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.
Unless the cities are allowed to reuse existing infrastructure, it is impossible to get a profit from the Olympic games in the modern setup. Cities should stop bidding so that the IOC is forced to find a solution that works for the cities and not just themselves.
Unless the cities are allowed to reuse existing infrastructure, it is impossible to get a profit from the Olympic games in the modern setup. Cities should stop bidding so that the IOC is forced to find a solution that works for the cities and not just themselves.
^This.
I think they should just be able to reuse the existing structures from Previous Olympics. This makes the most sense....that way buildings, Arena's and Hotel space would not be an issue.
Might be boring but it could help to justify the cost of the thousands of hotel rooms and assorted eating establishments built solely for the Olympics.
Exactly. Just pick 5-6 Super Bowl cities and rotate it around between them
Or have it in 3-4 cities around rhe globe simultaneously with certain cities having certain events. only one city has to build and maintain an awesome bobsled track or that giant shuffleboard floor where they curl.
Maybe the cities are as bored with the Olympics as the viewers are. My wife and I were terribly disappointed in the coverage this summer. I have watched it every time faithfully since I was a little girl, and it was so scattershot and strange this time that we think we will skip it completely in 2018. NBC needs another network to compete for coverage.
Well they show 3 minutes of events then talk for 5 minutes, and then there's 5 minutes of advertisements. So after watching it for 2 hours you don't really feel like you saw very much when there's like 28 different events.
I wanted to see a summary show where they showed the highlights of all the events, and who won the medals in them each day. If they had this I have no idea when it was on. Every time I flipped it on all they ever talked about was swimming, track and field, and gymnastics.
The two previous times the Olympic games were awarded to Los Angeles were when there were no other bidders. Perhaps this will be the third. We will shall see.....
There were other bidders but they were in countries considered politically unstable at the time. Barcelona for 1932 and Tehran for 1984. (I can only imagine if the latter had come to pass....)
Los Angeles had the Olympics twice already, no other American city has had them twice. Most American cities have never had them at all.
Los Angeles was a city on the rise when it had the Olympics before - it is now a city in decline. A city holding the Olympics is a city on the rise. It would be better to award them to a US city that has never had them, and one which is on the rise, like Seattle or the Texas cities.
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.
but it could help to justify the cost of the thousands of hotel rooms and assorted eating establishments built solely for the Olympics.
Permanent Home for the Olympics?
