Winter 2022: The Olympics that no one wants

[bilateralrope]

NZ Herald

The Olympics that no one seems to want is down to just two candidates.

Oslo became the latest city to drop its bid for the 2022 Winter Games after the Norwegian government rejected financial backing for the project on Wednesday amid concerns the games were too costly - a decision the IOC said was based on "half-truths and factual inaccuracies."

Oslo's exit leaves Beijing and Almaty, Kazakhstan, as the only two contenders.

Oslo is the fourth city to pull out of a race that has been thrown into turmoil in the wake of the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi, where the overall price tag was put at $51 billion, scaring off politicians and taxpayers and leaving the International Olympic Committee with a major image crisis.

Oslo's fate was sealed after the ruling Conservative party failed to support financial guarantees for the bid. Lawmaker Trond Helleland said it was a split vote and the party could not propose that the government go ahead with the candidacy.

The junior partner in the minority coalition voted against the bid four months ago, and polls have shown that more than 50 per cent of Norwegians are opposed.

Prime Minister Erna Solberg said there was not enough support to spend 35 billion kroner ($5.4 billion) on the Olympics.

"It's important to get broad support for such an expensive project and there is not enough to carry through such an expensive project," she told Norwegian NRK television. "Without enthusiasm, it's not natural to carry this through."

Stockholm; Krakow, Poland; and Lviv, Ukraine, withdrew their bids in recent months. Before that, potentially strong bids from St. Moritz, Switzerland, and Munich, Germany, were dropped after being rejected by voters in referendums.

The IOC will select the 2022 host city on July 31, 2015, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Beijing, which staged the 2008 Olympics, is seeking to become the first city to host both summer and winter games. Almaty, a city in Central Asia which hosted the 2011 Winter Asian Games, bid for the 2014 Olympics but failed to make the final short list.

In a strongly-worded statement, IOC executive director Christophe Dubi described Norway's decision as a "missed opportunity" for the city and country. He said Norway would miss out on $880 million in sponsorship and television revenues that the IOC will provide to the 2022 host city.

Dubi said the Norwegian bid team asked for a meeting with the IOC earlier this year for an explanation of all the requirements and costs.

"Unfortunately, Oslo sent neither a senior member of the bid team nor a government official to this meeting," Dubi said. "For this reason senior politicians in Norway appear not to have been properly briefed on the process and were left to take their decisions on the basis of half-truths and factual inaccuracies."

Oslo had seemed like the ideal candidate. Norway loves winter sports and has won the most medals in the Winter Olympics. Oslo hosted the 1952 Winter Olympics, and Norway held the widely acclaimed 1994 Games in Lillehammer.

But concerns over the cost of the games and public antipathy toward the IOC proved insurmountable.

"For a country of such means, full of so many successful athletes and so many fanatical winter sports fans, it is a pity that Oslo will miss out on this great opportunity to invest in its future and show the world what it has to offer," Dubi said.

Norwegian IOC member Gerhard Heiberg said opposition to the bid and the IOC mounted after an incident in Sochi, when the committee reprimanded four Norwegian female cross-country skiers for wearing black armbands in memory of an athlete's brother who had died on the eve of the games.

"It began with the armband case," Heiberg told NRK.

Cities have been put off by the cost associated with the Sochi Games. While most of that money went to long-term regeneration and infrastructure projects, not the cost of running the games, cities remain wary of the expense.

The IOC has acknowledged that it has failed to properly explain the difference between operating and capital budgets.

"We lost good cities because of the bad perception of the IOC, the bad perception of how the concept could be done," former IOC executive director Gilbert Felli said recently.

Cutting the cost of the games is one of the priorities of IOC President Thomas Bach, who is proposing a series of reforms - called "Olympic Agenda 2020" - to be voted on in December in Monaco. Among other things, Bach wants to add flexibility to the bidding process, allowing cities to propose their own concepts rather than adapting to a strict IOC blueprint.

-AP

Question for those who paid more attention to the Olympics than I did: How surprised should I be by everyone but China and Kazakhstan not wanting the 2020 games ?

[Broomstick]

There's been a sort of one-upmanship regarding the games for decades, with each one attempting to be more spectacular than the last.

Frankly, it's time to tone down the opening/closing ceremony and bring costs back to where more cities can reasonably afford to host the games. Or end the games.

No one has outdone the spending Beijing lavished on their games, and no one should. Not even Beijing. Reign in the excess, please.

[Guardsman Bass]

We'd do it again here in Salt Lake City, although we'd have to submit another bid. It was one of the few Winter Olympics that actually came out ahead of expenses.

[K. A. Pital]

Just end it. It is a worthless display of riches and drug successes.

