[Rumour] Calgary preparing for 2026 Winter Olympics bid. May open door to CalgaryNEXT funding

[polak]

Originally Posted by craigwd

Technically the old athletes village was at the UofC.
The Signal Hill condos were for the international media.

Pretty sure you have that messed up. I was told that the old athletes village were the condos on signal hill and that the MRU east res was the media village. Maybe the media stayed both at MRU and UofC?

Either way. I hope they do it.

[JohnnyT]

I think Calgary has to be a shinning example for the IOC, I mean look at how many of the facilities are still in use to today. Now if Calgary wants to continue to be a hub for Canadian winter Olympic athletes then these facilities will need an update sooner or later, so it would make sense to me that hosting another Winter Olympics would be the sensible way to update all of these facilities while at the same time upgrading other infrastructure around the city.

I kinda hate that Calgary NEXT will be directly tied to this proposal because I think it will negatively sway a large number of people, but I am all for spending the money to upgrade our current Olympic facilities up to todays international standards along with a few new facilities here and there so Calgary can remain a hub for our athletes training. Plus there will be infrastructure benefits those who will never use one of the facilities

[Maccalus]

Originally Posted by polak

Pretty sure you have that messed up. I was told that the old athletes village were the condos on signal hill and that the MRU east res was the media village. Maybe the media stayed both at MRU and UofC?

Either way. I hope they do it.

Stolen from wikipedia for what it is worth

"Calgary 1988: Presently student accommodations on the campus of the University of Calgary. The athlete's village consisted of the existing Kananaskis, Rundle, Castle, Norquay and Brewster buildings, as well as the newly constructed Glacier and Olympus buildings."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Village

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by jar_e

They did not. Spent ~$1.9 billion and broke even.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...says-1.2695994

Don't believe that for one second.

[Frequitude]

Winter Olympics facilities leave a more usable set of infrastructure compared to its Summer brethren. Sure you need to throw some money into ski jumps and sliding tracks which will only be used by hardcore athletes, but most of the rest are fairly well used by the public.

Arenas (hockey, figure skating, short track speed skating, curling)
Ski hills (alpine skiing, freestyle skiing, snowboarding)
Nordic Centre (biathlon, cross country skiing)

The only event I missed is speed skating which I'd say falls halfway between public use and hardcore athletes only.

Calgary would put together a very efficient bid. The only thing that would make it run away is how many bells and whistles we want to add (e.g. high speed train to Banff, road upgrades, etc.).

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

How does making the facility tied to the Olympics somehow make it a more lasting legacy than if it's not tied to the Olympics? Because the whole world gets to see the new facilty for two weeks?

Anyway we all know this is usually a spectacular waste of money, very little gained long term, and it makes one of the two most corrupt organizations on earth rich. Recently when western countries have been given the chance to vote on hosting the Olympics, they have overwhelmingly rejected it. I suspect it'd be the same here.

Seriously? Calgary has benefitted IMMENSELY from '88 in a myriad of ways, and in almost countless amateur sports. And it is still reaping benefits 27 years later.

As for the cost, not only does it bring in provincial and federal funding which aids in getting infrastructure projects completed (as the article above discusses), but Calgary has a huge head start already, with several facilities in place or simply needing an upgrade.

Even major upgrades (like the bobsleigh track would need) are typically cheaper than starting from scratch. The land is already committed, the facilities are already there - an upgrade means they can continue to benefit Calgary for another 25 years.

Yes, the IOC are a disgusting organization. But conversely, the Olympics are a wonderful event.

You have to look at the specifics when you weigh the costs and the benefits. Calgary is in a pretty unique position whereby the costs can be controlled and contained to a pretty significant degree.

And no city should be more aware of the benefits than Calgary already is.

I would be strongly in favour of this. And I would not be even a little surprised if an Olympic bid becomes part of the process for CalgaryNext.

[polak]

A high speed train to Banff feels like it would be heavily used year-round. Every tourist we get is here to see Banff.

[skudr248]

People talking about traffic nightmares for 2 weeks? Holy hell, are you serious?

This bid would be great for the city.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by polak

Pretty sure you have that messed up. I was told that the old athletes village were the condos on signal hill and that the MRU east res was the media village. Maybe the media stayed both at MRU and UofC?

Either way. I hope they do it.

Nope. I was a University student at that time and worked in the catering department as well. The U of C was the athletes village. Basically shut down the place for 3 weeks.

Best memory: the big party at the Jack Simpson when it was all over. Very drunk people having a good time.

[Flash Walken]

This sounds like a massive money pit.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Don't believe that for one second.

Independent auditors did.

[Frequitude]

So if Vancouver spent $1.9B, let's say a somewhat dissapointing "return" would be a loss of $500M.

Given the benefit of hindsight looking at the facilities and infrastructure left over, does anyone think that if '88 had "lost" $500M in today's dollar that that would have been a bad deal?

I say "lost" because that implies and operating income shortfall when it really should be considered a capital expenditure investment. Wondering if people think we would have got enough bang for the buck for a theoretical $500M investment. What about $1B? Curious on the threshold.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Seriously? Calgary has benefitted IMMENSELY from '88 in a myriad of ways, and in almost countless amateur sports. And it is still reaping benefits 27 years later.

As for the cost, not only does it bring in provincial and federal funding which aids in getting infrastructure projects completed (as the article above discusses), but Calgary has a huge head start already, with several facilities in place or simply needing an upgrade.

Even major upgrades (like the bobsleigh track would need) are typically cheaper than starting from scratch. The land is already committed, the facilities are already there - an upgrade means they can continue to benefit Calgary for another 25 years.

