. Seems this is the only serious bid on the table at the moment and the IOC are taking it seriously. Bach has invited the Premier of Queensland to come to the IOC headquarters at the end of the year. 

[Quaker2001]

Just now, FYI said:

You need to tell this to Darcy then, since it very clear that he enjoys to ‘misrepresent’ my posts, even though it’s obvious that I’m not the only one with this opinion. Maybe he’s ‘obscessed’ with me or something for whatever his reasons.

Not getting in the middle of that one.  Maybe John Coates and the AOC have done the math and feel they are better off offering up a less than ideal Brisbane bid in the preferred time window rather than going with Melbourne in a non-traditional window.  And who is to say if that's a smart decision or not, but at the very least, let's assume they've thought this one through, even if it's not necessarily the right call.  I honestly don't have a strong enough opinion on this one other than to reiterate that Australia is free to propose whatever they want, a "rule" be damned, so long as they understand the consequences and risks of that decision.

[FYI]

10 minutes ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

We argued it over and over and yet here we are, the IOC Vice President and actual President praising the Brisbane bid, Melbourne not even in the picture. The timing rules not being changed.

Perhaps you’re confused, cuz we never argued this over & over again. It was Beijing over Almaty, remember? Which, if we’re going to be this schoolyard game, you got WRONG, & I got right. 

And so f’n what if John Coates is “praising” the Brisbane bid (& Bach is just being diplomatic, not necessarily praising anything). Cuz remind how well that worked out for Gunilla Lindberg & Stockholm 2026. 

16 minutes ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

It's been 2 years, you need to get over it. Seems you're the naive one after all. 

Right, look in the mirror. Cuz you’re seeing what you want to see. Aren’t you the one that keeps saying that Brisbane won’t win anyway, so WTF is your problem then. 

[Olympic Fan Darcy]

Just now, FYI said:

Perhaps you’re confused, cuz we never argued this over & over again. It was Beijing over Almaty, remember? Which, if we’re going to be this schoolyard game, you got WRONG, & I got right. 

And so f’n what if John Coates is “praising” the Brisbane bid (& Bach is just being diplomatic, not necessarily praising anything). Cuz remind how well that worked out for Gunilla Lindberg & Stockholm 2026. 

Right, look in the mirror. Cuz you’re seeing what you want to see. Aren’t you the one that keeps saying that Brisbane won’t win anyway, so WTF is your problem then. 

You argued over and over that the IOC would bend the rules for the date change which is still yet to happen. You argued that Brisbane wouldn't happen and that Melbourne would which also, is still yet to happen. 

Where exactly is Melbourne in this bid race? Cause pretty much every second thread here has been about Brisbane updates. Melbourne's not in the picture. You need tor realize that. 

[FYI]

^As already has been mentioned here before, & not by me, but Coates has an axe to grind against Melbourne. So that’s why they’re currently not on the table, cuz Coates has gone out of his way to push Melbourne aside for his own personal vendetta during his re-election campaign for AOC president. 

Again, if you claim that Brisbane isn’t going to win anyway, then all your accusations are really a moot point.

[Olympic Fan Darcy]

3 minutes ago, FYI said:

^As already has been mentioned here before, & not by me, but Coates has an axe to grind against Melbourne. So that’s why they’re currently not on the table, cuz Coates has gone out of his way to push Melbourne aside for his own personal vendetta during his re-election campaign for AOC president. 

Again, if you claim that Brisbane isn’t going to win anyway, then all your accusations are really a moot point.

You REALLY think Coates is the one and only reason Melbourne isn't in the picture? Come on.

And besides, why are you still arguing it then if you know that Melbourne isn't happening. Brisbane's on the cards and that's it.

And yeah I did argue that Brisbane wasn't going to win, when I thought the IOC was still holding actual votes for it's Summer Olympic host cities. Then 2024 and 2028 were gifted without a voting process and given how much focus they've given to this South East Queensland bid and nothing for anyone else than perhaps not. If this goes to a bid and Berlin and Shanghai throw their hat into the rings then probably not but currently nothing is happening. 

[Quaker2001]

11 minutes ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

The NBC revenue is one of the most important incomes for the Olympics. The fact they haven't renewed for the games after 2032 is worrisome for any city that proposes hosting outside the proposed date window. If it looks like they'll be held outside their preferred window then that deteriorates the value for NBC and gives less income to the IOC. Why mess with that formula? Melbourne can go ahead with bidding outside the window but I doubt the IOC would be interested, especially when there's a city/region from the exact same country that is interested in bidding, within the right time frame and has the support of the head of the Australian Olympic Committee. 

Like I said, if that's the direction the AOC wants to go, then the IOC doesn't really get to have an opinion or a preference on that one.  If the AOC is putting forth Brisbane because they feel it has a better chance of being selected than Melbourne or Sydney, I'm sure they've weighed those options.  But from what I'm reading - and correct me if I'm wrong here because this is your city we're talking about - it sounds like it's going to be pretty expensive.  They say it fits in with some of the city's long term urban development plans, but I have some reservations about just how much they will need to spend and how that's going to look in an environment where the IOC is looking for existing infrastructure and to avoid large amounts of spending.

