2026 Olympics- Calgary votes no- 56%

[Joborule]

I don't see Calgary having any shot at 2030, so this is their best shot here with how favourable the biding field is. America seems to be really pressing to host in 2030, and have started the process in preparing their bid in the past few weeks. If it was Calgary versus US in 2030, Calgary is at a big disadvantage since the appeal of North America time slots would be satisfied with American games. Although America will already have the summer games going on in 2028, so Calgary could compete with the appeal of being a different country in that timezone region.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Calgary would have one advantage of SLC: America is still likely to be hated by most of the rest of the world, Canada not so much. Could easily see the OC's of various nations giving it to Canada to spite the US.

[GullFoss]

I really want to see a demographic breakdown of who voted which way:

- Ethnicity: White more likely to play the sports, but minorities like nenshi more and nenshi likes the games.

- Age: Old people have nostalgia, but are also stingy. Young people have FOMO, but also are struggling economically in this city.

- Income Level: The rich get the glory of the good events, but also end up footing more of the bill.

- Inner City vs Suburbs: The suburbs is where people have kids and kids play winter sports. But they also hate paying taxes. In the inner city, more people have cultural interests that are "beyond the games"

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Hackey

No city has actually bid yet. There are 3 cities who might bid. Stockholm sounds highly unlikely. So regardless of supposed interest the number of cities who actually bid has been steadily declining.

That includes for various reasons, including multiple cities delaying bids for future Olympic bids as well as repeat Olympic host cities applying again.

You are also implying that these cities withdrew for financial reasons, because ROI wasn't there. Dresden, for example, pulled out of the 2026 bidding process because a lack of Alpine Resorts would have forced them to use Czech venues, a similar problem with the Quebec City bid and a lack of available mountain for the downhill event.

Point is, not all cities withdraw simply because of bad economic optics - each has its own context for a multitude of reasons, and you cannot simplify it down to who actually submits a bid - that negates the greater pool of interested cities, some of which would be repeat hosting or have hosted other non-Olympic sporting events and wish to do so again.

[GullFoss]

At the end of the day, I didn't care enough about the olympics themselves to vote on the merit of the games or the bid. The bid is terrible and a giant inaccurate hack job. But the games would be cool and I'd have a good time.

But today I realized that Nenshi, Notely and Trudeau have all put more effort and shown more urgency for this olympic bid than they have into Alberta's economic recovery since late-2014. Voting no on this was a chance to give these politicians the big #### you. So I voted no.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

That includes for various reasons, including multiple cities delaying bids for future Olympic bids as well as repeat Olympic host cities applying again.

You are also implying that these cities withdrew for financial reasons, because ROI wasn't there. Dresden, for example, pulled out of the 2026 bidding process because a lack of Alpine Resorts would have forced them to use Czech venues, a similar problem with the Quebec City bid and a lack of available mountain for the downhill event.

Point is, not all cities withdraw simply because of bad economic optics - each has its own context for a multitude of reasons, and you cannot simplify it down to who actually submits a bid - that negates the greater pool of interested cities, some of which would be repeat hosting or have hosted other non-Olympic sporting events and wish to do so again.

Do you seriously believe there isn't significantly less interesting in hosting the Olympics than their used to be? They didn't institute Agenda 2020 for ####s and giggles after all.

[Travis Munroe]

Best case scenario for everyone to win is the no side comes out on top, the city says they are not bidding and the IOC steps up with a much larger chunk of cash.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

At the end of the day, I didn't care enough about the olympics themselves to vote on the merit of the games or the bid. The bid is terrible and a giant inaccurate hack job. But the games would be cool and I'd have a good time.

But today I realized that Nenshi, Notely and Trudeau have all put more effort and shown more urgency for this olympic bid than they have into Alberta's economic recovery since late-2014. Voting no on this was a chance to give these politicians the big #### you. So I voted no.

Ah, good ol' spite.

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

Best case scenario for everyone to win is the no side comes out on top, the city says they are not bidding and the IOC steps up with a much larger chunk of cash.

This seems quite unlikely.

More likely Stockholm or Italy get that larger chunk of cash. Or one of the former US Olympic cities like Salt Lake steps in to satisfy the desire for a NA timezone.

