Corruption, Again?

[The Moose]

In an article in the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet IOC member Heiberg says that there has been corruption in the 2014 bidding, and says that the rule changes of 2002 has not been "particularly successful". "There has been too muc gifts and invitations", according to Heiberg. Maybe the "campaign tactics" of some of the bidders are backfiring, and we should get ready for a big surprise in Guatemala?

[ghost1]

Yeah, GB is quoting an AP article mentioing it... well, there are always ways to avoid the rules. I can only hope that it won't be decisive

[Guardian]

And, I find it yesterday evening by the International Herald Tribune. It seems that they always get the news first, before every other such media by the likes of around 8 hours!

[Sir Rols]

I've still yet to see any concrete allegations. The Herald-Trib article only talked about costsm of the bidding process per-se. Heiberg's comments are at least a bit more specific, but only to the point that when pushed all he would say about bidders was: "They use some methods that involve invitations and gifts."

As far as I know, while the IOC imposes limits to the values of gifts and the types of functions that can be organised, neither concept is actually banned outright. If those rules have been broken, I wanna hear some firm evidence. Otherwise it's a bit rich to criticise bidders for doing all they can to snare the prize within the limits.

[thatsnotmypuppy]

Actually Samaranch brought in a no gifts rule - however PC broke that by handing out expensive watches prior to the final vote in 2003...

That rule may have changed though.. ha ha

[Sir Rols]

Actually Samaranch brought in a no gifts rule - however PC broke that by handing out expensive watches prior to the final vote in 2003...

That rule may have changed though.. ha ha

I thought it was some sort of $50 limit sort of thing _ the type of thing that lets them give out paperweights and ties and pin sets and that sort of crap, but cuts out before it gets to electronic gadgets etc.

If Heiberg has some evidence and wants to do a Hodler, I'm all ears _ I'd love to hear of any IOC members have new Samsung plasmas or pre-paid Gazprom petrol cards.

[thatsnotmypuppy]

Well at least the Russians haven't offered to blast the IOC member's names into the Siberian tundra - as the Chinese promised to carve the members name in the Great Wall.

I'll have to ask where exactly in the wall that IOC plaque will be when I'm in China next month.

I'm guessing somewhere not visited very often!

Anyhow, maybe the Koreans will give matching necklaces for the watches they gave away last time.

[The Moose]

Heiberg has moderated himself somewhat today, claiming that he never said that there had been corruption taking place in this process, but that there had been bribing attempts. For the candidate(s) in question this of course does not make things much better. That Heiberg is not spesific in media, does not neccessarily mean that the claims within the IOC are unspesified. Heiberg by the way had an hour-long meeting with Putin yesterday, and says that he has a favourite, although he has not yet decided what to vote finally. Many sports leader view Sochi as the best 2014 candidate for Norway's 2018 aspirations, because Sochi otherwise would be a big obstacle for Norway in 2018. Personally I don't feel their candidacy is ripe, however.

[NoNameNoCity]

After Sochi won, I heard talk that the IOC as well as Russian officials want to make Gazprom (state gas monopoly) a Top Tier $100 million dollar IOC sponsor. But the problem is that there are NO facilities at all in Sochi. Everything has got to be built from the ground up and if you know *anything* about Russia, graft is a given there. The concern that I have is that we are going to see another situation as what happened in Athens with the IOC issuing stern warnings about hurrying up the pace of construction and facilities being completed literally at the last minute and planned facilities being changed due to the slow place of construction.

Sochi was the lowest rated bid. There HAD to be a reason why this was so and it is rare I am in agreement with the IOC evaluation commision, but their inspections were spot-on. Sochi used to be the only holiday beach area Russians could go to in the old Soviet days. All my Russian friends went down there for their summer vacations, as they couldn't leave the country.

I have serious concerns about financing, pace of construction, and quality of built facilities. As much as I dearly love Russia, I smell a major disaster in the making and the IOC needs to keep tabs closely on these people, lest it finds itself with a major embarassment on thier hands.

[cfm Jeremie]

It seems that both the IOC and Sochi want to act fast:

• the Sochi Organizing Committee will be in place by September
  
• the first visit by the IOC is scheduled for late August.
  

I think clearly there is no time to waste but let's hope that everything will be ready in time. Again, even though the Evaluation Commission stated that the work would have to be closely monitored, they never said that it couldn't be done. So, if anything goes wrong the IOC will have a huge share of responsability.

