Should Calgary Bid on the 2026 Olympics

[RoadGame]

Originally Posted by GGG

Isn't that a smart thing for Nenshi to be asking. Finding a way to meet the federal requirements to access more federal dollars without adding city Dollars. This is precisely his job on this bid.

Depending on the timing of this email it does align with Nenshi's positon that he told the fed's that the matching spending requirement was untenable.

If you want gov't dollars you play the game. While I respect the moral absolutism of the anti-subsidy boy scouts (and generally don't like subsidies either, myself) I'll gladly vote yes to repatriate a big chunk of transfer payment dollars.

Edit: -1 to Nenshi & Co., however, for this playing out in public at the 11th hour. That kind of arrangement was what needed to happen, but weeks ago without the brinksmanship.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GGG

Isn't that a smart thing for Nenshi to be asking. Finding a way to meet the federal requirements to access more federal dollars without adding city Dollars. This is precisely his job on this bid.

Depending on the timing of this email it does align with Nenshi's positon that he told the fed's that the matching spending requirement was untenable.

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I despise Nenshi, but that seems completely reasonable?

If you need the green line infrastructure to support the Olympics, it makes sense to at least ask the question. Especially if you're trying to get the Federal government to match dollar for dollar...

I didn't say it was stupid, I was it was desperate. He wants this bid pretty much no matter what (including already cutting housing) and will find the accounting to make it seem decent. If there were a decent financial plan here, he wouldn't need to be reaching so much.

[bizaro86]

Didn't the feds already provide matching dollars for the Green line?

If not, this is a great idea. Put the line into the games bucket and get some extra matching dollars.

[GGG]

Is the whole IOC should contribute more line of thought valid.

The IOC gets around 4 billion in TV rights for a 4 year cycle and 1 billion in sponsorship revenue.

https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/D...-File-2018.pdf

So what are the winter games worth? The IOC has committed 925 US to the bid. So 20% of total revenue. There are about 11,500 athletes at the Summer games and 3000 athletes at the winter games.

This all seems pretty reasonable. The only answer is cut scope. Cut out Facilities, Athletes, and Media to reduce number of facilities, accommodation, and security costs. Increase Olympic standards and make sports less inclusive, Cut the Ski Jump facility unless the country already has one. Limit the amount of Media credentials handed out by half.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Didn't the feds already provide matching dollars for the Green line?

If not, this is a great idea. Put the line into the games bucket and get some extra matching dollars.

Yes, that's probably why the answer was no for using the Green Line but they were able to use the Victoria Park/Stampede Park upgrades instead since the feds hadn't already committed any money to that.



It did make me think of another large sports project that the city has been in negotiations on recently that would definitely be used as an Olympic venue if it was built...

[MolsonInBothHands]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I didn't say it was stupid, I was it was desperate. He wants this bid pretty much no matter what (including already cutting housing) and will find the accounting to make it seem decent. If there were a decent financial plan here, he wouldn't need to be reaching so much.

I don't understand the interpretation of desperation, and I am by no means a Nenshi fan. To me, it's a valid question, and the opposite of desperation. He isn't willing to sink more money into the bid, but is willing to see if money already allocated to other projects can be considered as part of the commitment.

As a business owner we are always looking at ways to allocate money we are spending anyway to try and receive further grants or subsidy from the feds. I have no problem with that strategy at all.

[transplant99]

This was so predictable...lol.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I didn't say it was stupid, I was it was desperate. He wants this bid pretty much no matter what (including already cutting housing) and will find the accounting to make it seem decent. If there were a decent financial plan here, he wouldn't need to be reaching so much.

I don't think that is desperate. Its looking for a way for the city and province to contribute less than half because the games don't make sense if they contribute half.

This is a person who recognizes that their is a certain value of hosting the Olympics to the city and is unwilling to spend more to make it happen. Regardless of what the financial plan was it would always make sense for the city to push for the feds to contribute more and the Province and City less.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by getbak

Yes, that's probably why the answer was no for using the Green Line but they were able to use the Victoria Park/Stampede Park upgrades instead since the feds hadn't already committed any money to that.



It did make me think of another large sports project that the city has been in negotiations on recently that would definitely be used as an Olympic venue if it was built...