If the vote is a no, I can't see anyone involved having the political willingness to keep the 2026 plans going (or any other games in the foreseeable future), no matter how big the dump truck of money from the IOC.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

Best case scenario for everyone to win is the no side comes out on top, the city says they are not bidding and the IOC steps up with a much larger chunk of cash.

Well how much is much larger considering their initial offer is mostly consulting? I read a report mentioning their committed money is "goods and services" which amount to mostly consulting work. Maybe it was fear mongering but I don't think the IOC actually has a large swath of cash to throw around.

I'd be shocked if you get more cash from them.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Do you seriously believe there isn't significantly less interesting in hosting the Olympics than their used to be? They didn't institute Agenda 2020 for ####s and giggles after all.

That's not what I said, but good thing you're there with the mental gymnastics - very fitting with the Olympic theme here.

I am simply saying the less amount of bids for an Olympics is precluded with many more cities showing initial interest - year in and year out. Only those seriously considering a bid usually make it to the bid stage.

To say only a few cities are interested is disingenuous when all you are looking at is the final stage of bidding.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

That's not what I said, but good thing you're there with the mental gymnastics - very fitting with the Olympic theme here.

I am simply saying the less amount of bids for an Olympics is precluded with many more cities showing initial interest - year in and year out. Only those seriously considering a bid usually make it to the bid stage.

To say only a few cities are interested is disingenuous when all you are looking at is the final stage of bidding.

Actually making a bid shows true interest though. So if the actual bids are declining then I think its fair to say there is less interest. All the numbers I provided were actual bids. If in a 20 year span you go from 9 actual bids to potentially 1 or 2 how can that not show a decrease in interest? Anyone can walk into a store, only those truly interested will buy something.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

Best case scenario for everyone to win is the no side comes out on top, the city says they are not bidding and the IOC steps up with a much larger chunk of cash.

Would love to see this but seems unlikely.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

Best case scenario for everyone to win is the no side comes out on top, the city says they are not bidding and the IOC steps up with a much larger chunk of cash.

Seems to be lots of chatter the IOC has a handshake deal with SLC to step in if there ends up being no real bids for 2026. Would certainly explain why they've already refused to kick in more for Calgary's bid.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Actually making a bid shows true interest though. So if the actual bids are declining then I think its fair to say there is less interest. All the numbers I provided were actual bids. If in a 20 year span you go from 9 actual bids to potentially 1 or 2 how can that not show a decrease in interest? Anyone can walk into a store, only those truly interested will buy something.

I disagree with that sentiment, simply because of the volume of cities who form committees to explore bids, who go through the vetting process, as well as the number of cities who re-apply.

You are technically right - the number of actual bidding cities has dropped. But the same customers keep coming back in to the store - they obviously see something worth exploring, including people who have bought before.

But you can't slap the same reason for submitting bids (or not) on every city ad nauseam. It's disingenuous, partisan, and isn't as binary as you are leading on.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Seems to be lots of chatter the IOC has a handshake deal with SLC to step in if there ends up being no real bids for 2026. Would certainly explain why they've already refused to kick in more for Calgary's bid.

If Calgary is awarded (or is last standing), as Mary Moran suggested in my podcast the expected broadcast revenue is higher for North America, and as such, we could (and likely would) share in the upside of that increased revenue as we go to sign a host contract.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bunk

If Calgary is awarded (or is last standing), as Mary Moran suggested in my podcast the expected broadcast revenue is higher for North America, and as such, we could (and likely would) share in the upside of that increased revenue as we go to sign a host contract.

Well based of past history we can certainly bank on CTV grossly overpaying for broadcast rights.

[troutman]

I'm still struggling how to vote. In theory I am in favor of hosting, but I think this particular bid is weak.

[Red]

Originally Posted by troutman

I'm still struggling how to vote. In theory I am in favor of hosting, but I think this particular bid is weak.

Exactly how I thought. What pushed me was trying to look at what happens after the no or yes wins. Going over those scenarios made a hard decision easy.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by troutman

I'm still struggling how to vote. In theory I am in favor of hosting, but I think this particular bid is weak.

Head vs Heart

I was in the same spot as you.

I reckon there is more in this group than there is in the Yes or No group(s).

I voted NO.