Jump to content

Salt Lake City 2034


Recommended Posts

Yes, I read the entire article. Again, you cherry pick. Why not include this part:

The new bid process is conducted almost entirely in secrecy with interested parties only revealed by the IOC once they have revealed themselves, or, if they are chosen as a preferred candidate with the intention of putting them on the election ballot. Though famously IOC president Thomas Bach suggested the new, opaque bid process was to avoid “too many losers,” the inferred intention here is to control the public dialogue and help shape the plans so the bids look the way the IOC wants them.

IOC Executives know that perception is everything. They know the future viability of the Olympic Games relies on regions willing and able to host. And in this world of social media and fake news, they know it is important to prepare and strategically send a conversation-starting message before others do it for them.

or

 

When I pressed the IOC’s Evaluation Commission Chair, Russian IOC member Alexander Zhukov for details around the potentially risky project – he was quick to distance himself from it.

He told me in Beijing in 2015 during the site inspection “the high speed railway is just a part of… a big project not related to the Olympic Games,” indicating that the rail costs were not discussed.

He was angry that I asked, especially as one in a tiny group of international journalists among a large group of Chinese stakeholders in a press conference.

That marked the end of the IOC having anything to do with major infrastructure projects connected to the Olympics.

Really, the article (which, yes, was very good and insightful) was very little concerned with SLC’s bid or it chances of being elected beyond using some off the cuff remarks by the Governor of Utah as a jumping point to discuss governments using the Games as an excuse for wider infrastructure projects, and the. IOC, through the “New Norm” trying to limit that or segregate it from public discourse on the Games. 

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Yes, I read the entire article. Again, you cherry pick. Why not include this part:

The new bid process is conducted almost entirely in secrecy with interested parties only revealed by the IOC once they have revealed themselves, or, if they are chosen as a preferred candidate with the intention of putting them on the election ballot. Though famously IOC president Thomas Bach suggested the new, opaque bid process was to avoid “too many losers,” the inferred intention here is to control the public dialogue and help shape the plans so the bids look the way the IOC wants them.

IOC Executives know that perception is everything. They know the future viability of the Olympic Games relies on regions willing and able to host. And in this world of social media and fake news, they know it is important to prepare and strategically send a conversation-starting message before others do it for them.

or

 

When I pressed the IOC’s Evaluation Commission Chair, Russian IOC member Alexander Zhukov for details around the potentially risky project – he was quick to distance himself from it.

He told me in Beijing in 2015 during the site inspection “the high speed railway is just a part of… a big project not related to the Olympic Games,” indicating that the rail costs were not discussed.

He was angry that I asked, especially as one in a tiny group of international journalists among a large group of Chinese stakeholders in a press conference.

That marked the end of the IOC having anything to do with major infrastructure projects connected to the Olympics.

Really, the article (which, yes, was very good and insightful) was very little concerned with SLC’s bid or it chances of being elected beyond using some off the cuff remarks by the Governor of Utah as a jumping point to discuss governments using the Games as an excuse for wider infrastructure projects, and the. IOC, through the “New Norm” trying to limit that or segregate it from public discourse on the Games. 

Yes I did most definitely cherry pick, because I have no intention of reproducing the entire long article here.

Between us, we’ve almost done that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The LA 2028 games have pledged, similar to Salt Lake's bid, to be largely about not having to build any new venues.  Yet their infrastructure budget is over $1 billion.  That includes $300 to renovate the Coliseum and make it ready to host track & field.

There's no such thing as a perfect bid.  I get Rob's sentiment to not taint Salt Lake's efforts here, but we're not talking about $51 billion worth of unaccountable spending.  And I agree with Rols that the much bigger issue here is how much of all this is done behind closed doors.  That's the point that Rob is trying to get across, that this aspect of the new norm is a slippery slope and could easily lead to more corruption and more serious problems that a more public process could potentially help to avoid.

As we've said here many times, moving away from a more formal and expensive bidding process was a smart and very necessary move.  But we're talking about a massive event here that costs billions of dollars to stage and is increasingly for the benefit of the shareholders, not the citizens of a city who are supposed to be better off because of investments that are made in city.  We're probably never going to see a city like Barcelona use the Olympics as an urban renewal project at any point in the future.  A little peak behind the curtain though would go a long way or else it seems inevitable that the IOC will find itself in a predicament that they don't want to deal with because they didn't offer up their processes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

There's no such thing as a perfect bid.  I get Rob's sentiment to not taint Salt Lake's efforts here, but we're not talking about $51 billion worth of unaccountable spending.  

As we've also said here many times, & Rob as well in this latest piece; perception is everything.

We know here on this site that SLC isn't going to spend anywhere near that, but try telling that to the NOlympics & NIMBY's crowd, & the ordinary citizen who doesn't follow these things like we here on GB's do, & can be easily manipulated. That $51 Billion Sochi price tag is all they see, & is what has scuppered many bids over the past several years in Western Europe, whether or not their respective communities were actually going to spend that kind of money on hosting. It didn't matter. All they saw was that huge number. They didn't care of all the nuances that are involved in all the actual numbers.

And in this day & age of social media & fake news, I can understand the sentiment where the IOC wants to "control the conversation" more in that aspect. But they also want to lay-low in the background, because they also fear that if they get too hands-on, that wouldn't necessarily be a good look for them either. It's really a catch-22 scenario the IOC finds itself in these days. But at the same time, a lot of it is of their own doing, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quaker brings up a really good point about transparency being important for maintaining integrity in the bidding process.