[arwebb]

The ultimate responsibility lays with the Sochi committee. The IOC only gave them enough rope to potentially hang themselves with.

[baron-pierreIV]

The IOC is such a hypocritical organization. Just bring it back to the good old days. Whoever gives the biggest, most expensive gifts, wins! Just keep it open! And let the IOC members receiving the gifts declare them and just deal with their respective governments!

That way too, we'll have more to discuss here rather than just hypocritical, clean' election processes. Boring. We need to discuss and rip apart all those shady, 3rd world IOC members.

Otherwise, discussing the subject has become very boring.

[cfm Jeremie]

The IOC is such a hypocritical organization. Just bring it back to the good old days. Whoever gives the biggest, most expensive gifts, wins! Just keep it open! And let the IOC members receiving the gifts declare them and just deal with their respective governments!

Do you honestly think that Korea has still something to learn about gift giving?

[baron-pierreIV]

Do you honestly think that Korea has still something to learn about gift giving?

Apparently, they didn't give enough!!

[arwebb]

The IOC is such a hypocritical organization. Just bring it back to the good old days. Whoever gives the biggest, most expensive gifts, wins! Just keep it open! And let the IOC members receiving the gifts declare them and just deal with their respective governments!

That way too, we'll have more to discuss here rather than just hypocritical, clean' election processes. Boring. We need to discuss and rip apart all those shady, 3rd world IOC members.

Otherwise, discussing the subject has become very boring.

A slightly pessimistic view if I may say so. It may be a novel idea, but wouldn't it be nice if the bid that was, in the opinion of a simple majority of IOC members, "best" won?

[frenchnounours]

yes maybe sochi was the best bid for IOC menbers in generals

but what if only 47 of the 51 voters voted sochi because they were the best and 4 others for political or fiancial reasons.

that would be unfair.

this is an example of course,for me a lot of menbers of IOC are corrupted(more thant half a t least),anyway if you choose based on another thing that the bid you arent a good menber in my opinion.

everyone is corrupted one way or another and every city tries to buy the menbers

[cfm Jeremie]

But then, we are always back to the same eternal question: what is the BEST bid?

I have asked this very question to a lot of IOC members and had a different answer for everyone of them.

Even the answer "the best bid is the one that offers the best conditions for the athletes" is not that easy. Would the athletes prefer an olympic village in a quiet mountain resort or in the middle of a large urban centre?

[Rei]

The second option you mentioned.

[FYI]

"Even the answer 'the best bid is the one that offers the best conditions for the athletes' is not that easy. Would the athletes prefer an Olympic village in a quiet mountain resort or in the middle of a large urban center?"

Well, that comparison wouldn't really question the IOC on anything, other than maybe convenience. A more inquiring one would be "would the athletes prefer an Olympic village in a city with an environmentally friendly, clean atmosphere or in the middle of an urban, smog-infested cesspool, with the threat of possible sandstorms".

[cfm Jeremie]

"Even the answer 'the best bid is the one that offers the best conditions for the athletes' is not that easy. Would the athletes prefer an Olympic village in a quiet mountain resort or in the middle of a large urban center?"

Well, that comparison wouldn't really question the IOC on anything, other than maybe convenience. A more inquiring one would be "would the athletes prefer an Olympic village in a city with an environmentally friendly, clean atmosphere or in the middle of an urban, smog-infested cesspool, with the threat of possible sandstorms".

Very valid question indeed calling for a quite obvious answer...

This being said, I have spoken to several olympians who are thrilled to go to Beijing.

[FYI]

Very valid question indeed calling for a quite obvious answer...

This being said, I have spoken to several olympians who are thrilled to go to Beijing.

Interesting.

But did they also mention to you exactly why they thrilled to be going there? It just sounds like they're being very diplomatic.

[cfm Jeremie]

Interesting.

But did they also mention to you exactly why they thrilled to be going there? It just sounds like they're being very diplomatic.

Good opportunity to discover Beijing / China mainly. To be fair, it was mainly indoor athletes (so not the most concerned about air pollution) and I did not ask them whether they would have rather gone to Toronto or Paris.

[arwebb]

The thing is that the phrase "best bid" encompasses so many different factors. In many ways, it does not matter why the IOC membership voted as they did. What matters is that they did vote as they did.