Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have never researched how much it cost Atlanta to host the Olympics or if they were left with a big debt.
$1.8 billion (in 1996 dollars)
Atlanta, and previously LA, used a model where ticket sales and sponsorships would pay for the games/events/stadiums.
This is what was so controversial in Europe, in particular, that really gave us so much bad publicity (before the bombing) that made outsiders not like the Atlanta Olympics.
Now what is funny is, it has become the model to look at (London for example).
Atlanta turned a $10 million profit.
Now with that said.... that spending does not include expansions in our public infrastructure (not stadiums) to the tune of $500 million. This includes things that did help pay for themselves via normal funding (airport expansion and the fees the airlines paid to fly there) and things taxpayers bought directly, expanded roads, parks, etc..
The nice thing about that cost is all of it went to help the city as a whole. It wasn't just for the Olympics and some of it would have been done eventually anyways. The nicest perks were the things that made us think big, like Centennial Olympic Park. It is hard to explain just how much that has helped the area 18 years later.
In short there is a cost, but most of it will be money towards public infrastructure the city will eventually need to build anyways. The difference is your moving the cost into a large up front investment, which creates added borrowing costs (probably around tens of millions).
For Atlanta the investment was worth every penny, because it paid for our future growth, and it increase land values intown in the long-run and led to a strong urban renewal in the mid 90s most cities didn't have until the late 90s/early 2000s.
Charlotte would have a few things going against it and a few things for it.... Against is LRT in mixed roads is hard to beef up in a large way for a HUGE amount of spectators for something as large as the Olympics. It would also need connections to the airport and there would need to be more private investment in hotels. Atlanta, luckily, already had a huge convention industry and many hotel rooms. We also had the HRT system to the airport, but it was overburdened and wasn't large enough despite being much higher capacity and frequency than an LRT system with street crossings.
The major benefits are that Atlanta spread the games out... Stone Mountain, Savannah, Athens, and even had a few events in DC. Charlotte could make use of the mid-size metros, especially near the Research Triangle to handle some large events.
Atlanta, and previously LA, used a model where ticket sales and sponsorships would pay for the games/events/stadiums.
This is what was so controversial in Europe, in particular, that really gave us so much bad publicity (before the bombing) that made outsiders not like the Atlanta Olympics.
Now what is funny is, it has become the model to look at (London for example).
Atlanta turned a $10 million profit.
Now with that said.... that spending does not include expansions in our public infrastructure (not stadiums) to the tune of $500 million. This includes things that did help pay for themselves via normal funding (airport expansion and the fees the airlines paid to fly there) and things taxpayers bought directly, expanded roads, parks, etc..
The nice thing about that cost is all of it went to help the city as a whole. It wasn't just for the Olympics and some of it would have been done eventually anyways. The nicest perks were the things that made us think big, like Centennial Olympic Park. It is hard to explain just how much that has helped the area 18 years later.
In short there is a cost, but most of it will be money towards public infrastructure the city will eventually need to build anyways. The difference is your moving the cost into a large up front investment, which creates added borrowing costs (probably around tens of millions).
For Atlanta the investment was worth every penny, because it paid for our future growth, and it increase land values intown in the long-run and led to a strong urban renewal in the mid 90s most cities didn't have until the late 90s/early 2000s.
Charlotte would have a few things going against it and a few things for it.... Against is LRT in mixed roads is hard to beef up in a large way for a HUGE amount of spectators for something as large as the Olympics. It would also need connections to the airport and there would need to be more private investment in hotels. Atlanta, luckily, already had a huge convention industry and many hotel rooms. We also had the HRT system to the airport, but it was overburdened and wasn't large enough despite being much higher capacity and frequency than an LRT system with street crossings.
The major benefits are that Atlanta spread the games out... Stone Mountain, Savannah, Athens, and even had a few events in DC. Charlotte could make use of the mid-size metros, especially near the Research Triangle to handle some large events.
Very good points all around. And I didn't know Atlanta actually turned a profit; good stuff.
Your last point is something I've heard thrown around also. Charlotte has a great location, being centralized among several midsized metros in the Carolinas. Some coastal events could go to Wilmington, Myrtle Beach, and Charleston, Columbia and Greensboro have some pretty sizable facilities, Asheville and Greenville could handle a few events; even suburban Rock Hill, which is carving out a nice sports tourism niche, could get in on some of the action. Of course, this would be after the city of Charlotte itself has gotten to a place where it could handle all of the demands of hosting an Olympics, which is still at least a good 20-30 years out IMO.
For Atlanta the investment was worth every penny, because it paid for our future growth, and it increase land values intown in the long-run and led to a strong urban renewal in the mid 90s most cities didn't have until the late 90s/early 2000s.
