JohnQCitizen
New Member
Last time I drove through Montreal, the streets looked like they'd been under heavy artillery shelling. Those are the effects I'm talking about. Infratructure.
|
|
|
Toronto 2024 Olympic Bid (Dead)
- Thread starter Southcore
- Start date
nfitz
Superstar
The streets in Montreal have always looked like that. More to do with the poor quality of construction, because of the high levels of corruption than anything else. And the desire to spend more $ on social programs and less on infrastructure.
Riverdale Rink Rat
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,775
- Reaction score
- 273
- Location
- Back to East York... Alas!
Tewder- make a pro-Oly argument. Or actually refute a 'they cost more than they're worth' argument. Or something. It doesn't sound to us anti-Oly-on-cost types like any progress has been made since Montreal, except on the 'disguising costs by running multiple books' side, where an Olympian effort has been made.
Archi - is there a friends of Toronto Diving foundation? Do you donate or volunteer? I pay for the next group of rugby players by going to Fletcher's Fields, supporting club fundraisers, and buying tix for a Canada/Italy friendly, e.g. We'd almost be offended if we needed to ask the Government to build us a field...
Tewder
Senior Member
We've parsed this in so many different ways already. The problem, whether you're pro or con quite frankly, is that the actual costs and benefits are so difficult to quantify in any real way. They are important, of course, but at the end of the day we do need to step back a bit, get our nose out of the ledgers, and consider whether the exercise is worth it or not for other reasons.
As I've said before I feel we owe it to ourselves to see what a bid might look like, how funded, and what the legacy would be for the city. I don't see how we can discount an Olys outright without knowing some of these things first.
Riverdale Rink Rat
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,775
- Reaction score
- 273
- Location
- Back to East York... Alas!
A reasonable answer from a pro-sider. May I respectfully say that you'd understand if I'm more than a little skeptical that a study would ever come out with the answer that we should NOT bid? A study of a bid will be the start of a bid.
Last edited:
TOperson
Active Member
Ah, I get it now. Tewder considers the experiences of past host cities to be irrelevant. In her mind, a Toronto Olympics would be a fresh start. There is nothing inherently problematic about hosting the games, as achieving success is merely a matter of good management, and does not include an analysis of costs, just the "other reasons". Her starting point is "hosting the games is good for a city" and since past host cities are off the table for discussion, the debate is purely theoretical. Plus, any comment against the games is dismissed as negativity or lack of civic pride.
The Olympics propagandists have a done a great job.
TOperson
Active Member
There was such a report for London 2012. It was called "Game Plan: A strategy for delivering Government's sport and physical activity objectives", from the UK Cabinet Office, in 2002.
From page 15:
To adopt a different approach to hosting mega sporting events. They should be seen as an occasional celebration of success rather than as a means to achieving other government objectives.
TOareaFan
Superstar
You actually saw that in Tewder's post? Cause i didn't.
Tewder
Senior Member
Neither irrelevant nor inevitable.
... but why keep harping on about Athens? Let's look at Barcelona. Unlike anything TOperson has posted this offers some balanced insight:
http://www.insights.org.uk/articleitem.aspx?title=Barcelona:+Before+and+After+the+%E2%80%9992+Olympic+Games
DavidJamesTO
Active Member
It may become increasingly difficult to evaluate previous Games for a Toronto bid because of a new development in London: temporary venues. By making several structures temporary and passing them on to other holders of the Games, considerable cost savings will be realized. Combine that with the number of existing venues already upgraded for the Pan-Am Games and the "white elephant" syndrome may very well be banished from Toronto.
Soccer stadiums might be an issue; I don't think BMO Field, Saputo, and BC Place will be enough. Might have to add temporary seating to university stadiums. Skydome could easily serve as an Olympic Stadium, provided they put the Argos and Blue Jays on the road for a couple of weeks; that will save a large amount of the cost. And unlike another Olympic Stadium that shall remain Montreal's, our retractable roof works
Soccer stadiums might be an issue; I don't think BMO Field, Saputo, and BC Place will be enough. Might have to add temporary seating to university stadiums. Skydome could easily serve as an Olympic Stadium, provided they put the Argos and Blue Jays on the road for a couple of weeks; that will save a large amount of the cost. And unlike another Olympic Stadium that shall remain Montreal's, our retractable roof works
isaidso
Senior Member
Skydome could easily serve as an Olympic Stadium, provided they put the Argos and Blue Jays on the road for a couple of weeks; that will save a large amount of the cost. And unlike another Olympic Stadium that shall remain Montreal's, our retractable roof works
Unlike Montreal's Olympic Stadium, Skydome is too small to fit an athletics track and the seating capacity is well below what the IOC would seek. Skydome only holds about 50,000 people while the an Olympic Stadium would likely need to be at least 70,000. Sydney's Olympic stadium held 110,000 people for athletics. Skydome isn't even half that size.