[mr friendly guy]

There's been a sort of one-upmanship regarding the games for decades, with each one attempting to be more spectacular than the last.

Frankly, it's time to tone down the opening/closing ceremony and bring costs back to where more cities can reasonably afford to host the games. Or end the games.

No one has outdone the spending Beijing lavished on their games, and no one should. Not even Beijing. Reign in the excess, please.

Er Sochi. Russia spent 51 billion vs Beijing 44 billion. I doubt inflation has shot up costs that much.

[Grumman]

My complaint about the Olympics is the way countries throw their citizens' rights under the bus to appease the IOC. It still annoys me that these bastards won against Wizards of the Coast over their symbol for The Legend of the Five Rings, when The Book of Five Rings predates the IOC's invention of their own symbol by almost three hundred years.

[Borgholio]

Los Angeles in 1984 turned a profit because they used existing infrastructure wherever possible. It was far cheaper to renovate an existing stadium than build a whole new one, for instance. As Broomstick stated, it's about one-upping others. If we had the summer games in LA again, people would be bitching about how we're using a Coliseum that is almost a century old instead of building a brand new arena like the Chinese did.

[Broomstick]

Didn't the LA Olympic stadium get used for TWO games, not just one?

And I stand corrected on who paid the most to put on the games.

[Borgholio]

Didn't the LA Olympic stadium get used for TWO games, not just one?

Yes, the 1932 games and the 1984. Even in '84 the stadium was over 60 years old and far from state of the art. They retrofitted it at a fraction the cost of building a whole new one and we continue to make use of those enhancements today. I see no reason why they couldn't do it again.

[Zaune]

I think I'm with Stas on this one. The Olympics have become the world's largest corporate expo with some sporting events tacked on as an afterthought, on the taxpayer's dime. I'd rather the whole thing was laid to rest.

[Welf]

I think I'm with Stas on this one. The Olympics have become the world's largest corporate expo with some sporting events tacked on as an afterthought, on the taxpayer's dime. I'd rather the whole thing was laid to rest.

The Olympics are an important event that play an important role for sports. Many fringe sports get their only exposure there. Not to mention that it offers sport fans an high class event. But since this event generates so much money there is no reason to transfer net wealth from tax payer to corporations and a bunch of old farts in the IOC. And trample citizen's rights while doing so.

[mr friendly guy]

China and Russia spent big because they were buying prestige. Well Putin was also helping out his oligarch buddies but I digress.

I would normally say if prestige is worth so much to them, then let them pay for it. However given some of these nations aren't exactly high income countries, the money most probably shouldn't be spent in such high amounts unless they can make a profit (which Beijing did, if barely).

So either expect those who are willing to pay for the prestige dominate the hosting applications, or accept lower costs to run an Olympic game.

[Grumman]

The Olympics are an important event that play an important role for sports. Many fringe sports get their only exposure there. Not to mention that it offers sport fans an high class event.

So? Why does a fringe sport deserve exposure? If the noble art of walking like a goofball faded into obscurity, why should anyone care?

[Battlehymn Republic]

If no one wants to host, Azerbaijan should snatch it up for Baku.

[Welf]

So? Why does a fringe sport deserve exposure? If the noble art of walking like a goofball faded into obscurity, why should anyone care?

Because it enriches our lives if we get exposed to a variety of new ideas and concepts. And there is the chance you see something you'll like and then do.

[Borgholio]

So? Why does a fringe sport deserve exposure? If the noble art of walking like a goofball faded into obscurity, why should anyone care?

Because it enriches our lives if we get exposed to a variety of new ideas and concepts. And there is the chance you see something you'll like and then do.

My first experience with Curling was in the Olympics.

And fuck anybody who says Curling isn't an interestingly strategic game that is way more fun than it looks like at first glance.

[Ralin]

And fuck anybody who says Curling isn't an interestingly strategic game that is way more fun than it looks like at first glance.

I seriously thought curling was something the Simpsons made up as a joke when I first saw it

[Mange]

China and Russia spent big because they were buying prestige. Well Putin was also helping out his oligarch buddies but I digress.

Indeed, and many thousands of workers from both Russia and former Soviet republics weren't paid and/or deported.

[Irbis]

Los Angeles in 1984 turned a profit because they used existing infrastructure wherever possible. It was far cheaper to renovate an existing stadium than build a whole new one, for instance.

Which is all nice and well but only works when there is existing infrastructure to renovate. People gloat about 51 billion number without ever taking into account it was A) inflated by Western press, B) much of it went into recreating local infrastructure, not just stadiums and such, but basic one, like water piping and roads, from scratch after 25 years of total neglect.