Restated, this means that Atlanta doesn't have a growth model that is sustainable. If it takes billions of $s of spending on a one time event, then one wonders what happens when it's done. Either there has to be something else, or this "future growth" statement is way over stated.
The question that should be asked, that is never asked when these sorts of claims are made is this.
"What would have happened to Atlanta's growth if the Olympics never came?"
Until that answer is put forth, no claim about the Olympics effect can be taken seriously.
As I said in earlier in this topic, Charlotte does not need to get mixed up in the same sort of nonsense.
During this year's London Olympics, which were light years ahead of the one on ATL, were still an example of why we don't want this here in Charlotte. The Olympic committee made many many unreasonable demands which placed a vast demand on the citizens of that city and a burden on many small businesses that didn't pay huge extortion fees to become a sponsor. Of course the mainstream media in the USA didn't cover it, but there were plenty of reports from foriegn news organizations who interviewed people on the street in that city about how they felt about it.
One of the most outrageous things that I saw was that the requirement that London, reserve lanes on highways for the exclusive use for members for the Olympic committee along with their VIPs and others they decided could use these lanes. So the end result were endless traffic jams on the remaining lanes next to empty roads. How do you think this sort of thing would go down in Charlotte?
Restated, this means that Atlanta doesn't have a growth model that is sustainable. If it takes billions of $s of spending on a one time event, then one wonders what happens when it's done. Either there has to be something else, or this "future growth" statement is way over stated.
The question that should be asked, that is never asked when these sorts of claims are made is this.
"What would have happened to Atlanta's growth if the Olympics never came?"
Until that answer is put forth, no claim about the Olympics effect can be taken seriously.
As I said in earlier in this topic, Charlotte does not need to get mixed up in the same sort of nonsense.
How can u answer that question at this point its shoulda coulda woulda.
During this year's London Olympics, which were light years ahead of the one on ATL, were still an example of why we don't want this here in Charlotte. The Olympic committee made many many unreasonable demands which placed a vast demand on the citizens of that city and a burden on many small businesses that didn't pay huge extortion fees to become a sponsor. Of course the mainstream media in the USA didn't cover it, but there were plenty of reports from foriegn news organizations who interviewed people on the street in that city about how they felt about it.
One of the most outrageous things that I saw was that the requirement that London, reserve lanes on highways for the exclusive use for members for the Olympic committee along with their VIPs and others they decided could use these lanes. So the end result were endless traffic jams on the remaining lanes next to empty roads. How do you think this sort of thing would go down in Charlotte?
Its the Olympics... who cares about a little traffic.
^Many people consider the Atlanta Olympics the least successful and most forgettable of the Summer Games in modern history. I hope Charlotte won't make the same mistake and go there.
I agree with the earlier posters. The olympics are a ripoff to the local community and they have gotten so commercialized as to cease being relevant anyway.
Least successful would be Montreal.It left Montreal bankrupt.It took from 1972 through the 1990's to get out of debt.I already proved that apparently it was not the "most forgettable"
Michael Johnson is the only male athlete in history to win both the 200 meter dash and 400 meter dash events at the same Olympics, a feat he accomplished at the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta. Johnson is also the only man to successfully defend his Olympic title in the 400 m. Aside from his Olympic success Johnson accumulated eight gold medals at World Championships, and is thus tied with Carl Lewis for the most gold medals won by any runner in history.
^Nope. Montreal was a Cold War olympics. Those olympics were more about East vs West relations, contrasts, philosophy etc, They highlighted the ability of countries with nuclear weapons pointed at each other taking the time to hold a joint event. It was the last big Soviets vs Americans olympics. Serious stuff. They will be remembered for far more than the crass commercialism that came by the time ATL got an event.
The Montreal Olympics also produced some stunning architecturally relevant venues that are immediately recognized around the world. I can't say that I remember much of anything about ATL's attempt except for the bombing, and maybe a wading pool that reminds me of a shopping mall.
Restated, this means that Atlanta doesn't have a growth model that is sustainable. If it takes billions of $s of spending on a one time event, then one wonders what happens when it's done. Either there has to be something else, or this "future growth" statement is way over stated.
The question that should be asked, that is never asked when these sorts of claims are made is this.
"What would have happened to Atlanta's growth if the Olympics never came?"
Until that answer is put forth, no claim about the Olympics effect can be taken seriously.
As I said in earlier in this topic, Charlotte does not need to get mixed up in the same sort of nonsense.
You are just the biggest hater I have ever seen on any of these boards.
Last edited by SunnyKayak; 02-23-2013 at 10:32 AM..
Reason: please post links to copyrighted pictures
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
