To IOC: Return to Open Bidding!!

[StefanMUC]

10 hours ago, FYI said:

^Maybe it was the mayor's & former DOSB president's phantom accounts then. But they sure were an ornery clan nonetheless lol.

Actually, NOC. If I remember well, one of the reasons to merge Germany’s top sports organisations, the NOC and the DSB, was because of the dilletantism that led to the selection of Leipzig and its eventual embarrassing failure at the first IOC hurdle.

The merger allowed Bach to become DOSB President and put himself more in the limelight.

[Sir Rols]

56 minutes ago, FYI said:

I don't know where you get that Atlanta is not a regional host, because it very much is. It's after all, dubbed "the big apple of the South" (or should I say the 'big peach'), with many corporate headquaters there even before the Olympics. It's hosted political conventions & the Superbowl twice before. Atlanta was also even larger when it was elected than Brisbane is now. That's why city leaders there even pitched the idea to begin with back in the late 80's. But in the bigger picture, I don't see what being the gateway to a region, or being a top tourist destination in a smallish country that's already hosted twice before, has to do with anything compelling. California is also a very top tourist destination here, & has been. But that aspect doesn't excite you about L.A. much, as you already said. 

I also don't see Brisbane being like a Barcelona at all (other than in the way that they got their respective Games, that is). Especially cultural-wise, it's very much more like Atlanta (or Texas, as someone else mentioned). The last Summer Games that the U.S. & Australia held, they were back-to-back. Now it's going to be the same thing just 32 years later. Two culturally, very similar countries that also speak the same language. That's what most casual international observers will see. Not very exciting whatsoever in Olympic host terms. And sorry, but all this talk of Brisbane 'setting a good example of responsibility & widening the pool of potential host locations in the years forward', sounds extremely akin to all the braggart rhetoric from Angelino's that L.A. 2028 will be such a "huge success" (as it also was back in 1984), that cities will be "lining up" again to host the Olympics. IMO, I think that's still way too far into the future to make such declarations with such certainty in either case. Especially for Brisbane, when literally it'll be the smallest city/metro area in decades to host the big party. So it still remains to be seen how much that sustainability will hold up as it gets closer to Games time.

I get it. We all have our personal preferences and favourites and they colour our perceptions. You find it hard to countenance Brisbane, just as I totally despise Beijing getting 2022 and am indifferent to LA 28. Brisbane.

South East Queensland) is no slouch in past experience either - it’s hosted a World Expo, two Commonwealth Games, a Goodwill Games, a G20 summit, an AFL Grand Final (our Super Bowl equivalent) and numerous world championships or legs of international series. Certainly enough reason to be aspirational for the next step, and have existing infrastructure more than comparable to other high credentialed cities/locations. It was always planned and promoted as a regional bid - it only got off the ground at the behest of local councils outside Brisbane and on the legacy developments of Gold Coast 2018. It wouldn’t have got off the ground in Queensland itself if it was totally Brisbane focussed. It was always more than mere lip service.

I’m certainly not proclaiming it already to be a huge success that will save the games - only that’s it’s exactly the type of hosting the IOC needs to nurture if it’s ever going to get interest from or move beyond the repeat megalopolises of the world - places like, say, a Ruhr region, a Netherlands, a Denmark/South Sweden, a Singapore/Malaysia games. You mention cultural familiarity and fatigue, and I get that too, and share that feeling. As an Aussie, I’m also torn between being happy we’ve won another games and a feeling that it’s a bit too soon after Sydney to be “special” again. I like the Olympics hosts to be varied as well, and that’s exactly why I’d like to see the conversation move beyond London again, SLC again, Vancouver again and so on. Smallest city/metro area in decades? Isn’t that a good thing if it can be achieved.

 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Sir Rols

[FYI]

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

I get it. We all have our personal preferences and favourites and they colour our perceptions. You find it hard to countenance Brisbane, just as I totally despise Beijing getting 2022 and am indifferent to LA 28. Brisbane.

South East Queensland) is no slouch in past experience either - 

So tell me, Rols. What was your first impression when you found out that Atlanta was going to host the 1996 Centennial Olympics? 

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

You mention cultural familiarity and fatigue, and I get that too, and share that feeling. As an Aussie, I’m also torn between being happy we’ve won another games and a feeling that it’s a bit too soon after Sydney to be “special” again. I like the Olympics hosts to be varied as well, and that’s exactly why I’d like to see the conversation move beyond London again, SLC again, Vancouver again and so on.

