Should Calgary Bid on the 2026 Olympics

[oldschoolcalgary]

normally a fan of Nenshi, but the veil of secrecy that's been placed over the costs of the olympic bid is not a good look.

you can't cry foul about the cost of the Flames arena and the costs to the taxpayers and not be forthcoming about costs that you KNOW haven't been factored into the total for the olympic bid.

The mayor and the Councillors serve at the pleasure of their constituents, not the other way around.

Not providing a clear understanding of costs to the public, so that the voters have a full and clear understanding of exactly what they are voting for is the kind of 'bait and switch' that he accused the Flames of doing.

Not impressed... bordering on stupidity and or hubris.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Im regretting voting Nenshi now, and not just for this olympic fiasco, he really is a petty, vindictive, manipulative person. not the type of person you want representing a city and the interests of it's inhabitants.
Sorry Bill Smith, I made a mistake.

Hallelujah!!

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

normally a fan of Nenshi, but the veil of secrecy that's been placed over the costs of the olympic bid is not a good look.

you can't cry foul about the cost of the Flames arena and the costs to the taxpayers and not be forthcoming about costs that you KNOW haven't been factored into the total for the olympic bid.

The mayor and the Councillors serve at the pleasure of their constituents, not the other way around.

Not providing a clear understanding of costs to the public, so that the voters have a full and clear understanding of exactly what they are voting for is the kind of 'bait and switch' that he accused the Flames of doing.

Not impressed... bordering on stupidity and or hubris.

Praised be!!

[Ozy_Flame]

Bill Smith would have been a terrible mayor. Not sorry at all.

That said, I think the numbers should have been publicized completely, but if Nenshi has to follow process then so be it. I wish Council was more transparent about this whole thing.

[Bunk]

I suspect one of the issues with this leak with respect to the bus barns is the narrow context of that particular report. I'd bet there is other very related matters like land swaps in that area that really need confidentiality, because they involve real estate transactions by the City. Usually more than meets they eye. I don't think anyone disagrees with transparency in principle - but there are useful and necessary limits to transparency, for very good reason.

[Bunk]

Interesting conversation I was engaged with on Twitter.

Question to throw out there, particularly for opponents.

There's a claim that the Olympics are a bad investment. Bad for the host city.

But, in the two most relevant examples - was it bad for Calgary and Vancouver? On balance, considering the economics, infrastructure, tangible and intangible benefits, costs - would it have been better that they not hosted?

If it would have been better to not host, why? If on balance you think it was a good thing, is there good reason to believe it would be a bad thing this time if we did it? Why would it be something we ultimately regret this time?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Bill Smith would have been a terrible mayor. Not sorry at all.

That said, I think the numbers should have been publicized completely, but if Nenshi has to follow process then so be it. I wish Council was more transparent about this whole thing.

I mean how do we know? He never put forward any sort of stance on anything.

[TorqueDog]

I was a huge fan of Nenshi, I voted for him thrice.

But unfortunately, I think every politician has a shelf life, and he's lost me. His blind endorsement of the 30 KM/H zoning and the Olympic bid were the last straws for me. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'd rather he had put us on the hook for the goddamn hockey arena (and I include CalgaryNEXT in that) than the Olympics. At least we'd actually get to enjoy the hockey arena for the next 30 years. The Winter Olympics show up for -- what, a month? -- and tickets are exorbitantly priced such that most people won't have a hope in hell of seeing what they want to see, and then it buggers off and we're left with a bill. At least the Flames you can usually score the cheap seats to a game or two a year even on a tighter budget.

I'm ready for the Purple Reign to be over, I just hope there is a good alternative in the next election because the last one was laughably bad.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Interesting conversation I was engaged with on Twitter.

Question to throw out there, particularly for opponents.

There's a claim that the Olympics are a bad investment. Bad for the host city.

But, in the two most relevant examples - was it bad for Calgary and Vancouver? On balance, considering the economics, infrastructure, tangible and intangible benefits, costs - would it have been better that they not hosted?

If it would have been better to not host, why? If on balance you think it was a good thing, is there good reason to believe it would be a bad thing this time if we did it? Why would it be something we ultimately regret this time?

I definitely think Calgary and Vancouver both benefited from hosting. But you have to look at what both cities got out of the deal, hosting in and of itself is not beneficial.

