[News] UPD: Calgary City Council approves exploratory bid study for 2026 Olympics

[Weitz]

Leave the Olympics to Dictatorship type Countries. There's no place for a country like ours to be spending money we don't have on the Olympics of all things.

[NiklasSundblad]

Pretty tough pill to swallow if LRT infrastructure alone is already off the table if you ask me. My main reason for leaning towards being a supporter was an assumption that it would mean at least a Green Line build-out and an airport spur line.

[Tyler]

Everything is off the table!

This is the band-aid, slap it together Olympics with nothing new.

Arena and fieldhouse expected but not included in costs?

Stampede grandstand? Corral? No new transportation infrastructure?

What a freakin joke.

[Joborule]

Wait for the final report that indicates the costs and benefits, but if we aren't getting much infrastructure gains, and are spending billions for an expected loss of hundreds of millions, it's not worth it.

[stamps]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

so you'd forgo someone else paying for a new arena and perhaps a stadium, a LRT line and housing because 2 or 3 hockey games were in Edmonton?
it's one thing to hate Edmonton, but there is a point when you have to put on some big boy pants and at least act grownup.

I do not feel the need nor want to share a bid with that city , this is about our city and region .... If the province will not accept a bid for our region because the city of Edmonton will get hurt feelings then let it die .... It would be truly sad that our government is make making decisions for our city and region based on the hurt feelings of Edmonton ....

[Joborule]

Where is this even coming from? Do you have a link or quote that indicates it's being considered, or just saying?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Hmmm. Ballpark capital spend numbers, without any detail and in fact leaving out the most expensive items. Where have I heard that before?

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Where is this even coming from? Do you have a link or quote that indicates it's being considered, or just saying?

I think it was just general chat. someone thought it might be easier to get provincial money if something was done in Edmonton. using rogers as a secondary hockey arena perhaps. also a way to maximize revenue. the chance to sell 18,000 tickets instead of 3000.

I don't think it's actually being considered.

leaving that aside, the mcleans column does have a point. if the Olympics are done on the cheap, there doesn't seem to be many long term benefits for the city of Calgary.

[Southside]

Looks like there will be some butthurt up north if Calgary hosts another Olympic Games.

[HHW]

I actually like the idea of giving Deadmonton a couple of second rate games etc as long as the bid is still Calgary's in name.They can come to our soirée as long as they forego the sweatpants and keep it clean.

This would show the world who really runs things in the province and put Edmonton in its proper place as the backup

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Cappy

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/c...ount-olympics/

Jason Markusoff with a good article on the proposal today. By the sounds of it, the 4 billion doesn't include a new arena or many other infrastructure upgrades. This is about as low cost as you can get for an Olympics in Canada and it's still a huge price tag with little economic payoff.

Based on the report I would say the committee did a great job trying to limit costs and not offer massive vanity projects. But it's still tough to swallow

Now that's how you properly assess and oppose an Olympic bid.

This article has me leaning towards "no thanks". Not enough infrastructure that we want/need for the price.

I really thought a budget games would have given a bit more infrastructure for a bit less money. Glad to see the committee is taking the exact right approach here.

[Stay Golden]

If the current Mayor and council was in place in 1988. We never would have hosted the Winter Olympics. Calgary would never have these fantastic facilities or the legacy.

[Muta]

Another benefit to upgrading all winter sports infrastructure in and around Calgary is the ability to attract future non-Olympic international competitions, tournaments and events, which contributes to the local economy in the long term. I do know that the Nordic Centre has to be upgraded if they have any hope of hosting the major biathalon events in the future. This is just one example, as well.

[NiklasSundblad]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Everything is off the table!

This is the band-aid, slap it together Olympics with nothing new.

Arena and fieldhouse expected but not included in costs?

Stampede grandstand? Corral? No new transportation infrastructure?

What a freakin joke.

Yeah, I meant that the LRT portion alone was enough to make me opposed, never mind the Fieldhouse, Stadium, and new arena. This is why modern, western nations have started avoiding the IOC like the plague though. They make off like bandits and the local populace is left with a multi-billion dollar bill.
This direction is clearly designed to limit the costs to what they hope will be acceptable levels, but in the end, it's almost impossible to justify.

I am a little curious why the fieldhouse would be needed for the winter olympics.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I was thinking the Olympics would likely make those things more likely to happen with funding from more levels of government.

I don't get the attitude from some that if Edmonton even gets a sniff of a sport, then they don't want the Olympics. seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Well, strictly from a logistics point of view it really doesnt make much sense, right now the only thing Edmonton can offer that would be of any assistance to hosting Olympic events is Roger's Place. The New Arena.

Everything else is logistically closer and better in Calgary, close to Canmore, Banff and the Mountains, you know, 'Wintery' stuff.

Plus Calgary has experience.

So plunk a new Arena in Calgary and logistically why would you include Edmonton? It doesnt make any sense.

Really, this is the crux of the issue, including Edmonton would be the definition of 'throwing them a bone.'

Neither City should want that.

Edmonton should stand on their own two feet like Big Boys rather than trailing around behind us like a kid brother.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

There's one question: can the games break even, or come within striking distance, while allowing for new infrastructure to be built. That's all that matters.

If the answer is yes, and the city (and region, because Banff) gets new facilities and transit and road improvements built a large portion of which is covered by the revenue that the Games generates, awesome. Even if it takes a bit of a loss, that's manageable, because it's a great thing for the city to host and we end up better than we were before. If it's a money pit, then obviously, no dice.

The 2010 games were good for Vancouver. It was, in hindsight a good idea for that city to host them, and that's even with the many mistakes that were made in the process that increased the costs. That's possible here, too, isn't it? If not, hard pass, obviously.

[Weitz]

Where would they hold Ski stuff? Nakiska is too small now and didn't the National Park/Banff say they had no interest in having the Olympics?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Where would they hold Ski stuff? Nakiska is too small now and didn't the National Park/Banff say they had no interest in having the Olympics?

Rumour has it Nakiska is still tall enough to hold the ski events, although certain parties are pushing for Lake Louise or nothing. Parks Canada, so far, is giving it a hard 'no', but who knows what the future holds.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

There's one question: can the games break even, or come within striking distance, while allowing for new infrastructure to be built. That's all that matters.

If the answer is yes, and the city (and region, because Banff) gets new facilities and transit and road improvements built a large portion of which is covered by the revenue that the Games generates, awesome. Even if it takes a bit of a loss, that's manageable, because it's a great thing for the city to host and we end up better than we were before. If it's a money pit, then obviously, no dice.

The 2010 games were good for Vancouver. It was, in hindsight a good idea for that city to host them, and that's even with the many mistakes that were made in the process that increased the costs. That's possible here, too, isn't it? If not, hard pass, obviously.

Precisely.

If we can upgrade our infrastructure as well as improving our Image on the World Stage while passing a few bucks on to other levels of Government or the IOC or whomever then great, I'm in 100%.

If its a Sochi-esque Boondoggle then its a hard 'No.'

Its a balancing act. Some venues put too much emphasis on being celebrated for hosting the Olympics, thats secondary or even in some cases tertiary.

The best part of the Olympics is when all of the people leave and we're left with all of the great stuff that they helped to pay for.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Muta

Rumour has it Nakiska is still tall enough to hold the ski events, although certain parties are pushing for Lake Louise or nothing. Parks Canada, so far, is giving it a hard 'no', but who knows what the future holds.

Heres the thing: If we were to be approved for an Olympics then Parks Canada will do as they're told.