Poland didn't have it anywhere near as bad as fringe areas of Russia in last 25 years, and yet, Euro 2012 stadiums, most roads, and hotels had to be built brand new. That doesn't mean Putin didn't blew a few billions on one-upmanship, but I'd be surprised if cutting the show entirely would have saved even 10%.

Yes, IOC should take a hike on taxpayer expenses and start funding the Olympics on its own, with host cities contributing only location and buildings, IMHO, but that doesn't mean you should throw the baby out with the bathwater just because person or two on top is corrupt.

So? Why does a fringe sport deserve exposure? If the noble art of walking like a goofball faded into obscurity, why should anyone care?

Gee, why we need these stupid, money wasting humanities departments in universities? Why we throw money away on useless museums and cultural events? We could just give everyone ad-laced TV cable and free hamburger and be done with it!

Welf is right, people who have no idea what Olympics can do for nations, especially poorer or not free ones, like it did for second world countries before 1989, please do read on that topic first before you start spouting old, tired crap about wasting money on more abstract things than just feeding base animal needs, okay?

Polish teams winning gold on several occasions in 70s did more for the idea of democracy and freedom than all of the CIA sponsored propaganda crap and black ops put together, as did all the cultural exchange with people of both blocks meeting under peaceful auspices.

[K. A. Pital]

Olympics did nothing. The USSR was dismembered in a bloodbath. Now, with it being a Nestle-Cola-whatever oligarch brand there is 'contests', I see no reason for it to continue. Poor countries should educate their people and teach them to make stuff, not mindlessly waste millions earned by these workers on plays for rich fuckers who deserve to choke on their coke.

[Irbis]

Olympics did nothing.

Nothing? But you have something to support that bold thesis?

In People's Poland, Olympic medallists were celebrities, and the victory counted double if it was against major capitalist nation like (especially) Germany or USA, but also against major Warsaw Pact members like USSR or ČSSR. Hell, one rather mediocre sportsman's gesture led to wave of dissent and nationalism that almost led to repeat of 1968 revolution.

Now, with it being a Nestle-Cola-whatever oligarch brand there is 'contests', I see no reason for it to continue. Poor countries should educate their people and teach them to make stuff, not mindlessly waste millions earned by these workers on plays for rich fuckers who deserve to choke on their coke.

Anything that lead to more interest in sport and inspires people to move from their couch and start some damned exercise leads to millions of deaths less worldwide. Even in poor countries - how many kids in Brazil and Argentina voluntarily adopts active lifestyle thanks to just football?

Sport isn't worthless vanity activity like most of modern economy, it's something that actually has intrinsic value even encumbered with celebrity shit.

[Borgholio]

Which is all nice and well but only works when there is existing infrastructure to renovate. People gloat about 51 billion number without ever taking into account it was A) inflated by Western press, B) much of it went into recreating local infrastructure, not just stadiums and such, but basic one, like water piping and roads, from scratch after 25 years of total neglect.

Right, so what business did Sochi have even bidding on the Olympics in the first place? I'm sure there are dozens of cities on any continent that would be better equipped to handle this sort of thing than some resort town on the Black Sea. The IOC should be far more picky when picking future host cities.

[K. A. Pital]

In People's Poland, Olympic medallists were celebrities, and the victory counted double if it was against major capitalist nation like (especially) Germany or USA, but also against major Warsaw Pact members like USSR or ČSSR.

And this is good why?

Anything that lead to more interest in sport and inspires people to move from their couch and start some damned exercise leads to millions of deaths less worldwide. Even in poor countries - how many kids in Brazil and Argentina voluntarily adopts active lifestyle thanks to just football?

Sport isn't worthless vanity activity like most of modern economy, it's something that actually has intrinsic value even encumbered with celebrity shit.

Except rich morons who sit in front of the runners or drink megaliters of beer at home easily cancel out the entire positive development. Just like football fans are mostly just worthless Nazi broth and maybe a small fraction actually does sports. Don't even try to say sports-watching fatbags have some intrinsic value.

[Broomstick]

One positive of the Olympics is that you have a whole bunch of nations getting together to do something other than kill people and break things. Certainly, back when the modern games were started, and through the two world wars, that was a somewhat unusual and laudable thing.

Not sure they're still a net positive, although I do enjoy watching the opening/closing and some of the sporting events. Think maybe they've gotten a little too big.

[Ralin]

One positive of the Olympics is that you have a whole bunch of nations getting together to do something other than kill people and break things. Certainly, back when the modern games were started, and through the two world wars, that was a somewhat unusual and laudable thing.

Not sure they're still a net positive, although I do enjoy watching the opening/closing and some of the sporting events. Think maybe they've gotten a little too big.

I'm told it was a pretty big deal to the original Greeks that no city-state sent athletes to the Olympics when they were at war?