In 1988 Calgary got:
-Saddledome
-COP/Winsport
-New housing at U of C
-Olympic Oval
-Nordic Center
-Road upgrades

This bid gives us no beneficial infrastructure for a much higher bill due to how the world has changed in 30 years. I was ready to get behind a bid until I saw the details. The additional aspect of how Nenshi has seemingly applied almost none of the same skepticism he showed towards the Flames against this bid and the IOC also makes me not want to host.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Joborule

You could argue though what's the benefit from building a brand new stadium (including costs for land and such), vs renovating McMahon extensively for less than the costs of a new stadium? What benefits do we gain from that over what's possible to be done with McMahon?

The benefit is that it's a new facility for the ground up built to today's standards and conveniences as opposed to the 1960's standards McMahon was built to. If the city spends $135 renovating how many years are they going to get out of extending the life of this old dinosaur vs a new facility? There's a long term big picture here in that you can pay now to get a new stadium or pay now to renovate and pay again to build a new one down the road. The city has got over 50 years out of this old stadium as it's served its purpose well but it's simply poor management of taxpayer to continue to invest in such an old structure.

Look I get Nenshi only cares about this Olympic legacy and professional sports in this city mean nothing to him so I'm fine with sinking in the bare minimum to make McMahon passable for Olympic ceremonies. One way or another the city will get a new facility when he's gone. Sinking $136 million into renovations to extend the life of this old dinosaur is just a waste of time and money.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I actually think Nenshi going 100% pro-Olympics might end up hurting the plebiscite. There's definitely a lot of people who would love to give a spite vote against Nenshi, and this gives them the best opportunity, especially since the benefits of hosting are extremely underwhelming so far. It's not like people would be spitting a great bid here.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I was a huge fan of Nenshi, I voted for him thrice.

But unfortunately, I think every politician has a shelf life, and he's lost me. His blind endorsement of the 30 KM/H zoning and the Olympic bid were the last straws for me. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'd rather he had put us on the hook for the goddamn hockey arena (and I include CalgaryNEXT in that) than the Olympics. At least we'd actually get to enjoy the hockey arena for the next 30 years. The Winter Olympics show up for -- what, a month? -- and tickets are exorbitantly priced such that most people won't have a hope in hell of seeing what they want to see, and then it buggers off and we're left with a bill. At least the Flames you can usually score the cheap seats to a game or two a year even on a tighter budget.

I'm ready for the Purple Reign to be over, I just hope there is a good alternative in the next election because the last one was laughably bad.

His popularity dropped after I left the office in the beginning of 2015. Coincidence? I THINK NOT!!

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bunk

His popularity dropped after I left the office in the beginning of 2015. Coincidence? I THINK NOT!!

You're the Steve Bannon of his administration?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by nik-

You're the Steve Bannon of his administration?

Sam Seaborn of the Bartlett administration. Left after season 4.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I actually think Nenshi going 100% pro-Olympics might end up hurting the plebiscite. There's definitely a lot of people who would love to give a spite vote against Nenshi, and this gives them the best opportunity, especially since the benefits of hosting are extremely underwhelming so far. It's not like people would be spitting a great bid here.

I suspect the majority of people are ~ 60/40 in favour (internally, as an individual) or 60/40 against hosting

When you're close to 50/50, you're a lot less likely to bother going out to vote. I don't think spite will be a strong enough motivator for many people to do it either.

It should certainly be a yes vs. no vote, but it would be really interesting to see if it played out on a 10 pt scale. I think you'd see a ton of 4s, 5s, and 6s.

[La Flames Fan]

The BidCo, at its heart, has nothing to do with Nenshi or Council. Yes, they need to approve the bid going forward if the people, in true democratic fashion, vote Yes on the Plebiscite on November 13th.

The BidCo contains business leaders, athletes, indigenous peoples, Federal representatives, Provincial representatives, Civic representatives, and Canadian Olympic/Para-Olympic representatives. Who is not part of the BidCo is Mayor Nenshi or anyone from Council.

Here's a detailed plan of the Bid - from the BidCo - the same plan that everyone is working from. There is no secret, evil, alternate plan.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...Web.Sept10.pdf

The cost of operating the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games will be 91 per cent privately funded through revenue from the IOC, domestic sponsorship and ticket sales. The remaining 9 per cent ($218 million) is a contribution to the Paralympic Games, ensuring that the Paralympics are an aligned and inclusive event. There are also generous contingencies built into that funding to protect against overruns.

Here's the big thing about the Federal funding for sport which I found eye-opening: That money is earmarked for just that, sport. Whether it's used on the 2026 Calgary Olympic Games is not important - that funding will get used, somewhere, somehow. For instance, it could go to Montreal for sport, it could go to Toronto for sport. That money will be disbursed no matter if the Olympics come here or not. It's already earmarked.

