Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarley
Here's what Markusoff said:
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:
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." |
I certainly understand where you are coming from. You are saying that there hasn't been a study of about the tourism effects of the olympics in Calgary. Which is fair, I will give you that. It dimishes Markusoff's statement.
Again, I cannot read the Reilly & Smith article so i cannot comment on the actual study or any of its assumptions.
Im assuming Baade and Matheson are inferring that a decrease in international awareness is tied to a decrease in international tourism. There seems to be support for the inference that you cannot count on an continued increase in tourism after the olympics -especially if major infrastructure upgrade aren't made.