See, but as American, I can still detach myself from L.A. 2028. I'm certainly not part of the "rah rah L.A. 2028" braggart club. I was a little kid to even remember L.A. 1984. But I was still able to familiarize myself enough with it when I knew what the Olympics were all about. And by the time Atlanta 1996 came around (which was my very first full Olympics to follow in real time from beginning to end), I was able to savor what an American Olympics was all about. And certainly even moreso by SLC 2002. So another L.A. Games relatively soon by Olympic standards, doesn't excite me as much. Perhaps it if was another American city that has never hosted before, it'd be a different story in my view. Maybe that could've been my "Brisbane" I suppose (like it is for you). Yes, I also wouldn't be necessarily excited by another SLC or Vancouver. But if the case for Brisbane is about sustainability, then SLC or Vancouver have to be considered once again, & especially when it comes to the winter Olympics, where the topography is very, if not the most, important element to a winter bid. 

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Smallest city/metro area in decades? Isn’t that a good thing if it can be achieved.

Is it, though? Isn't/wasn't the point of the Olympics in the first place, was to gather the greatest athletes in the world all in one place? That's what made them so appealing in the past & cities wanting to host them before. Two years ago, I was so excited about Tokyo 2020. The biggest metropolis in the world, hosting the biggest sporting spectacle in the world. The mega cities is what also got us excited here on GB's in the past. These regional concepts going forward feel like they're going to water down that Olympic experience. Maybe on TV it won't be that noticable, but on the ground it will be. And we all know that the IOC is doing this out of necessity instead for sustainability. They're doing it simply for survival. Whether it'll work in the end, the verdict is still out. And you've mentioned this, as well as others on here have, but Brisbane would not have won this in a real contest, like the 2012 race was. They literally had 2032 handed to them on a silver platter. 

[Sir Rols]

8 minutes ago, FYI said:

So tell me, Rols. What was your first impression when you found out that Atlanta was going to host the 1996 Centennial Olympics? 

Probably, like a lot in the world: “WTF?” If it wasn’t gonna be Athens, Toronto or Melbourne seemed more likely.  So, surprised, but I never thought of Atlanta as “yuck, another American games”. More that it’s always inevitable the US will host more often, and it was nice to see a new US city in a whole new region host it. I quite liked the regional variety of a Southern States games.

13 minutes ago, FYI said:

And you've mentioned this, as well as others on here have, but Brisbane would not have won this in a real contest, like the 2012 race was. They literally had 2032 handed to them on a silver platter. 

I’m not a great fan of the process, but I thought it in this case delivered a good result. I do believe 2032 is in safe hands. And isn’t that what you’ve valued in the past? Almaty was unthinkable, but Beijing was safe?

[Australian Kiwi]

2 hours ago, FYI said:

 And sorry, but all this talk of Brisbane 'setting a good example of responsibility & widening the pool of potential host locations in the years forward', sounds extremely akin to all the braggart rhetoric from Angelino's that L.A. 2028 will be such a "huge success" (as it also was back in 1984), that cities will be "lining up" again to host the Olympics. 

On that - if Coates et al. were serious about use of existing venues and 'sustainability' they would have probably given more thought to how they could accomodate a second Sydney or Melbourne Games. Melbourne probably has the most phenomenal line of up ready to go venues of just about any city that has not hosted in the last 60 years (and I dare say more Olympic-ready now than many that have hosted since --- looking at you, Atlanta!)

Brisbane has - by comparison to is two larger counterparts - has A LOT of work to do. It will be a great Games but I don't think it's going to be a model of sustainability come 2032 and I expect that cost-creep will be a bit issue Queensland taxpayers (and voters!) will have to contend with over the next decade. I can see it getting very political when the reality doesn't match the gloss. 

[FYI]

9 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Probably, like a lot in the world: “WTF?” If it wasn’t gonna be Athens, Toronto or Melbourne seemed more likely.  So, surprised, but I never thought of Atlanta as “yuck, another American games”. More that it’s always inevitable the US will host more often, and it was nice to see a new US city in a whole new region host it. I quite liked the regional variety of a Southern States games.

Lol, yuck & WTF would seem to go hand-in-hand in a lot of cases, though. I don't consider Brisbane to be 'yuck', either. But certainly indifferent is a good word, like you are with L.A. Although, I would say that L.A. would be better equipped in the sustainability dept.

14 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

I’m not a great fan of the process, but I thought it in this case delivered a good result. I do believe 2032 is in safe hands. And isn’t that what you’ve valued in the past? Almaty was unthinkable, but Beijing was safe?

But isn't 'safe hands' not much of a message for you, though, like the case with SLC & Vancouver? That was certainly Tokyo's message for 2020. How many more times can that still be a selling point, before it's not anymore.