At the same time, like FYI said, I can understand why the IOC wants more control over the narrative now too. After deals like Sochi ballooned costs way out of proportion, it's easy to see why the average citizen might be skeptical without proper context.

It really does seem like a tricky situation without an obvious answer. More transparency is ideal, but may also inadvertently undermine bids if misinformation spreads. Closed doors leave room for unhealthy dealings but prevents hype from going overboard.

With LA 2028 spending over a billion just to renovate existing venues, Salt Lake likely has their work cut out for them on the budget front too. Baron's right - $300 million for a coliseum reno is a steal! Makes you wonder where all that Sochi cash really went.

At the end of the day, doing right by the host city has to be the priority over profits. A balanced approach that protects integrity while still allowing bids to succeed is what's needed. Easier said than done for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Sir Rols changed the title to Salt Lake City 2030/2034
  • 2 weeks later...
30 minutes ago, Victorian said:

This is why I am against the Salt Lake City bid. It just seems like a complete re-run from the 2002 Winter Olympics...

 

9 minutes ago, FYI said:

Ummm, well obviously the IOC isn't against it. And they're the ones who actually make the decisions on this sort of stuff, so..

Yes agree with @FYI.  

@Victorian The highly successful 2002 Games and the unchanged Games Plan is exactly why they are preferred bidder for the 2034 Games.

Why fix something if it’s not broke?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

apropos of nothing, i wonder how park city ski club member alex hall (raised in utah and switzerland) is reacting to today's news. 

most likely he a) has no fucking idea because who cares or b) is only vaguely invested for patriotic/hometown pride reasons because he will be thirty-six in 2034 (too ancient to seriously compete) and forty in 2038 (dead, or fat with two kids and an internet "business" to promote). 

his insta is mostly concerned with hyping up clips from his homemade ski videos and encouraging us, his adoring fan base, to go "anchors up" with pacifico beer.  

personally, i think he could have lost the shirt if it was so damn important but what do i know.

qrHJ3r0.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Victorian said:

This is why I am against the Salt Lake City bid. It just seems like a complete re-run from the 2002 Winter Olympics...

That's not a bad thing that Salt Lake has all the facilities they need.  I doubt it'll feel like a re-run since the vast majority of athletes at the 2034 games will not have been alive in 2002.

Salt Lake City has been courting both an NHL team and an MLB team, so perhaps the timing is right for them to build a new arena (which obviously isn't contingent on the games).  The speed skating oval is still one of the best facilities in the world.  No worries about the sliding track.  Hard to find a new location to bid for the games.  And for all the rumblings about the IOC looking for semi-permanent hosts for the Winter Olympics, this venue plan at Salt Lake clearly stands the test of time.  That's a good thing, not a bad thing

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • I was just in SLC this past Sept for FanX, one of the largest comiccons in the US, and I can say while I believe SLC is ready to host another Games, there are a couple of issues that do need to be addressed: by 2034, the University of Utah should consider renovations to Rice Eccles, the biggest need being wider concourses (though with how the main stand is built likely won't happen)-I was at Utah's football game vs Weber St and, oh man, those concourses are small, not good for people with disabilities, especially when the house is packed; and another thing SLC should consider, would be an entertainment district on par with the Power and Light in Kansas City, ideally close to both downtown and U of U's campus. And now with BYU, and Utah newt year, joining the Big 12 conference, would the Big 12 leadership be interested in promoting the Salt Lake 2034 games across the Big 12 with regards to promoting volunteer opportunities among the member schools, not just Utah and BYU, but Arizona/Arizona St and Colorado, all within reasonable travel to SLC since they are the closest interstate schools to SLC.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, LinkParkFn said:
  • I was just in SLC this past Sept for FanX, one of the largest comiccons in the US, and I can say while I believe SLC is ready to host another Games, there are a couple of issues that do need to be addressed: by 2034, the University of Utah should consider renovations to Rice Eccles, the biggest need being wider concourses (though with how the main stand is built likely won't happen)-I was at Utah's football game vs Weber St and, oh man, those concourses are small, not good for people with disabilities, especially when the house is packed; and another thing SLC should consider, would be an entertainment district on par with the Power and Light in Kansas City, ideally close to both downtown and U of U's campus. And now with BYU, and Utah newt year, joining the Big 12 conference, would the Big 12 leadership be interested in promoting the Salt Lake 2034 games across the Big 12 with regards to promoting volunteer opportunities among the member schools, not just Utah and BYU, but Arizona/Arizona St and Colorado, all within reasonable travel to SLC since they are the closest interstate schools to SLC.

They've been working at this for awhile now and have 10 years until their Olympics.  Plenty of times to make improvements to facilities.  And again, Salt Lake may try to court an NHL team.  Good excuse to build a new arena to replace the Delta Center and they have the parking lot right next door to be able to do it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, yoshi said:

Is there any chance of SLC getting an NFL team? That'd need a brand new stadium and there's enough time. 

Exceedingly unlikely.  The NFL doesn't seem like they're expanding anytime soon (and if they do, it would be to Europe).  And I doubt any team would be looking to relocate to Salt Lake City

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...
×
×
  • Create New...