12 minutes ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

Melbourne's out of the equation, not sure why people are still hung up on it. Just because FYI pathetically argues that Brisbane has the same international recognition as Leipzig (seriously?) or a population the same size at Kansas City doesn't matter. Seems this is the only serious bid on the table at the moment and the IOC are taking it seriously. Bach has invited the Premier of Queensland to come to the IOC headquarters at the end of the year. 

Because the most recent string of hosts for the most part have been some of the world's largest and most prominent cities.  No disrespect to Brisbane, but I don't know if it fits that mold.  So if the IOC is given a choice between Brisbane or a larger city/region (who knows if they'll have that choice though), which city is the IOC could to choose?

Key phrase in that last sentence.. "at the moment."  If we were still operating under the old formula, applications for the 2028 Olympics Olympics probably wouldn't be due for another couple of months and we'd be 2 full years from the vote.  I don't get where people on this site are making it seem like the IOC is ready to choose the 2032 host city right now just because they have 1 country that's showing interest.  Of course the IOC should take it seriously. But it takes a whole lot more than a couple of meetings to get a deal done.  It's a good start and I'm sure the IOC has to love a country that seems enthusiastic especially after what just transpired with 2026.  That shouldn't imply the IOC is ready to hand them an Olympics in the near term.  IMO, we are years away from that even being a consideration.

[Quaker2001]

5 minutes ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

You REALLY think Coates is the one and only reason Melbourne isn't in the picture? Come on.

And besides, why are you still arguing it then if you know that Melbourne isn't happening. Brisbane's on the cards and that's it.

And yeah I did argue that Brisbane wasn't going to win, when I thought the IOC was still holding actual votes for it's Summer Olympic host cities. Then 2024 and 2028 were gifted without a voting process and given how much focus they've given to this South East Queensland bid and nothing for anyone else than perhaps not. If this goes to a bid and Berlin and Shanghai throw their hat into the rings then probably not but currently nothing is happening. 

What "anyone else"?  These Olympics are still 13 years away.  The IOC hasn't set any sort of timeline for how or when they'll decide on who hosts 2032.  Australia doesn't get extra credit just because they're the first ones to raise their hands and start working with the IOC.  Like you said, if China comes along and says they're offering up Shanghai - and they still have years ahead of us to do that - then no one is likely to remember that Australia was potentially offering up Brisbane years in advance.

[thatsnotmypuppy]

21 minutes ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

You REALLY think Coates is the one and only reason Melbourne isn't in the picture? Come on.

Actually - from his own mouth - he is a huge part of it.  He has stated categorically that Melbourne will not be able to host due to the local climate in July and August. 

The Federal Government can suggest Melbourne (or Sydney, or Perth) to John Coates and he gets to say no.  If the AOC do not present the bid the IOC will not accept the bid.  If John Coates is telling Scott Morrison that Brisbane is the only option then yes - John Coates is telling the IOC that Brisbane is the only option.

The Victorian premier has stated he would like Melbourne to bid - repeatedly - and yet we are only getting this SEQ option spoken about. At all.

It really is that cut and dried.

Of course Brisbane can say no and pass on the opportunity. And that may still come to pass.  I still would not expect any change of policy from the current AOC regime - though they may try to spin that Sydney has a "mild enough winter climate" if it benefits the AOC to throw it's hat in the ring at all costs.  And it may.  Who knows.

There are far too many what ifs at this stage.

[Olympianfan]

The Australian economy is not in a great shape right now and there is allot of talk it will enter a long rescission in the next year of two the public might turn against the bid from Brisbane if that happens. 

There is no need for a big oval stadium in Brisbane the Gabba hardly sells out for Cricket and AFL, John Coates rule will come to a end soon and what is interesting is Thomas Bach wants flexibility for the dates for the games so the 2032 Summer Games could be the last games with date restrictions under the NBC deal. 

Melbourne right now is the best city for the games in Australia right now with the date restrictions likely to go from the 2036 Summer Games it could open up a January Olympic Games and February Paralympics Games, The Cricket could be held at Marvel Stadium for that summer and the Australian Open could go to another city for that year.

If the 2032 Summer Games go to Asia the 2036 games will likely not be held in the Asia Pacific region so the Australian Games may not happen for a while yet.   

[Quaker2001]

8 hours ago, Olympianfan said:

The Australian economy is not in a great shape right now and there is allot of talk it will enter a long rescission in the next year of two the public might turn against the bid from Brisbane if that happens. 

There is no need for a big oval stadium in Brisbane the Gabba hardly sells out for Cricket and AFL, John Coates rule will come to a end soon and what is interesting is Thomas Bach wants flexibility for the dates for the games so the 2032 Summer Games could be the last games with date restrictions under the NBC deal. 

Melbourne right now is the best city for the games in Australia right now with the date restrictions likely to go from the 2036 Summer Games it could open up a January Olympic Games and February Paralympics Games, The Cricket could be held at Marvel Stadium for that summer and the Australian Open could go to another city for that year.

