When I'm on my deathbed, I want to remember 2026 as the year I saw the Olympics in my hometown. I don't want to be telling my grandchildren that I kvetched about infrastructure deficits. Time on this world is fleeting.
I say go for it.
Well feel free to pass all the stupid, unrealistic life lessons you want onto your grandchildren. Back here in the real world I have no interest in risking my hard-earned money on a two-week party.
As a city, we need to live within our means. This is the dumbest use of money imaginable and beyond what we can afford.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sliver For This Useful Post:
I say put a bid in, with the condition that Calgary not only gets the 2026 Olympics, but every Winter Olympics thereafter every 20 years (so 2046, 2066, 2086, etc).
The whole concept of "build it once and then walk away" is crazy. Rather, the Olympics should be held in 4 specific locations, each of which hosts on a rotating 20-year basis. For the Winter Olympics, have one in Calgary, one somewhere in Europe, one someone in Asia, and one in the US. For the Summer Olympics, have one in the US, one in Europe, one in Asia, and one in either Australia or South America.
I voted yes; But only because of the way the City is looking at running it. Their initial budget is 4.5-5 Billion and focusing on resuing of facilities. Yes, that could increase but I don't see it going crazy.
I have looked at his from a different way; What would the City of Calgary have to spend if they didn't host the Olympics.
- Upgrades to current legacy venues (Olympic Oval, Canmore Nordic Centre, Olympic Plaza, Saddledome, Winsport.
- Upgrades to the Stampede Grounds, and expansion of BMO Centre. (CMLC is currently developing a plan to do this)
- Construction of low-income housing
- Arena deal
- CMLC Victoria Park Master Plan
I also see the economic benefit being more than two weeks.
- Construction jobs to put people back to work; short-term but would be helpful.
- Construction of some new hotels (Building permit revenue)
- Olympians and there coaching staff will be living and be training in Calgary in the years leading up to the Olympics.
- Millennials are looking for experiences and for Calgary and Area to maintain to be a tourist destination we need to continue to create those opportunities.
- The expedited build out of East Village and Victoria Park, which will allow the City to close the current CRL sooner (Less Interest Paid)
- Improved convention space, ability to attract new conferences.
But there is one thing I see that is maybe being a bit overlooked; is the revenue stream from Advertisers and Media. 2026 is in a unique place where the 2024 Olympics are in Paris and the 2028 Olympics are in LA. Two very important markets where I think you will see increased marketing budgets. The 2026 host will get a spin-off as I think you will see bundled proposals to get all three.
Chris
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to CPK80 For This Useful Post:
- Upgrades to current legacy venues (Olympic Oval, Canmore Nordic Centre, Olympic Plaza, Saddledome, Winsport.
- Upgrades to the Stampede Grounds, and expansion of BMO Centre. (CMLC is currently developing a plan to do this)
- Construction of low-income housing
- Arena deal
- CMLC Victoria Park Master Plan
What values do you use for these Items to make up the 2.4 billion in shortfall. I did the same and came to the conclusion that the above costs somewhere in the 1.5 billion dollar range and the Olympic bids 2.4 billion didn't include a new arena. So the Olympic number is more like 2.7.
To it appears that hosting the Olympics is paying 1 - 1.5 billion dollars more for infrastructure than we need too.
Calgary has the benefit of even more in city facilities with what is left from the last Olympics.
We would certainly have to build infrastructure for the athletes but that isn't money down the toilet, that housing can be reused after the games.
The point isn't the "2 week event", it all comes down to dollars and cents. If the city can come even close to break even then we win with the legacy infrastructure.
IF is the word.
4.6 billion right now, with the number going up with as more information is released? you don't think that number isn't going to continue to go up over the next 5-7 years? even doing a hillbilly discount Olympics, I doubt it can break even.
I say put a bid in, with the condition that Calgary not only gets the 2026 Olympics, but every Winter Olympics thereafter every 20 years (so 2046, 2066, 2086, etc).
The whole concept of "build it once and then walk away" is crazy. Rather, the Olympics should be held in 4 specific locations, each of which hosts on a rotating 20-year basis. For the Winter Olympics, have one in Calgary, one somewhere in Europe, one someone in Asia, and one in the US. For the Summer Olympics, have one in the US, one in Europe, one in Asia, and one in either Australia or South America.
why Calgary and not Vancouver? they're better suited to run the Olympics on an ongoing basis, considering their current infrastructure.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Yeah it is likely that the cost comes in at over 5 Billion than anything resembling the 4.6B currently estimated which is already a bare bones budget.
