Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The real thing, though, is that the IOC needs to worry about finding a 2030 host first, before they can even begin worrying about 2034. They don't have the luxury anymore of saying "well, L.A. is hosting 2028, so SLC 2030 will be too soon after that".

Let's also remember how close SLC came to getting the 1998 Winter Games, despite Atlanta already slated for 1996. They lost to Nagano by a mere four votes. And that was at a time when the IOC actually had many choice to choose from. Not so much today, & that's particularly true for the Winter Games.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, stryker said:

Let me be clear. A double award of Salt Lake City and Vancouver is a long shot. Given the IOC's new process and with Salt Lake City already engaging with the IOC, I would expect the IOC will try to move quickly as they did with Brisbane. Most recent news about a possible Vancouver hid was a formal bid could be as much as a year off. I don't think the IOC will wait that long if SLC is ready to get serious now. Still doesn't solve the sponsorship money issue though.

In an era of diminishing availability of quality hosts, the IOC have shown in 2017 they will not hestitate to act decisively to lock in two high quality successive Hosts (Paris 2024 & LA 2028) rather than risk one of them dropping out 4 years down the road due to changing circumstances such as a slump in public support.  

Right now, we are still in that era for both the 2030 and 2034 Games.

A unique situation re 2030/2034 is developing as we speak - Sapporo’s chances are fading fast from a catastrophic slump in support from the Japanese people, Vancouver 2.0 enjoys majority public support right now and SLC 2030 has a big sponsorship problem.

What the IOC did in 2017 showed that in uncertain times, double awarding of Hosts is an important strategic option that the IOC now have up their sleeve to use when required for the continuity and survival of the Olympic Games.

FIFA is another world sport governing body one who use it when required as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

 

In an era of diminishing availability of quality hosts, the IOC have shown in 2017 they will not hestitate to act decisively to lock in two high quality successive Hosts (Paris 2024 & LA 2028) rather than risk one of them dropping out 4 years down the road due to changing circumstances such as a slump in public support.  

Right now, we are still in that era for both the 2030 and 2034 Games.

A unique situation re 2030/2034 is developing as we speak - Sapporo’s chances are fading fast from a catastrophic slump in support from the Japanese people, Vancouver 2.0 enjoys majority public support right now and SLC 2030 has a big sponsorship problem.

What the IOC did in 2017 showed that in uncertain times, double awarding of Hosts is an important strategic option that the IOC now have up their sleeve to use when required for the continuity and survival of the Olympic Games.

FIFA is another world sport governing body one who use it when required as well.

Vancouver has some hoops to jump through before it can be considered for either 2030 or 2034. The poll showing 77% public support was a very small sample size. It reminded me of the surveys the Democrats conducted in Pennsylvania showing Biden with 15 point lead prior to the election. A poll with more recipients and from a wider representation is necessary to gain a more accurate view of what the public support is for another bid

The other issue is money. B.C. passed on Vancouver as a 2026 World Cup venue and Victoria as a potential 2026 CWG host. If you can't find the cash for a WC or CWG how are you going to come up with the cash and government support for an Olympics which will require significantly more capital. Don't forget the forest fires as well which are sapping public funds. Vancouver had also been on record stating a regional bid is at least a year away.

2030 is a major problem for the IOC. SLC is ideal but the IOC will have to make some financial concessions for that to happen. There are no other realistic options at this time

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hightowerio86 said:

The thing is that the IOC will think that 2030 will be too soon after LA 2028 so I think that they will come to an agreement that Salt Lake will host in 2034.

Exactly.  There will be "Olympic fatigue" in the US between 2028 and 2030.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, stryker said:

Vancouver has some hoops to jump through before it can be considered for either 2030 or 2034. The poll showing 77% public support was a very small sample size. It reminded me of the surveys the Democrats conducted in Pennsylvania showing Biden with 15 point lead prior to the election. A poll with more recipients and from a wider representation is necessary to gain a more accurate view of what the public support is for another bid

The other issue is money. B.C. passed on Vancouver as a 2026 World Cup venue and Victoria as a potential 2026 CWG host. If you can't find the cash for a WC or CWG how are you going to come up with the cash and government support for an Olympics which will require significantly more capital. Don't forget the forest fires as well which are sapping public funds. Vancouver had also been on record stating a regional bid is at least a year away.

2030 is a major problem for the IOC. SLC is ideal but the IOC will have to make some financial concessions for that to happen. There are no other realistic options at this time

Actually the poll i was looking at was this from Inside the Games in May which was not as high as the one you mentioned so a different  one:

 “Poll suggests slight public support for potential Vancouver 2030 Winter Olympics - May 8, 2021 - Inside the Games

“An independent poll has found public support for a potential Vancouver 2030 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games stands at 55 per cent, rising to 77 per cent should public money not be required.”

“The poll has been published by Insights West, a marketing research firm based in Western Canada.  The online study was conducted from April 28 to 30, with a sample of 883 residents across British Columbia”.

Support viewed as higher in the City of Vancouver where 60 per cent of respondents are seen as supportive, compared to between 48 per cent and 57 per cent in other areas.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

Actually the poll i was looking at was this from Inside the Games in May which was not as high as the one you mentioned so a different  one:

 “Poll suggests slight public support for potential Vancouver 2030 Winter Olympics - May 8, 2021 - Inside the Games

“An independent poll has found public support for a potential Vancouver 2030 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games stands at 55 per cent, rising to 77 per cent should public money not be required.”

“The poll has been published by Insights West, a marketing research firm based in Western Canada.  The online study was conducted from April 28 to 30, with a sample of 883 residents across British Columbia”.

Support viewed as higher in the City of Vancouver where 60 per cent of respondents are seen as supportive, compared to between 48 per cent and 57 per cent in other areas.”

This was the poll I was referring to. I remembered 77% from somewhere. That's a small sample size. More polling is needed to get a more accurate picture of what type of support a Vancouver bid would have. Also remember that the 2010 bid did have to pass a referendum which it did. The IOC and Olympic bids have a rather long losing streak when it comes to referendums. Any future Vancouver bid could face a referendum again.

Of note though about Insights West, they correctly predicted a Donald Trump victory in the 2016 elections so they have some credibility IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, stryker said:

Bit of a misleading headline. Salt Lake City does not require any new venues. They have everything. The question becomes how much needs to be spent on upkeep.

I don't think it's misleading at all.  You're not reading it right.   The article & the way it's worded are for the possible No-Olympix people and their supporters who will shout that "new contruction again will be required" for another round of hosting.  The article DIRECTLY addresses that -- including apparently Univ. of Utah's dorms which it seems are now enough to host 3,000+ athletes.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...