News   Jun 02, 2020
 188     0 
News   Jun 01, 2020
 321     0 
News   Jun 01, 2020
 1.4K     3 

Toronto 2024 Olympic Bid (Dead)

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,253
Reaction score
3,362
Location
Toronto
Well, I'll say this, if an Olympic bid results in the GTA getting our own version of the Overground and other rail links London's getting for 2012, then I can swallow that bitter pill.
I don't think London is getting that much rail instrastructure for the Olympics. The London Overground is certainly new, but it's mostly a reorganization of services that have run for decades, and the newer piece isn't particularly advantageous for the Olympics - and the piece they are currently building to comlete the link around London doesn't open until after the Olympics as far as I know (nor was it planned to). There's certainly some new DRL services near the Olympic site that have been driven by the Olympics - but it's very much like grade-separated LRT rather than heavy rail. The newish Jubilee line will be essential, but it was already open when they started bidding. The high-speed rail connection from the Olympic site at Stratford International to St. Pancras and Kent will be specially operated for the Olympics, but only the station is for the Olympics, the HS1 line itself was under construction long before the Olympics were awarded.

The biggest project going in London currently is the Crossrail line - essentially a huge subway under London - but it won't open until long after the Olympics. There's been no tube expansions for the Olympics
 

password1125

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
The venue plan can be done the most cost effective way. They just have to be creative and maybe get some sponsor ships on the building of the venues.
 

jn_12

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
1
The venue plan can be done the most cost effective way. They just have to be creative and maybe get some sponsor ships on the building of the venues.
1. What incentive would a company have to sponsor a venue when venues during the Olympics are not allowed to have any corporate branding or name attached to them? That's why GM Place was "Canada Hockey Place" during the Vancouver games.

2. How much money do you think sponsorships actually bring in? When the Canucks sold the naming rights for its arena last summer to Rogers it was for $1million/yr and the most expensive naming rights deal in the country is $64million for 20 years for the Bell Centre in Montreal. In the US, we've seen some deals in the $300-400million range for football (Houston) and basketball (New Jersey) and baseball (NY Mets) but to expect anything similar to happen in Canada would be a stretch given the current situation. You could maybe argue that an Olympic stadium in Toronto that was 100% guaranteed a NFL tenant could fetch a record amount in Canada (that would still fall well short of the totals seen in the US), but you're probably looking at that number only funding 25% of an Olympic Stadium.

3. The best way for a cost-effective venue plan to be implemented would be to use as much infrastructure that is currently in place as possible, which is exactly what has been proposed in the past. The convention centre or the CNE buildings would host many events (just look at previous plans to discern what would go where). The biggest cost would be an Olympic Stadium and an athletes village, followed by any upgrades in transportation and renovations to those buildings.

4. Creativity is not a good idea when it comes to funding massive events like this. It's a recipe for failure. Just ask Rob Ford what happens when you're "creative" about building subways. You end up overestimating revenue generation and you're left looking for pennies. That's when you start cutting corners, and various details start to fall by the wayside. Once that happens, the quality of the games you can hold are put at risk and then the entire point of hosting such an event is thrown out the window. What you need is concrete funding from various levels of government that covers every dime. Any further financial benefits that you might be able to find are just a bonus.
 

themarc

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
6
I don't doubt that there are many cricket fans here (ie, anyone living here from the sub-continent, England and Australia), but 99% of taxpayers aren't going to want to fund for ten brand-new stadiums for a sport they have probably never heard of and have no clue about.
Except more than half of that 99% likely grew up with Cricket as one of their native sports. It could very easily be done using temporary structures like what is used during the "Molson Indy". The rest is just landscaping... Probably only need to erect four 25k seat facilities - about 3 times the grandstands the Indy would use.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
11,175
Reaction score
6,214
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
This from the Economist shows that having the Olympics is not always 'worthwhile". (Having lived in Montreal in 1970s I can only agree.)

LONDON’S leisure industry hopes for a bonanza next July and August, thanks to the Olympics. To lure hordes of visitors, a campaign marketing Britain abroad has been launched with the slogan “You’re invited”. But they may not come.

