Should Calgary Bid on the 2026 Olympics

[Red]

I know that people are cost conscious. But the benefits of such an even are huge and long lasting.

The construction boom and everything downstream would be a huge benefit to counter that last few years of recession. That's a few years of a massive boom.

The money that would come here around the event time would help local venues.

The infrastructure built or upgraded would be a benefit to Calgarians for decades.

Expensive? Sure, but if you think about, if we don't break even this isn't really much more than we pay for the bins (150mil per year from taxpayers). Just spread it over the next 10 - 15 years.

I would love the games here. Being in the spotlight, ability to attend and the infrastructure after? Sign me up. I am ok with a few more $$$ in taxes when it can provide 1000's of local people to make a ton of $$$ in the next few years.

[Wormius]

Hey Bunk, I noticed you are hosting an event at Thorncliff. What’s this going to be about?

[getbak]

Say "Sayonara" to Sion: https://gamesbids.com/eng/featured/v...-swiss-dreams/

The bid that was likely to be Calgary's biggest competition will not go ahead after local voters rejected it on Sunday.



Also, the Calgary Assessment Committee will be reviewing the Bid Book requirements this week. Here's a powerpoint presentation on it: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....cumentId=51707

There's not any new information in this. There is an interesting rendering on Page 25 of a small hockey venue that is definitely not the Corral or any other existing venue I'm aware of in Calgary.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by getbak

Say "Sayonara" to Sion: https://gamesbids.com/eng/featured/v...-swiss-dreams/

The bid that was likely to be Calgary's biggest competition will not go ahead after local voters rejected it on Sunday.



Also, the Calgary Assessment Committee will be reviewing the Bid Book requirements this week. Here's a powerpoint presentation on it: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....cumentId=51707

There's not any new information in this. There is an interesting rendering on Page 25 of a small hockey venue that is definitely not the Corral or any other existing venue I'm aware of in Calgary.

I thought the biggest competition is Turin because its where they meet to make the final decision?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Slava

I thought the biggest competition is Turin because its where they meet to make the final decision?

No. The vote is scheduled to be held in Milan, but if the Italian bid is one of the finalists, the meeting will have to be moved because the IOC rules don't allow a candidate city to host the vote.

If anything, that makes it more likely that Italy will drop its bid before the vote takes place.

As it stands, the Italian bid submission was so last-minute that they haven't even decided which city will be the Candidate City. They also don't have any government support at this point.

[Bunk]

I’d think if Calgary wants it, we can have it.

Leverage this to our advantage.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I’d think if Calgary wants it, we can have it.

Leverage this to our advantage.

Yup.

Stockholm and Turin/Milan/Cortina d’Ampezzo are still trying to get political support for their bids and there's a good chance they fall apart before September.

Graz was a late switch for Austria after the Innsbruck bid lost support and is facing its own local opposition.

Sapporo appears to be leaning towards pulling out and moving to a 2030 bid.

Going to a relatively small and remote city in eastern Turkey that would need to build new facilities for virtually every sport is not likely to be the IOC's preferred destination for its new cost-effective hosting plan.

[CliffFletcher]

It's worth considering why all these bids are falling apart when local citizens have a say.

[Freeway]

The IOC's sponsors are primarily North American, and they've been giving the IOC the gears over Asian and European games with low, low ratings.

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by Red

I know that people are cost conscious. But the benefits of such an even are huge and long lasting.

The construction boom and everything downstream would be a huge benefit to counter that last few years of recession. That's a few years of a massive boom.

The money that would come here around the event time would help local venues.

The infrastructure built or upgraded would be a benefit to Calgarians for decades.

Expensive? Sure, but if you think about, if we don't break even this isn't really much more than we pay for the bins (150mil per year from taxpayers). Just spread it over the next 10 - 15 years.

I would love the games here. Being in the spotlight, ability to attend and the infrastructure after? Sign me up. I am ok with a few more $$$ in taxes when it can provide 1000's of local people to make a ton of $$$ in the next few years.

Thanks for this. I haven't read every post in this thread but this is one of the few that gives a bit better perspective on the "pro" side.

I'm still against it despite watching as much of the olympics as possible every two years. Ticket prices will likely be pricey, and a lot of the sports aren't particularly spectator friendly anyway.

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I’d think if Calgary wants it, we can have it.

Leverage this to our advantage.

We are building an arena, and the IOC's paying for it!!!!