If the 2032 Summer Games go to Asia the 2036 games will likely not be held in the Asia Pacific region so the Australian Games may not happen for a while yet.   

A Summer Olympics in January?..

[Roger87]

12 hours ago, Olympianfan said:

 

Melbourne right now is the best city for the games in Australia right now with the date restrictions likely to go from the 2036 Summer Games it could open up a January Olympic Games and February Paralympics Games, The Cricket could be held at Marvel Stadium for that summer and the Australian Open could go to another city for that year.

If the 2032 Summer Games go to Asia the 2036 games will likely not be held in the Asia Pacific region so the Australian Games may not happen for a while yet.   

Now, this is territory of delusional thinking. Especially when Melbourne can work per September timeline. 

[munichfan]

On 7/3/2019 at 1:28 AM, munichfan said:

That said, all of this takes time to unfold, and it won't be a done deal within the next months, but as of now, I would certainly not rule out we will see an Olympics awarded to Australia well before 2025.

[stryker]

This is either going to work out splendidly for the IOC or completely blow up in their faces. If it's the latter, then the SOGs are going to be facing the same crisis the WOGs have in terms of attracting hosts outside of nations ruled by despots.

I am not surprised by the rush to name Brisbane in essentially a targeted move. I've said before that the IOC is likely only considering SOGs from nations considered to have safe bids (China, Japan, Australia, USA, Russia, Korea, or Western Europe. Outside of those, then it's a no go and likely will be for decades to come. As for Australia, I've never understood outside of the weather issue why Brisbane has been pushed forward over Melbourne. With limited places that can host safely as the IOC wants, I would have a hard time believing the IOC wouldn't bend a timetable to let a city like Melbourne host in order to avoid going to the likes of Jakarta, Delhi, or Doha. Melbourne has almost all the infrastructure in place and give the IOC a compact Olympics. From what I've read, the push for Brisbane has been largely due to John Coates. A risky move considering Coates is as much responsible for the bidding crisis as Bach is.

As for Brisbane, this can be pulled off if they go with a regional approach. I'll be very interested in seeing how their venue plan comes out. From the feasibility study, it's claimed Brisbane has 85% of the venues in place, they are missing the ones that are the most problematic (Olympic Stadium and slalom canoe course). Brisbane has yet to come up with an answer for the Olympic Stadium problem. Plenty of evidence exists for temporary stadiums being failed options. There's no tenant needing a new stadium. I've seen Carrara Stadium which hosted athletics during the CWGs as an option but would space around Carrara be an issue in terms of expansion? If not, then it's viable. The feasibility study proposed a number of arenas being converted to community centers, a risky legacy prospect. I'm not sold on the idea of temporary arenas either. We are seeing this now with Paris who have junked the temporary volleyball arena and aquatics center in favor of existing facilities (the stadium in Lille and moving swimming to Arena 92 while moving gymnastics to Bercy). Brisbane has gone a step in the right direction with using Brisbane Live for aquatics. Brisbane can go further by utilizing some of the Sydney venues such as the slalom canoe course and perhaps even the Qudos Bank Arena. I do think the proposed budget is a bit optimistic as well. If Brisbane can pull this off with a regional approach while leaving a legacy of transportation upgrades and no white elephants, then there's a template for similar bids going forward. If it turns into a situation where the budget spirals out of control, then the IOC will have an even smaller pool of candidates to choose from in future SOGs.

[Tejas57]

On 3/21/2021 at 5:03 AM, stryker said:

. If it turns into a situation where the budget spirals out of control, then the IOC will have an even smaller pool of candidates to choose from in future SOGs.

yep. I'm starting to think that brisbane 2032 could be the most important games in a century. 

Brisbane is really the first smaller city to host the games in the new norm era, after LA & Paris. It’s also no secret that the games are struggling to find host cities, for a myriad of reasons including economic viability and public support.

Should Brisbane 2032 be successful it will show the IOC and smaller cities that the games can be in regional cities, therefore opening up a lot more hosting opportunities and cities that considered themselves too small may now see that they could host a successful games, whereas if it fails, it will block these cities from hosting and really restrict the cities that can host.

[FYI]

Let’s not kid ourselves here, though. The Games are struggling to find Host Cities (at least from Western nations anyway), because the IOC for decades was accustomed to getting their own way. Lavish venues & grandiose pomp & show. Every sequential host country tried to outdo the previous one by being even more extravagant, & the IOC loved it. But after to so many wild Olympic parties, the big hangover has now arrived. So the IOC is currently trying to do something more frugal because it has to, & not necessarily because they want to.

I’m sure that they’d love to go back to those lavish Olympic years, who wouldn’t. It’s mainly why we all here fell in love with the Olympics in the first place. But my concern would be, after L.A. 2028, the Olympics will then start to lose their big draw that makes them very special ITFP: the world coming to together in ONE place. But when you start to spread everything too far out, it’s going to start to dilute that Olympic allure & atmosphere that makes them so appealing (that’s been a topic on here before). Maybe on TV it won’t be noticeable much at all. But on the ground it certainly would be. And will make the Olympics start to feel no different than just your usual other world championships, & that will be a shame.