When Britain won the right to host the Olympics in 2005, ministers promised a windfall not just for sport but for tourism. Previous hosts held similar hopes, and were mostly disappointed. Since the 1992 Barcelona games, hosts have seen a fall in foreign guests during each Olympics, as well as in the months before and after, says the European Tour Operators Association (ETOA), a trade body. In Beijing, hotel bookings in August 2008 were 39% lower than they had been a year earlier.

The belief that a city will be expensive and chock-a-block with sports fans can deter visitors. Official advice this time reinforces that notion: Transport for London, which runs most of the capital’s transit system, has asked locals to stockpile goods and stay at home to ease congestion.

Fully 4.2m foreign tourists came to London in the summer of 2010, as well as 3m British ones. The government has belatedly acknowledged that it would be a shame to lose them. Speaking at a trade fair for the tourism industry on November 7th, Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, expressed confidence that Britain could “defy the tourism dip” other hosts have experienced.

Early signs are not encouraging. A sample poll of tour operators by ETOA suggests 2012 bookings are a fifth lower than at this time last year; for the Olympic period they are even slower, in part because some hotels are demanding money up front. That does not mean the games will be a commercial disaster: Olympic organisers have already reserved a third of London’s hotel rooms for athletes, officials, sponsors and the media. But hotels may not see the high demand—or high prices—they expect. Barcelona and Athens did not fill their 13,000-16,000 rooms. London has 125,000.

London’s proximity to other destinations normally lifts its tourist trade: it is Europe’s most-visited city. But this may be a disadvantage when it comes to hanging on to Olympic spectators. Of the past three games, people stayed for longer in Sydney and Beijing than they did in Athens, which, like London, is a short-haul trip for many international passengers.

In fact, most fans are likely to be local: British residents have bought 95% of the 3.5m tickets sold so far, reports the London 2012 Organising Committee. Since much of the population lives within a day’s commute of the capital, many ticket-holders could bypass the city’s other offerings. They are likely to spend money on some things, of course. “These people still have to eat,” points out Miles Quest of the British Hospitality Association.

Sensing weakness in London, Scotland’s tourist board has revved up its marketing operation. But it, too, may crash into a hurdle. In Greece, the Ionian Islands and other tourist hotspots suffered even more during the 2004 Olympic slump than did Athens, reckons ETOA.

Determined not to be judged by medal tables alone, London will stage a cultural extravaganza around the Olympics. Yet the city’s routine cultural offerings are far from scant—and some question whether the city really needs to sell its brand. The 2008 Beijing Olympics was a chance for China to display its wealth and prowess. Britain, by contrast, already has one of the best-developed tourist markets in the world. Yet the long-term benefit of hosting a slick and beautiful games may become apparent in the long run. The nation’s boosters must be hoping that, even if they do not come next year, prospective tourists are at least watching from afar.
 

Solid Snake

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
866
Reaction score
1
Toronto's Chances are very good

1996--Atlanta, United States, North America
2000--Sydney, Australia, Oceania
2004--Athens, Greece, Europe
2008--Beijing, China, Asia
2012--London, England, Europe
2016--Rio de Janeiro, South America

Contenders for 2020

Baku, Azerbaijan, Eurasia
Doha, Qatar, Asia
Istanbul, Turkey, Eurasia
Madrid, Spain, Europe
Rome, Italy, Europe
Tokyo, Japan, Asia

My prediction would be between Istanbul and Tokyo

Possible Contenders for 2024

Africa
-Due to the rotation of continents, it makes Africa (Durban,South Africa) a very serious contender. As of now they are not sure if they should bid for 2024 or 2028

Asia
-Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Asia had the games in 2008 but again Money talks right?

Europe
-Europe can forget it since they had 2004 and 2012

South America
Lima, Peru...due to the 2016 games in Brazil this makes their bid very unlikely to succeed

Now

North America

-Beside Africa (if no country bid or have a strong one), North America will be the continent that will be the most overdue

-What did the swift elimination of Chicago for 2016 taught us? The IOC are trying to distance themselves from the bribery scandals over the Salt Lake City games and Atlanta as well. The US are in the doghouse for a while

-Mexico held the games in 1986 while Montreal had them in 1976. Mexico hasn't specified when they would bid again.