[getbak]

It looks like we should have a pretty good idea about what they're looking at for venues and cost by the end of the month...

http://www.calgarycitynews.com/2018/...lympic_11.html

June is an important month for Calgary’s potential bid on the 2026 Games. Here are some project milestones:

• June 8-10: Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) Board meeting in Banff: Calgary Mayor and BidCo Chair attending.
• June 19: IOC-Calgary bid team meeting in Switzerland. One City employees are expected to attend; the IOC is funding the trip.June 23: COC decides whether to endorse Calgary’s bid.
• June 25: Regular Meeting of Council: government submission review.
• June 30: Deadline to submit government submission: details the operating and capital costs of the 2026 Games; mission, vision and value of the 2026 Games; Games concept: venues and locations; governance; communications; Bid Corporation; risks and mitigation; and milestone schedule.
• July-August 2018: Committee meetings continue, as required.
• July-August 2018: Government submission analysis and multi-party agreement negotiations for 2026 Games cost to The City and the governments of Canada and Alberta.
• September 2018: Multi-party agreement results, including cost of the Games and who is paying what amount.
• October 2018: IOC formally invites cities to bid on the 2026 Games (candidature stage)
• November 2018: Calgary plebiscite: citizens vote on whether or not Calgary should bid on the 2026 Games.
• January 11, 2019: IOC deadline to submit Bid Book.

[Nage Waza]

Probably posted already, but why the 'Determine by Plebiscite' option? You can be yes or no, and yes or no to plebiscite.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Probably posted already, but why the 'Determine by Plebiscite' option? You can be yes or no, and yes or no to plebiscite.

To find out whether most people are yes... or no...

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Freeway

The IOC's sponsors are primarily North American, and they've been giving the IOC the gears over Asian and European games with low, low ratings.

True story: The ratings for 2012 in London were much better than for 2016 in Rio, despite Rio obviously being clearly better far as getting live events in US primetime. Cord cutting and the growing irrelevancy of the Olympics (a part that really should be talked about more) are far greater factors. Nevermind that NBC doesn't even show most events live, but that's what the sponsors actually want.

Anyway congrats to the Swiss people, another Olympic bid that fails when put to the general public. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe every plebiscite has failed now, or at least every recent one has failed. Here's hoping Calgary joins the list, my dream of no bids is coming closer to fruition.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

To find out whether most people are yes... or no...

And based on the results right now, you don't have that answer. 11% of the vote is for plebiscite, which is also more than the difference between yes or no. Yes or no in this poll would have given that certainty. Currently, the poll is wrong.

Two polls, one with yes/no and the other to pick plebiscite or city council or mayor would have been appropriate.

Reminds me of hockey pools that include wins-losses*shutouts to score goalies.

The poll could have asked for a) yes b) no c) Oilers suck, it would create a similar error as this poll.

[4X4]

The reason I asked for that third option was to allow for people (such as myself) that are ok with Yes or No, as long as it was determined by plebiscite. Yes is a hard Yes. No is a hard No. Determine by Plebiscite is Whatever the Majority Votes For. AKA, majority rules, or in more simple terms, democracy.

Nothing wrong with any answer. Just that some people have their opinion, but are willing to concede to the majority vote.

Chill, Nage.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by 4X4

The reason I asked for that third option was to allow for people (such as myself) that are ok with Yes or No, as long as it was determined by plebiscite. Yes is a hard Yes. No is a hard No. Determine by Plebiscite is Whatever the Majority Votes For. AKA, majority rules, or in more simple terms, democracy.

Nothing wrong with any answer. Just that some people have their opinion, but are willing to concede to the majority vote.

Chill, Nage.

I understand your point, but it muddied your results. If you were curious how many would vote Y/N, you didn't really get that answer.

Nothing to chill about, just pointing out the math.

[4X4]

I think it makes it pretty clear that there are yesses, nos, and people that swing the vote. If you want a scientific poll, call Ipsos. This is Calgarypuck. It's a general sentiment.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

And based on the results right now, you don't have that answer. 11% of the vote is for plebiscite, which is also more than the difference between yes or no. Yes or no in this poll would have given that certainty. Currently, the poll is wrong.

Two polls, one with yes/no and the other to pick plebiscite or city council or mayor would have been appropriate.

Reminds me of hockey pools that include wins-losses*shutouts to score goalies.

The poll could have asked for a) yes b) no c) Oilers suck, it would create a similar error as this poll.

I think you may have struck gold with this one. I vote we add this option to every poll going forward!