Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
Yup...and should it go forward (which i do believe will happen) I hope they are bang on with their predictions, though I question some of them.
And there is just this flat out fact....
https://eureka.sbs.ox.ac.uk/6195/1/2016-20.pdf |
The problem with that report is that it doesn't look at why the different Games went over budget. Were the budgets poorly done from the beginning? Did they keep the estimates low to help gain support for the bid knowing that the costs would balloon after the fact? Did the scope of the projects change causing the costs to rise, but they got an overall better product?
Without knowing those answers, the analysis is lacking.
Also, looking at those numbers, the two Winter Games with the lowest cost overruns are also the two that are closest in structure to the 2026 bid plan, Salt Lake and Vancouver. Both were held this century in North American cities with populations in excess of a million people. Both made effective use of existing venues to reduce construction costs.
Even the 88 Games aren't a great comparison to the 2026 bid plan because Calgary is twice as large as it was then, and the Olympics are twice as large too. Also, the 88 Games had a large amount of new construction, including a never before seen at the Olympics, indoor speed skating track.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Is that the budget that Hostco was given or the budget at the time of plebiscite. Is that the Opex or Capex or both?
|
The Vancouver plebiscite was held in February 2003, so it would have been the budget that was in the submitted bid book.
I got the 13% overrun number from the report that transplant99 linked above. My understanding is it includes both operating and capital expenses, but only those capital expenses that directly relate to the Olympics (e.g Speed Skating Oval, Whistler Nordic Centre). Capital expenses for things like transportation improvements (e.g Sea to Sky Highway and Skytrain to YVR) aren't factored in.