That's already in the city dollars for the bid under "5000 seat arena and "find somewhere to host curling."

[Senator Clay Davis]

So the "insurance" they want doesn't actually exist.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1057687850576039936

When I say desperate, I mean they just want this pass, and are doing everything to get it done, regardless of how impossible or ridiculous it is.

[llwhiteoutll]

Isn't this whole new funding model just a PROPOSAL at this point and the province/feds have not agreed to it yet? And what's to stop the feds from using Nenshi's logic? He wants to count city money towards Calgary spending, so Ottawa should count their contribution to the Green Line as well, reduce their commitment that way.

If so, council should be voting as if it doesn't exist. Because what happens if they decide to continue and the proposal isn't accepted? We go to the plebiscite and risk a yes vote on a games with no funding in place?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

So the "insurance" they want doesn't actually exist.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1057687850576039936

When I say desperate, I mean they just want this pass, and are doing everything to get it done, regardless of how impossible or ridiculous it is.

Yeah, that one kind of jumped out at me as well.

"Insurance on Olympic overruns."

Who in their right mind would be willing to insure that? That sounds like a sucker's bet.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think that is desperate. Its looking for a way for the city and province to contribute less than half because the games don't make sense if they contribute half.

This is a person who recognizes that their is a certain value of hosting the Olympics to the city and is unwilling to spend more to make it happen. Regardless of what the financial plan was it would always make sense for the city to push for the feds to contribute more and the Province and City less.

As we all know, the real value in hosting the Olympics is infrastructure. Considering they are already moving the athletes village around to....somewhere....and have already cut housing, this pathetically weak infrastructure games is even weaker. Also today it was confirmed there's no back door to getting a Flames arena, so even that hope is gone. We're paying to upkeep Winsport essentially. That is abysmal financial value.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yeah, that one kind of jumped out at me as well.

"Insurance on Olympic overruns."

Who in their right mind would be willing to insure that? That sounds like a sucker's bet.

Not to mention that a $200 million policy wouldn’t cover a lot in terms of Olympic overruns

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

So the "insurance" they want doesn't actually exist.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1057687850576039936

When I say desperate, I mean they just want this pass, and are doing everything to get it done, regardless of how impossible or ridiculous it is.

If this was the case wouldn't BidCo have put out a lowballed number eliminating 500 million of contingency and making the whole problem disappear and no one being the wiser.

I think this is much more a group that was Host the Olympics if it makes sense are doing what they can to secure the funding they require to make the deal make sense.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Because what happens if they decide to continue and the proposal isn't accepted? We go to the plebiscite and risk a yes vote on a games with no funding in place?

That's why it's a non-binding plebiscite. Even if the vote goes yes, it doesn't mean that the bid will absolutely go through no matter what.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

As we all know, the real value in hosting the Olympics is infrastructure. Considering they are already moving the athletes village around to....somewhere....and have already cut housing, this pathetically weak infrastructure games is even weaker. Also today it was confirmed there's no back door to getting a Flames arena, so even that hope is gone. We're paying to upkeep Winsport essentially. That is abysmal financial value.

I'm waiting until we get the final numbers after today rather than the tweet length reactions. But in general I agree that before today there wasn't good value in hosting the Olympics and nothing that has came out has changed that. I just don't think your characterization of the people organizing the bid is fair.

I missed where the back door flames arena was eliminated as a possibility. Without that announcement before the bid this thing was dead in the water from the start.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GGG

I just don't think your characterization of the people organizing the bid is fair.

I think it is. This is now unquestionably a "no-bid contract", there is no one but Calgary who has even the slightest federal support. Calgary doesn't need to rush this through, and given what a debacle the process has been, having the plebiscite in the new year when everything has cleared up makes far more sense. But the organizers of the BidCo and YesCalgary are trying to ram this thing through now, hence why they've turned up the emotional push rather than the logical one.

[chemgear]

What a ####ing ####show. Zero confidence they know what they are doing, all just rushing to ram something, anything through.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Locke

Really? Thats how you view the guy standing up and saying that if the Feds dont cough up more cash hes going to kill the proposal?

Ummm....yes?