I'm reading this all on the actual BidCo website (separate from the city) - not the media who have their own interesting agendas. I'm looking beyond the bias and agendas and sticking to the facts.

[La Flames Fan]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I actually think Nenshi going 100% pro-Olympics might end up hurting the plebiscite. There's definitely a lot of people who would love to give a spite vote against Nenshi, and this gives them the best opportunity, especially since the benefits of hosting are extremely underwhelming so far. It's not like people would be spitting a great bid here.

Does anyone actually think Mayor Nenshi will still be the Mayor in 8 years? And if the bid helps those people who want to spite Mayor Nenshi, doesn't that seem a little "Cut off your nose to spite your face" kind of thing?

Instead of looking into the actual plan and deciding for yourself, we're basing this on politics and who we like as the Mayor that probably won't be Mayor when this happens? Seems short-sighted to me.

[zhulander]

Originally Posted by La Flames Fan

The BidCo, at its heart, has nothing to do with Nenshi or Council. Yes, they need to approve the bid going forward if the people, in true democratic fashion, vote Yes on the Plebiscite on November 13th.

The BidCo contains business leaders, athletes, indigenous peoples, Federal representatives, Provincial representatives, Civic representatives, and Canadian Olympic/Para-Olympic representatives. Who is not part of the BidCo is Mayor Nenshi or anyone from Council.

Here's a detailed plan of the Bid - from the BidCo - the same plan that everyone is working from. There is no secret, evil, alternate plan.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...Web.Sept10.pdf

The cost of operating the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games will be 91 per cent privately funded through revenue from the IOC, domestic sponsorship and ticket sales. The remaining 9 per cent ($218 million) is a contribution to the Paralympic Games, ensuring that the Paralympics are an aligned and inclusive event. There are also generous contingencies built into that funding to protect against overruns.

Here's the big thing about the Federal funding for sport which I found eye-opening: That money is earmarked for just that, sport. Whether it's used on the 2026 Calgary Olympic Games is not important - that funding will get used, somewhere, somehow. For instance, it could go to Montreal for sport, it could go to Toronto for sport. That money will be disbursed no matter if the Olympics come here or not. It's already earmarked.

I'm reading this all on the actual BidCo website (separate from the city) - not the media who have their own interesting agendas. I'm looking beyond the bias and agendas and sticking to the facts.

If you are actually looking beyond the bias reporting, look at pg 12 of the report, it literally says PUBLIC FUNDING OF GAMES OPERATIONS at $1.248 billion, FUNDING OF HOSTCO OPERATIONS $2.018 billion. Please explain how 91% of operating the games is through private funding?

[La Flames Fan]

Originally Posted by zhulander

If you are actually looking beyond the bias reporting, look at pg 12 of the report, it literally says PUBLIC FUNDING OF GAMES OPERATIONS at $1.248 billion, FUNDING OF HOSTCO OPERATIONS $2.018 billion. Please explain how 91% of operating the games is through private funding?

Operating the Games costs money. Where does that come from? The air?

You have to spend money to make money as a business. I know for my two businesses we put up a lot of upfront costs to make profit down the road. It's a similar scenario here. You spend money to update facilities, infrastructure, build new venues, hire people, get everything ready for those 50 days surrounding and including the Olympics. What you get out of that is income from Sponsorships, Broadcast Rights, Ticket Sales, Merchandising, Licensing, IOC Contributions, Tourism, Venues, Low Income/Senior Housing that last and operate far beyond those 50 days.

People seem to forget the income portion of that balance sheet. You can make educated assumptions on income, based on previous Olympic games like Vancouver 2010.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by La Flames Fan

Operating the Games costs money. Where does that come from? The air?

You have to spend money to make money as a business. I know for my two businesses we put up a lot of upfront costs to make profit down the road. It's a similar scenario here. You spend money to update facilities, infrastructure, build new venues, hire people, get everything ready for those 50 days surrounding and including the Olympics. What you get out of that is income from Sponsorships, Broadcast Rights, Ticket Sales, Merchandising, Licensing, IOC Contributions, Tourism, Venues, Low Income/Senior Housing that last and operate far beyond those 50 days.

People seem to forget the income portion of that balance sheet. You can make educated assumptions on income, based on previous Olympic games like Vancouver 2010.

I don’t think anyone has forgotten about income. It’s why we talk about 3billion in public funding instead of 5 billion. The cost of hosting Olympics is roughly 3 billion more than the revenue generated by the Olympics and roughly 1.5 billion more than the revenue plus the left over infrastructure. And this assumes we need all of the infrastructure and that the cost of this infrastructure is good value and not inflated for Olympic requirements.

I don’t think there is much confusion over this.