10-04-2022, 12:52 PM
|
#2
|
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the middle
|
If the province wants to foot the bill, we'd be stupid as a city not to want to go all in on it.
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 12:54 PM
|
#3
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
We could finally get a new arena!
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 12:56 PM
|
#4
|
|
THE Chuck Storm
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
If the province wants to foot the bill, we'd be stupid as a city not to want to go all in on it.
|
Not to mention the Federal dollars that would flow in....
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:00 PM
|
#5
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemgear
|
Good - I was on the last Olympic bid for 2026. I thought it was absolutely stupid we voted it down yet expect all the associated infrastructure. Winsport seriously needed to the Olympics to even survive not to mention what shape McMahon is in on top of needing a new Arena. Why wouldn't you do this and get the incremental benefit of Olympic, Federal and Provincial dollars?
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Leondros For This Useful Post:
|
BeltlineFan,
Coach,
craigwd,
Enoch Root,
Erick Estrada,
Fire,
Ironhorse,
Joborule,
kevman,
mac_82,
Mr.Coffee,
Muta,
Sainters7,
Scroopy Noopers,
Sr. Mints
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:09 PM
|
#6
|
|
Scoring Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leondros
Good - I was on the last Olympic bid for 2026. I thought it was absolutely stupid we voted it down yet expect all the associated infrastructure. Winsport seriously needed to the Olympics to even survive not to mention what shape McMahon is in on top of needing a new Arena. Why wouldn't you do this and get the incremental benefit of Olympic, Federal and Provincial dollars?
|
Because the committee did a piss poor job showing the math to the people. Prove it would not be another boondoggle and it would have passed easily. That was not done. Based on what was presented it was not the voters that were stupid.
__________________
We are cheering for laundry
Dino7c
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Titan2 For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:11 PM
|
#7
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
|
I will gladly have a party in my city and all the associated infrastructure on someone else's dime. 'bout time. If its net-positive to Calgarians (including our share of provincial and federal funds) then why the hell not.
That should have been the slogan last time..."'bout time we got something with someone else's money".
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:11 PM
|
#8
|
|
Franchise Player
|
I mean Calgary should just be in the regular rotation for Winter Olympics. Perfect city for it.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:14 PM
|
#9
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SW Calgary
|
Sounds good, I'm in
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:14 PM
|
#10
|
|
wins 10 internets
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: slightly to the left
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leondros
Good - I was on the last Olympic bid for 2026. I thought it was absolutely stupid we voted it down yet expect all the associated infrastructure. Winsport seriously needed to the Olympics to even survive not to mention what shape McMahon is in on top of needing a new Arena. Why wouldn't you do this and get the incremental benefit of Olympic, Federal and Provincial dollars?
|
The city, province, nor country should be spending tax dollars that flow directly into such a corrupt organization as the IOC. It would be best if no country gave into their demands to be host, and either force some kind of reforms within the IOC or let it die
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hemi-Cuda For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:20 PM
|
#11
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Interesting to see that the "winning" Italian bid is already looking at nearly 40% budget overrun with 4 more years left to balloon. (Probably end up what, at least double their original budget probably?) The host cities are getting squeezed.
Maybe I'll attend another Olympics - nice to ride a free party that somebody else is paying for.
https://www.insidethegames.biz/artic...ina-costs-rise
In June, local politicians voiced their concerns over the funding for the Olympics and Paralympics.
The new overall costs of the next scheduled Winter Olympics total an estimated €2.165 billion (£1.821 billion/$2.203 billion).
The Games had been given a budget of €1.58 billion (£1.3 billion/$1.6 billion).
Government representatives from Milan and Cortina d’Ampezzo, co-hosts of the 2026 Winter Olympics, as well as from the regions of Lombardy and Veneto and provinces of Trento and Bolzano signed a letter demanding for the meeting.
According to Il Fatto Quotidiano, which obtained a copy of the letter, the officials alleged there was "no money" for Milan Cortina 2026 and remarked "there are four years left and we are worried."