-Toronto is in a very good spot. Love them or hate them (most likely leaving you indifferent) Toronto needs to make the 2015 Pan American a success. This would help Toronto obtaining the Games just like it helped Rio De Janeiro's case
 
Last edited:

highlife

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Quoting that Economist Article:

In Greece, the Ionian Islands and other tourist hotspots suffered even more during the 2004 Olympic slump than did Athens...
I looked up Greece AND 2004 AND Olympics AND Debt and wow....

anyway, i think the whole application process is a waste of time and money. And if we did get the games, it's not until 2024. A little late for all the transit improvements we need now.
 

Tewder

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
5,401
Reaction score
150
Transit requires long term planning and commitment. To get lines in place for 2024 you need to start now, which is something people in toronto didn't understand ten and twenty years ago!
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,204
Reaction score
1,528
The last Toronto bid (that came so close to winning) had temporary seats to be removed after the Games, leaving a permanent 30,000-ish seat stadium. Building an NFL stadium when the NFL has no interest in moving here is the kind of thing that blows budgets.

Sure, the Big O is hugely recognizable, but I would take the economics of the Saddledome any day.
The two aren't exactly comparable. One is a 70,000 seat stadium built for the summer Olympics, the other is an NHL size arena built for the relatively small-time winter Olympics. Big difference.
 

TonyV

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
1,698
Reaction score
84
Location
Downtown Toronto
-Toronto is in a very good spot. Love them or hate them (most likely leaving you indifferent) Toronto needs to make the 2015 Pan American a success. This would help Toronto obtaining the Games just like it helped Rio De Janeiro's case
You make a very good point: ambivalence among the natives. I will 'fess up that I've practically broken an ankle getting on and off the Olympic bid bandwagon, while generally I'd concede that the games would bring us mostly benefits. The problem I have, along with many others, is that these days security swallows up most of the budget.

I was in London in the latter half of September, and spoke with some locals about their big close-up next year (the summer 2012 games). A lot of them admit to being quite nervous about the possibility of terrorism and/or unrest, and they are keenly aware of the cost of security. And honestly, I met some Londoners who wished that the Olympics would "just go away" (honestly!!!).

London is scrubbed beyond belief at this point, BTW.
 

Nick.

Banned
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
You make a very good point: ambivalence among the natives. I will 'fess up that I've practically broken an ankle getting on and off the Olympic bid bandwagon, while generally I'd concede that the games would bring us mostly benefits. The problem I have, along with many others, is that these days security swallows up most of the budget.

I was in London in the latter half of September, and spoke with some locals about their big close-up next year (the summer 2012 games). A lot of them admit to being quite nervous about the possibility of terrorism and/or unrest, and they are keenly aware of the cost of security. And honestly, I met some Londoners who wished that the Olympics would "just go away" (honestly!!!).

London is scrubbed beyond belief at this point, BTW.
London also removed all their trash cans from public areas in fear of bombs, it's a different city.
 

kkgg7

Banned
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
920
Reaction score
0
You make a very good point: ambivalence among the natives. I will 'fess up that I've practically broken an ankle getting on and off the Olympic bid bandwagon, while generally I'd concede that the games would bring us mostly benefits. The problem I have, along with many others, is that these days security swallows up most of the budget.

I was in London in the latter half of September, and spoke with some locals about their big close-up next year (the summer 2012 games). A lot of them admit to being quite nervous about the possibility of terrorism and/or unrest, and they are keenly aware of the cost of security. And honestly, I met some Londoners who wished that the Olympics would "just go away" (honestly!!!).

London is scrubbed beyond belief at this point, BTW.
London held the Olympics a few times. They are entitled to be over all this attention.
Toronto on the other hand, hasn't. Plus who would conduct terrist attack on a small country like Canada? There is really no point of doing that.
 

kkgg7

Banned
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
920
Reaction score
0
Transit requires long term planning and commitment. To get lines in place for 2024 you need to start now, which is something people in toronto didn't understand ten and twenty years ago!
agree with you.
I laugh at the "we don't need an Olympic Game" "we don't care" kind of speech. With Toronto on the rise, particularly compared with the rest of the developed world, it is a good opportunity to hold it for once and upgraded all the aging infrastructure that is uncommon in a supposedly "rich country".
 

Red October

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
2,335
Reaction score
278
Location
Toronto, ON
London held the Olympics a few times. They are entitled to be over all this attention.
Toronto on the other hand, hasn't. Plus who would conduct terrist attack on a small country like Canada? There is really no point of doing that.
Ask the FLQ and the Toronto 18.
 

Top