[Australian Kiwi]

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

I like the Olympics hosts to be varied as well, and that’s exactly why I’d like to see the conversation move beyond London again, SLC again, Vancouver again and so on. Smallest city/metro area in decades? Isn’t that a good thing if it can be achieved.

 

Agree - one thing I do hope that Brisbane hosting does is make smaller cities believe that they can attain it again. For example, I think Brisbane's win would have been noted by the likes of Manchester who could still very well host its long awaited Olympics in the coming decades. 

Some of the most iconic Olympics have occurred when the IOC took the circus to the lesser known - Antwerp, Helsinki, Melbourne, Munich, Seoul, Barcelona, Atlanta.... were all "backwaters" by comparison in their day. These cities pride themselves of their Olympic heritage.

Happy to be rebutted but I am not convinced that the Olympics leaves as much of a mark on the likes of Paris, London or Tokyo. 

[Australian Kiwi]

35 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Probably, like a lot in the world: “WTF?” If it wasn’t gonna be Athens, Toronto or Melbourne seemed more likely.  So, surprised, but I never thought of Atlanta as “yuck, another American games”. More that it’s always inevitable the US will host more often, and it was nice to see a new US city in a whole new region host it. I quite liked the regional variety of a Southern States games.

 

I was too young to remember, but didn't Toronto 1996 get undermined by the fact it was a mere 20 years after the not-so-successful Montreal? Not to mention Calgary?

At least Australia was proposing a respectful 40 years even with a previous host city.

[FYI]

17 minutes ago, Australian Kiwi said:

On that - if Coates et al. were serious about use of existing venues and 'sustainability' they would have probably given more thought to how they could accomodate a second Sydney or Melbourne Games. Melbourne probably has the most phenomenal line of up ready to go venues of just about any city that has not hosted in the last 60 years (and I dare say more Olympic-ready now than many that have hosted since --- looking at you, Atlanta!)

Brisbane has - by comparison to is two larger counterparts - has A LOT of work to do. It will be a great Games but I don't think it's going to be a model of sustainability come 2032 and I expect that cost-creep will be a bit issue Queensland taxpayers (and voters!) will have to contend with over the next decade. I can see it getting very political when the reality doesn't match the gloss. 

Yep, absolutely agree about Melbourne. But Brisbane was Coates' pet project. I certainly would've been more excited about a Melbourne Games, even 32 years out from Sydney. A large, more cosmopolitan metropolis, more in-line with the "new norm" than any other city in Australia (or anywhere else, for that matter). As as American, Brisbane is merely like a Kansas City, Indianapolis or San Antonio hosting an Olympics. Not in line whatsoever, with any of the Summer Olympic hosts this century alone. 

[FYI]

19 minutes ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Some of the most iconic Olympics have occurred when the IOC took the circus to the lesser known - Antwerp, Helsinki, Melbourne, Munich, Seoul, Barcelona, Atlanta.... were all "backwaters" by comparison in their day. These cities pride themselves of their Olympic heritage.

Up until Munich, the Olympics weren't the big commercial showcase that they are today, though. Also, we all know by now how Barcelona wound up with an Olympics. And Seoul only had to compete with Nagoya, Japan. Another lesser-known city in a country that had already hosted only 17 years prior when the '88 vote took place. As for Atlanta, they sold themselves as a multi-cultural city on the Eastern portion of the U.S. And on the recent success of the L.A. '84 Olympics.

23 minutes ago, Australian Kiwi said:

didn't Toronto 1996 get undermined by the fact it was a mere 20 years after the not-so-successful Montreal? Not to mention Calgary?

That's been the general consensus around here in the past & from old articles.

[BigVic]

They awarded Paris 2024 and LA 2028 simultaenously without no competition. 

[Lord David]

59 minutes ago, Australian Kiwi said:

I was too young to remember, but didn't Toronto 1996 get undermined by the fact it was a mere 20 years after the not-so-successful Montreal? Not to mention Calgary?

At least Australia was proposing a respectful 40 years even with a previous host city.

I always assumed that Toronto got undermined because of the whole "Breads not Circuses" campaign against the Olympics. Even when the bid committee conceded that the proposed athletes' village would become public housing, this still wasn't enough to appease the no crowd.

[Australian Kiwi]

4 hours ago, Lord David said:

I always assumed that Toronto got undermined because of the whole "Breads not Circuses" campaign against the Olympics. Even when the bid committee conceded that the proposed athletes' village would become public housing, this still wasn't enough to appease the no crowd.

Well, thats an internal problem. I was meaning more about the fact that Toronto's 1996 bid was asking for a third Canadian Olympics within 20 years. Seemed like a lot. 

