[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Cappy

No but it talks about the relative bump and then decay of tourism experienced elsewhere where lies the problem enunciated in Markusoff's column.

Now, I can't actually access the full report, so if you can that would be awesome. I'm not trying to discount the value of tourism dollars in Calgary/Banff, i just think Markusoff's article, and this abstract, present an argument that should be considered.

Essentially it is potentially folly to rely on a two week bump in tourism and the assorted benefits to continue into the future. I don't understand how that assertion is wrong.

Atleast you didnt attack my intelligence though, so you are getting less dickish .

Here's what Markusoff said:

Calgary did benefit temporarily from its turn on the world stage during the Winter Games three decades ago, but 1988’s tourism bump didn’t last—which is often the case when the Games come to town, one Olympics economic benefits study noted last year.

Here's the journal article he cited for that quote. As I mentioned before, this study does not even examine Calgary other than a line in passing that mentions the Ritchie and Smith study, which does not even evaluate tourism levels. It's simply a study of name recognition of Calgary in foreign markets. Logically, how could a study completed from 1986-1989 assess the post-event impact of the games on tourism? Again, there has never been an academic study of the impact of the 1988 Olympics on tourism levels. From the conclusion of the 1991 study:

There is little doubt that the hosting of the 1988 Olympic Winter Games had a dramatic impact on levels of awareness and knowledge of the city of Calgary in Europe and the United States when compared to other Canadian cities. However, it also appears that this impact on levels of top-of mind awareness decreases measurably after a short period of time. Conversely, total recall (unaided plus prompted) appears to remain relatively constant one year after the event.

For certain well known cities (such as Los Angeles) there may in fact be very little increase in awareness or change in image due to the high degree of exposure it enjoys on a regular basis. For those cities which do experience a marked increase in awareness (such as Calgary), it is not immediately obvious that this will translate into increased visitation levels, tourism receipts, and/or other forms of economic development. While tourism does appear to have increased significantly following the 1988 Winter Games, an ongoing, rigorous test of this hypothesis needs to be made as figures come in over the next several years.

Markusoff either didn't do his research fully on this point or he's deliberately misrepresenting the contents of the study. There's absolutely zero evidence supporting his claim that "1988’s tourism bump didn’t last."