[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Stop putting words in my mouth. Nowhere did I say the article was based on lies. It's simply a based on information cherrypicked from the presentation to support a narrative (for example, why is only the Corral used as an example when it's one of several potential sites being evaluated?). It's financially ignorant of the fact that many of the capital costs are sunk in that they will be required to ensure our venues from '88 remain at a competitive standard, and of the fact that these venues bring international competitions and training to our city year after year.

Also, the research paper he cited to justify the denial of a bump in tourism does not support that view and only mentions Calgary in passing once. In fact, the cited report counters his argument, stating: "Data were collected annually from 1986 through 1989 in some 20 centers in the United States and Europe. The results indicate that, in this particular case, the event dramatically increased levels of awareness and substantially modified the image of the city of Calgary."

I'd by happy to provide you with a detailed analysis. Given your history (where you only post about this topic and the arena with obstinate ignorance) I doubt you'd understand much of it or even read it, but perhaps it will be beneficial for the other posters here.

If you are going to quote the abstract, you should include the full quote:

The results indicate that, in this particular case, the event dramatically increased levels of awareness and substantially modified the image of the city of Calgary. However, there is also strong evidence that cities considering the staging of such a mega-event must anticipate a significant rate of awareness and image decay, and take steps to counter it, if they wish to remain visible and competitive in the international marketplace.

Pretty much in line with what Markusoff said.

I don't think attacking me personally on my opinions on either the arena or the olympics to be in good taste. I don't think my views are out of line with the majority of the people in both threads (and take a look in the mirror with respect to your obstinateness comment), but hey! question my reading comprehension and intelligence! That always works on the internet!