Amazes me to see all these cities so eager over and over with bad timing. Where were Toronto and Madrid when Brisbane was being fussed over for 2032? I bet if the IOC proactively engaged with them early (instead of Brisbane with a Coates tip off to go in hard) they would have been interested and frankly one of them would have won, probably Madrid. 

[baron-pierreIV]

11 hours ago, BigVic said:

They awarded Paris 2024 and LA 2028 simultaenously without no competition. 

Well, technically, Paris and LA were in competition for 2024!  Except that the IOC did not want to lose LA again, so a compromise was worked out.  But they were in competition against each other intially. 

[baron-pierreIV]

11 hours ago, Lord David said:

I always assumed that Toronto got undermined because of the whole "Breads not Circuses" campaign against the Olympics. Even when the bid committee conceded that the proposed athletes' village would become public housing, this still wasn't enough to appease the no crowd.

Atlanta's pitch and the man calling in his chits for an Atlanta vote was then Atlanta mayor Andy Young.  Remember, Atlanta's pitch was "A City Too Busy to Hate," and the ghost of MLK, Jr., was hovering over the bid.  In effect, Atlanta was probably the closest to an "African" host city at the time -- since it is the hometown of MLK, Jr., and many African-American leaders.  This appealed to the African votes -- and which none of the other 1996 candidates could match.  Plus, the Greeks felt entitled to the Centennial games which the IOC feels is theirs to give away and not for the Greeks to have claimed.  
 

[ulu]

9 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Well, thats an internal problem. I was meaning more about the fact that Toronto's 1996 bid was asking for a third Canadian Olympics within 20 years. Seemed like a lot. 

Amazes me to see all these cities so eager over and over with bad timing. Where were Toronto and Madrid when Brisbane was being fussed over for 2032? I bet if the IOC proactively engaged with them early (instead of Brisbane with a Coates tip off to go in hard) they would have been interested and frankly one of them would have won, probably Madrid. 

A games in Asia or Oceania makes the most sense for 2032 after games in Europe and North America. Consecutive games in a similar timezone (Toronto after LA) should be a last resort.

[Australian Kiwi]

4 hours ago, ulu said:

A games in Asia or Oceania makes the most sense for 2032 after games in Europe and North America. Consecutive games in a similar timezone (Toronto after LA) should be a last resort.

I don't disagree - but you can't tell me that if Toronto had stepped up with a serious counter offer to host 2032 that the IOC would have turned it down because of LA 2028. 

[Faster]

Toronto was undone because of an American city in the race. Plain and simple. There was more money to be had going to second tier American city then Canada's biggest. Versus Melbourne alone Toronto would have been likely favoured to go over Athens.

Comparing Brisbane to Kansas City is a bit unfair. Brisbane is much closer to Houston in terms of cultural flavour and Chicago for national importance (Calgary and Vancouver would be Canadian comparables) 

Paris - Milano - Los Angeles - Blank - Brisbane - Blank - Blank could and should be the single greatest string of hosts in Olympic history. Only repeat host being bantered about that I wouldn't like to see is Salt Lake. Even London would be better then having to suffer through a Shanghai games. Or Delhi

[AliciasBlade]

Reading this thread makes me think the race for 2028 would’ve been interesting considering 2028 is the Americas desired year for the Olympics after Europe was in 2024, and Asia in 2020(1).

[Brekkie Boy]

Brisbane 2032 will forever be tainted by being a behind closed door deal far earlier than games are usually awards.   No only do such things whiff of corruption given how they were awarded, regardless of whether they are or not, but most importantly it means it doesn't feel like it's the peoples games.   OK, the problem is half the time the people don't want the games on their doorstep but that is no reason to force them upon them.    This feels like a leaving gift for an Aussie IOC member rather than an event for the people of the city.

 

It's tricky to get excited about the 2030/34 bids in the current format when there seems to be no clear process.    The way you tackle corruption isn't embracing it - though it often seems to be the solution organisations arrive that.    There must be a compromise which keeps the costs down but the process open and transparent.   Awarding two games at once seems an obvious solution, although I guess some cities will always need a dry run to even have a shot at getting them on the second attempt.   The thing is not to string them along though for the sake of an apparent competition, but without narrowing down your choices so signficiantly so early in the process.

[Brekkie Boy]

P.S.  And one other factor in awarding Brisbane so early is it's going to hit the next media cycle for the games, which although for 2026/28 is also inviting bids for 2030/32.   The European value for 2032 is going to be signifcantly lower now we know they're in Australia than had they took the media rights to the market before a final call was made, potentially with European cities in the mix.      Perhaps it's more honest to award the rights after the cities are known, but not necessarily to the advantage of the IOC.