Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
Make more money, how exactly?
There's very little evidence that olympics are even good for tourism, which is supposed to be the huge moneymaker locally. For example, Britain actually had 5% less tourists in 2012 than the previous year. London saw a slight increase in tourism, but even that was not a boon for everyone, as for example museums and theaters (both big business in London) saw significant declines in audiences.
In other words, olympic tourism mostly just replaces other tourism instead of adding to it.
|
That seems like a poor comparable to use a top 5 city in the world as your example of tourism. Los Angeles, New York, Paris, London have tourist populations the size of small cities on any given day.
It's not surprising at all that a city like London would see no discernable increase in tourism over the course of an entire year because of a two week event, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of people were there every day that wouldn't have otherwise been there, spending money.
I would highly contest that a slight dip in tourism in 2012 was anything more than coincidence, if you were intending to make a point that the Olympics might actually take away from tourism. Your conclusion that Olympic tourism just replaces other tourism based on London and then applying that to a place like Calgary or any similar sized city is absurd, imo.
If Calgary were to get the Olympics again there wouldn't be thousands upon thousands of Olympic tourists here that would have come anyways.