Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingmoose
Ironically, a lot of the people I see making comments across social media and in person say "I'm worried that it will go over budget, and we'll be stuck with a big bill", but at the same time say "maybe if we were getting more LRT or roads it would be a good deal" - the games itself have shown consistently that operationally they are break even (or make modest profit)....it's the infrastructure add-ons that make things late and over-budget.
I think that there's a good chance that the budget numbers (with contengency) will be pretty close to correct, assuming people don't start adding big infrastructure projects that don't actually have anything to do with staging the Olympics (Vancouver, for example, had accelerated Canada Line and upgrading the Sea-to-Sky highway). Sure, those things can make hosting easier, but they're not needed to host. Realistically, they shouldn't really be part of the Bid Budget.
I'm not sure how you can complain about the Olympic budget, and then ask for more costly infrastructure projects at the same time.
|
I think there is a better chance that the Oilers trade Mc David to the Flames for Sam Bennett than ANY of the numbers they are espousing.
It's quite remarkable that in the space of 24 hours, for example, they were able to cut over 150 million dollars from security costs without any known input from those who actually uderstand providing security for eents of this magnitude.
Add on to that there is no new NHL sized arena nor a new stadium as part of any of this entire thing, makes the whole thing unpalatable to many many many Calgarians.
But hey....remember Karen Percy
LOWE and how great it all was....right?