Last edited by chemgear; 10-04-2022 at 01:24 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:22 PM
|
#12
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Titan2
Because the committee did a piss poor job showing the math to the people. Prove it would not be another boondoggle and it would have passed easily. That was not done. Based on what was presented it was not the voters that were stupid.
|
There was a 56 page report commissioned and conducted by one of the big 4 firms and did an extensive cost-benefit analysis. The voters were stupid...
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Leondros For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:23 PM
|
#13
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda
The city, province, nor country should be spending tax dollars that flow directly into such a corrupt organization as the IOC. It would be best if no country gave into their demands to be host, and either force some kind of reforms within the IOC or let it die
|
Agree to disagree - we left a lot of money on the table regardless based on our decision.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Leondros For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:43 PM
|
#14
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Looks like budget overruns average 172% for Olympic bids forecasts since 1960.
Almost not sure why you'd bother making up cost benefits when you are purposely lowballing numbers to the people footing the bill. Well, actually I get they make it up I guess. Nearly triple the costs they claim, wild.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 01:59 PM
|
#15
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leondros
There was a 56 page report commissioned and conducted by one of the big 4 firms and did an extensive cost-benefit analysis. The voters were stupid...
|
When I worked in sales, every customer who never bought what we were selling was stupid.
Psst. That means you didn't do a good job selling it.
Yes, I agree in hindsight that the infrastructure spending we could have benefitted from would have been significant. But even Nenshi himself lamented not better selling that benefit of the Olympic bid to the public on a podcast after he left office.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 02:44 PM
|
#16
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorqueDog
But even Nenshi himself lamented not better selling that benefit of the Olympic bid to the public on a podcast after he left office.
|
I lost a lot of respect for Nenshi when he kept parroting the outright lie of a "1000% percent return on investment" and "OMGWTFBBQ it's a 10 to 1 ROI!!!". It was a clear lie and insulting to the intelligence of Calgarians, one that would have you laughed at and sent to jail by the ASC if you ran a business or tried to sell an investment that way.
Nevermind being caught operating bots in order to swing public opinion polls, claiming to have insurance for cost overruns when such insurance never existed, lowballing security costs by multiple times and trying to explain it away as being able to find volunteers instead, etc. No need to rehash or refresh people's memories about the gongshow of the lowball budget that no one had faith in.
Hey, I'm all for free party if somebody is paying for it with free money. But it was never going to be true, it was never going to be free money, the budget that was being presented was poo. It was going to be a ####show moneywise as all Olympics always are. And we were going to be paying for a ####ton of it.
Last edited by chemgear; 10-04-2022 at 02:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 03:06 PM
|
#17
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SW Calgary
|
Was all for it last time and would be all for it this time
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to btimbit For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 03:11 PM
|
#18
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
1000% for this. Last bid, for every invested dollar by the City, we would have seen $5 in additional investment. Hopefully this is communicated better this time and the numbers are similar if seriously pursued. Rare opportunity to get our badly outdated sports and rec infrastructure repaired and redeveloped, and a good chunk of it paid for by others (province, feds, IOC, private).
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Muta For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 03:53 PM
|
#19
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemgear
Looks like budget overruns average 172% for Olympic bids forecasts since 1960.
Almost not sure why you'd bother making up cost benefits when you are purposely lowballing numbers to the people footing the bill. Well, actually I get they make it up I guess. Nearly triple the costs they claim, wild.
|
Got any data on summer vs winter? I imagine 172% is greatly skewed by summer since it is so much bigger and needs so many facilities. Winter gets to benefit greatly from gravity and mountains being free.
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2022, 04:01 PM
|
#20
|
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leondros
There was a 56 page report commissioned and conducted by one of the big 4 firms and did an extensive cost-benefit analysis. The voters were stupid...
|
My parents voted against it. They didn't read the doc...and they'll be retired in Phoenix when the games go forward.
The city I live in now got the summer Olympics. They bid purely for the infrastructure. Think of all the projects that would've gotten approved with vivid with federal cash. It makes me cringe what Calgary voters turned down.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rutuu For This Useful Post:
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:19 PM.
|
|