Skydome could function as a soccer, gymnastics, or baseball (if it gets re-instated) venue. It might be a tad large for gymnastics, but arenas are an awkward shape for this.
Last edited:
intoronto1125
Active Member
I`d use Rogers Centre for football preliminaries and rugby sevens towards the end of the games.
Only tennis and mountain biking (and Diving and synchro if a new venue is not built) has to be outside the 6km zone in downtown Toronto. That is compact.
Only tennis and mountain biking (and Diving and synchro if a new venue is not built) has to be outside the 6km zone in downtown Toronto. That is compact.
DavidJamesTO
Active Member
What about the football finals instead? Preliminaries tend to be held outside the host city, so this could be an opportunity to share the wealth. They could install temporary seating at Ivor Wynne and BMO Field; maybe stabilize the Big Owe and let Montreal have a taste of the games again.
Aside from Aquatics, I don't see a need for any new facilities for inside sports. Between International Centre, the Toronto Congress Centre, the Ex, the Gardens, the ACC, the Convention Centre, and the new facilities at UTSC, there should be enough space. If they get desperate, there's also the Hershey Centre.
Outdoor events could pose a problem. I suppose beach volleyball could put that at Varsity Stadium. Archery could be held there or at YorkU. Some of the tennis could be held at the Rexall Centre, but I don't know if it has the capacity for everything. Holding equestrian events at Woodbine seems like a given to me. Rowing might be a problem; maybe they could put something together at Ontario Place. Sailing seems to make the most sense off the Islands, but there is the problem of access. Sunnyside, maybe?
The Olympic Stadium is, of course, the troublesome factor. One solution, I suppose, is to build something that could be used by both the Argos and a future NFL team, assuming such a team isn't a total pipe dream. Maybe the York University plan could be resurrected, with the stadium used by both/all three teams. Still, after the Pan-Am upgrades I think the stadium and athlete's village are the only facilities that would have to be built from scratch.
Aside from Aquatics, I don't see a need for any new facilities for inside sports. Between International Centre, the Toronto Congress Centre, the Ex, the Gardens, the ACC, the Convention Centre, and the new facilities at UTSC, there should be enough space. If they get desperate, there's also the Hershey Centre.
Outdoor events could pose a problem. I suppose beach volleyball could put that at Varsity Stadium. Archery could be held there or at YorkU. Some of the tennis could be held at the Rexall Centre, but I don't know if it has the capacity for everything. Holding equestrian events at Woodbine seems like a given to me. Rowing might be a problem; maybe they could put something together at Ontario Place. Sailing seems to make the most sense off the Islands, but there is the problem of access. Sunnyside, maybe?
The Olympic Stadium is, of course, the troublesome factor. One solution, I suppose, is to build something that could be used by both the Argos and a future NFL team, assuming such a team isn't a total pipe dream. Maybe the York University plan could be resurrected, with the stadium used by both/all three teams. Still, after the Pan-Am upgrades I think the stadium and athlete's village are the only facilities that would have to be built from scratch.
TOperson
Active Member
Your logic is all over the place. If past host cities are relevant, then they must be considered, and the evidence from them shows that hosting is - at best - a wash in terms of being "worth it", and often a costly train wreck, however good it all might look on television. There isn't ONE past host city in the modern Olympics where there is strong agreement that the overall benefits strongly outweighed the overall costs, but all past host cities have a long list of problems and complaints and more than a few white elephants.
I don't keep harping about Athens. I've mentioned it maybe once. I've citied numerous studies that looked at most or all of past host cities. At least read what I actually post, for crying out loud.
As for Barcelona, it's a red flag that it is the ONLY city that can ever be cited as an exception, and yet at best the benefits are debatable, as the other studies show. The article you cited was written by a tourism organization, but tourism is not the only consideration re: hosting the games. Plus, tourism professionals can hardly be considered unbiased, given the purported benefits of the Olympics on the tourism industry, and the risk of alienating the IOC and hurting future Olympic bids in that country, e.g. Madrid 2020.
Tewder
Senior Member
You've been claiming that the Olympics hurt tourism, and now you're saying the tourism industry acknowledges are benefits.... well, which is it? As for the article, It was pretty balanced. It didn't paint a 'perfect' picture of the Olympics, even from the perspective of the tourism industry.