Yes, the IOC are a disgusting organization. But conversely, the Olympics are a wonderful event.

You have to look at the specifics when you weigh the costs and the benefits. Calgary is in a pretty unique position whereby the costs can be controlled and contained to a pretty significant degree.

And no city should be more aware of the benefits than Calgary already is.

I would be strongly in favour of this. And I would not be even a little surprised if an Olympic bid becomes part of the process for CalgaryNext.

That was in 1988. Right now the only major thing Calgary needs desperately to fix is Crowchild/Bow, and that's probably a $2 billion project. So obviously that's not getting tied in. Green line is already happening, so is the Ring Road. Other than that? Can't think of anything badly needed.

Facility upgrades? Meh, spend that money to upgrade schools and hospitals instead, those are things the public needs, not winter facilities which are wants. I get that winter sports fans won't agree, but that doesn't change what deserves fiscal priority. Even low end though, you're looking at around $500 million in upgrades to be ready for the 2026 Olympics, which you have to remember could have twice as many athletes as 1988. No dispute that it'll be cheaper than building from scratch, but that doesn't mean it'll be cheap. And there will still need to be quite a few new facilities needed for the many new events since 1988.

And then there's security, which is guaranteed to be a minimum of $1 billion, the cost it was in Vancouver. Factoring in inflation and such, probably $1.25 billion at a minimum. And that assumes nothing changes the dynamic. A terrorist attack in North America anywhere close to this event ensures a significant rise in security costs. So it's wild, unpredictable variable.

So right there, just a basic estimate is looking at $2 billion, and that assumes everything goes right which we know it won't. And that always forgets that sports now are more money based than ever. Tickets will likely be, relatively speaking, much more expensive than 1988. I get that people want the Olympics, it's just very poor fiscal management to spend any money on it.

[DoubleF]

IIRC, for the Vancouver Olympics, there were articles that highlighted some issues with our training facilities. Our facilities are getting dated and I believe some North American athletes were saying they might not be able to or want to train in Calgary any longer.

I recall SAIT getting recognition for building training luge boards (term?) as apparently there was a world wide Luge board shortage? Mount Royal upped their sports training programs etc. during that Olympics too. Bads? More people here may mean more crowds in our beautiful back yards even after the Olympics. Cost, no need to keep going, others have already chimed in. Canmore might not be the same nice and quiet alternative to Banff long run. Traffic? I personally think this would be a wash. Airport to West has Stony Trail which isn't generally congested, though the Stony to TransCanada perhaps could use a minor tweak. Downtown disruption IMO wouldn't be much worse than the Stampede.

State of the art facilities would attract athletes from around the world, perhaps not just for winter sports. Tourism may increase long term as well. Ironically, I've always hated the idea of trying to quantify long term benefits, but there seriously is a huge argument for it here.

Does Calgary need the Olympics? no. Would it be nice? Yes.
Would it cost a lot? Sure. But I don't think we would lose huge amount of money and the city wouldn't be a ruin in the end either.

If anything, I could see the city benefiting from great improvements across the board. If anything, additional provincial and federal funding aiding things like infrastructure and "wants" would free up more future provincial and municipal funds for the things like schools and hospitals that were mentioned earlier. But that's just my opinion. Anyone is free to disagree.

[Reaper]

I know it would never happen but I keep laughing at a scene where there is intense coverage of an Olympic long track speed skating event. As the camera pans out after the first turn it reveals that there is a rec hockey game currently going on in the one end of the oval. The speed skaters all gag from the smell of hockey as they enter the back turn.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Seriously? Calgary has benefitted IMMENSELY from '88 in a myriad of ways, and in almost countless amateur sports. And it is still reaping benefits 27 years later.

As for the cost, not only does it bring in provincial and federal funding which aids in getting infrastructure projects completed (as the article above discusses), but Calgary has a huge head start already, with several facilities in place or simply needing an upgrade.

Even major upgrades (like the bobsleigh track would need) are typically cheaper than starting from scratch. The land is already committed, the facilities are already there - an upgrade means they can continue to benefit Calgary for another 25 years.

Yes, the IOC are a disgusting organization. But conversely, the Olympics are a wonderful event.

You have to look at the specifics when you weigh the costs and the benefits. Calgary is in a pretty unique position whereby the costs can be controlled and contained to a pretty significant degree.

And no city should be more aware of the benefits than Calgary already is.

I would be strongly in favour of this. And I would not be even a little surprised if an Olympic bid becomes part of the process for CalgaryNext.

It was a Dump in the 90's

[cam_wmh]

Goodness. How do these cities spend $1bn on security? Seems so excessive.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Goodness. How do these cities spend $1bn on security? Seems so excessive.

It does, but given what has happened in the past, it is also probably necessary. Vancouver's security budget was probably higher than what Calgary would be given there was an Olympic riot in Vancouver that is far less likely to happen here.

Over a third of VANOC's budget came from the IOC itself, and that helps mitigate the cost of these things.

[Locke]

I am generally opposed to Olympics, especially after the Boondoggle that was Sochi, but, I'll soften my stance a little.

If Calgary were to get the Olympics and not spend like drunken sailors, the City could get some External Revenue as well as some Federal and Provincial funding to re-model parts of the City as well as fund infrastructure that otherwise the City would have to pay for on its own.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Goodness. How do these cities spend $1bn on security? Seems so excessive.

Because of the waterfront proximity to many of the Vancouver events, it is a much more difficult location to secure than a Calgary venue would be.

That's one thing Calgary has going for it.

I don't really think theh games required things like Mid-Air refuelling tankers for around the clock jet support, but what do I know?