I do wonder if the city expects the Flames to contribute to a new arena and stadium in this proposal, cause if I am them ...I tell 'em to take a hike. They want to build new facilities? Go ahead. Then after all that money has been sunk into those infrastructure projects, they will want tenants to offset ongoing costs. At that point the CSEC can play hardball on favorable leases as they will be the ONLY group in town with entities that can fill those spots.
I was front and center in attending/partying/ 88. It was the best two weeks in this city's history and selfishly I would love to see it again. Its still a horribly bad idea at this point though. The advantages we had in 88 to turn a profit/break even are long gone, so this will not be a repeat.
Fata it. Doesn't sound like it will be profitable so there's no point. I absolutely have no interest in paying a single penny for a bunch of 20 somethings to live out their dream of skeet shooting better than the other guy's who's dream it was to skeet shoot.
Question for the doubters...if Vancouver was able to do it, get a bunch of infrastructure projects, need to build a bunch of facilities, and didn't lose their shirt on it, why are you so doubtful we can't do the same? Comparing to Sochi is silly, BTW.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Holding the opening ceremony at McMahon would be pretty much a no go, we wouldn't get away with putting up temporary seats.
Why not? Pyeongchang's stadium was completely temporary and will be taken down now that the Paralympics are done. So I don't see why some temporary stands could be used, similar to what happens when the Grey Cup is in Calgary.
Why not? Pyeongchang's stadium was completely temporary and will be taken down now that the Paralympics are done. So I don't see why some temporary stands could be used, similar to what happens when the Grey Cup is in Calgary.
Cause it cost 110 million usd? The savings comes when you don't have to maintain it. The temporary stands Capt'n was talking about are probably like the bleachers you fold out in the gym during assembly.
The Temporary stands that they used at the Grey Cup, the ones that wobble in the slightest wind. The concourse is crap, its unheated they don't have room for food selection, there's a shortage of VIP facilities at McMahon. In terms of wired for modern broadcast, its one thing for a CFL game, the Olympics is a whole other thing.
I doubt they could pull off the type of opening ceremonies that the Olympics has today.
I mean 88 was cool and all, but the 88 opening ceremonies was the true definition of budget and cheesy
These aren't the same type of Winter Olympics as they were in 1988 where the Winter Olympics were truly the small Olympics and the summer olympics were a behemoth of spending.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Last edited by CaptainCrunch; 03-21-2018 at 08:40 AM.
wow, you have really drank the Kool-Aid haven't you?
I voted no - but I would be interested in a plebiscite - although great point about how a plebiscite should include more than just Calgary residents.
I just see this as another way for the government to saddle us with more debt.
So...if you think it's worth trying, you've "drank the Kool-aid"? What kind of discourse is that? We're here to discuss the pros and cons of going after it aren't we? How about a respectful discussion.
I happen to think the Olympics are very important. I don't blame people for being skeptical, or even cynical. The track record of requirements and cost control has been poor. The IOC has taken tangible, positive steps through its reform program Vision 2020 - which you can see some of the results of in the LA and Paris programs.
Forgive me for waxing poetic, but I think the games are important because they are one of the only true global events that brings humanity together for common cause, and cooperation. That has value. I also just think it's a hell of a lot of fun. If Calgary can truly be part of getting the games hosting situation back on track, and we can leverage that effort to our advantage knowing the IOC needs us more than we need them, let's go down the path. I've always said, if the terms are not favourable, or if demands return to being ridiculous, then we should be out. Full stop.
__________________
Trust the snake.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
it would be a disaster to host the Olympics, and then watch the Flames move away. Please pass that onto Nenshi for me, if they're so hell bent on hosting the Olympics for this council's legacy, at least go full idiot and pay for the bloody arena so that we have something to look forward to beyond a 2 week party.
People seem to forget I haven't been working for him for 3 years. Also, I work in the industry he supposedly despises. I have a mind of my own.
__________________
Trust the snake.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
IF is the word.
4.6 billion right now, with the number going up with as more information is released? you don't think that number isn't going to continue to go up over the next 5-7 years? even doing a hillbilly discount Olympics, I doubt it can break even.
The sticker shock is high.
But the number needs to be broken down:
How much revenue?
How much provincial $?
How much federal $? (would be nice to get more of our own tax $ back in our community)
How much for infrastructure that would be attributed to the games, but would be needed without the games?
How much for one time operating (security) versus long-lasting infrastructure?
That will be the most important aspect of understanding whether we should go for this or not.
__________________
Trust the snake.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post: