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.
Economically, Barcelona (1992), Sydney (2000), Athens (2004) and Beijing
(2008) were all profitable Games for the cities/countries in question.
However the longer term profits - from tourism etc - make the staging of those Games in those cities even more profitable.
Once again for the slow learners :
Before a bid is presented to the IOC - each bid must undergo a cost/benefit analysis.
Cost is measured on several levels : financial costs, enviromental costs, opportunity cost, inconvenience costs etc.
Benefits are measured on several levels : financial profit, infrastructure benefits, tourist benefit, economic added value.
If the bid satisfies the cost/benefit approval process : the bid is accepted by the IOC and is then assessed by the IOC on other criteria.
The fact of the matter is that the location which gets the Games benefits as follows :
1.The economic activity generated in the buidling of the stadiums/infrastructure generates incomes and taxes for the local/national economy.
2.The actual staging of the Games generates income and taxes from foreign tourists, from visitors from within the country, income acrruing from TV rights, income from advertising etc.
3.Long term effects of the staging the Games ensuring recurring income from tourisism, free advertising for the location worldwide, increase in international esteem from staging the games, long term benefit from infrastructure investment for travel (rail/tube/lightrail).
It makes economic sense for any city to try to win the nomination to stage the Olympic Games,
Obama continues to roll; He's digging this country out of the effects of 8 horrific years of Bush, with the talentless, clueless Republicans fighting him every step of the way. In the grand scheme, Chicago's failed Olympic bid is not critical to his agenda.
You said he continues to roll.
Just curious. What has he done since his inauguration that has made your life and the lives of Americans in general, better?
Economically, Barcelona (1992), Sydney (2000), Athens (2004) and Beijing
(2008) were all profitable Games for the cities/countries in question.
However the longer term profits - from tourism etc - make the staging of those Games in those cities even more profitable.
Once again for the slow learners :
Before a bid is presented to the IOC - each bid must undergo a cost/benefit analysis.
Cost is measured on several levels : financial costs, enviromental costs, opportunity cost, inconvenience costs etc.
Benefits are measured on several levels : financial profit, infrastructure benefits, tourist benefit, economic added value.
If the bid satisfies the cost/benefit approval process : the bid is accepted by the IOC and is then assessed by the IOC on other criteria.
The fact of the matter is that the location which gets the Games benefits as follows :
1.The economic activity generated in the buidling of the stadiums/infrastructure generates incomes and taxes for the local/national economy.
2.The actual staging of the Games generates income and taxes from foreign tourists, from visitors from within the country, income acrruing from TV rights, income from advertising etc.
3.Long term effects of the staging the Games ensuring recurring income from tourisism, free advertising for the location worldwide, increase in international esteem from staging the games, long term benefit from infrastructure investment for travel (rail/tube/lightrail).
It makes economic sense for any city to try to win the nomination to stage the Olympic Games,
Get those facts out of here! You're scaring the sheep!
Economically, Barcelona (1992), Sydney (2000), Athens (2004) and Beijing
(2008) were all profitable Games for the cities/countries in question.
However the longer term profits - from tourism etc - make the staging of those Games in those cities even more profitable.
Once again for the slow learners :
Before a bid is presented to the IOC - each bid must undergo a cost/benefit analysis.
Cost is measured on several levels : financial costs, enviromental costs, opportunity cost, inconvenience costs etc.
Benefits are measured on several levels : financial profit, infrastructure benefits, tourist benefit, economic added value.
If the bid satisfies the cost/benefit approval process : the bid is accepted by the IOC and is then assessed by the IOC on other criteria.
The fact of the matter is that the location which gets the Games benefits as follows :
1.The economic activity generated in the buidling of the stadiums/infrastructure generates incomes and taxes for the local/national economy.
2.The actual staging of the Games generates income and taxes from foreign tourists, from visitors from within the country, income acrruing from TV rights, income from advertising etc.
3.Long term effects of the staging the Games ensuring recurring income from tourisism, free advertising for the location worldwide, increase in international esteem from staging the games, long term benefit from infrastructure investment for travel (rail/tube/lightrail).
It makes economic sense for any city to try to win the nomination to stage the Olympic Games,
Darn, if only Obama knew that before he gave his speech.
Yes, and the anti-American repugs will dance in glee at the failure of the US to get the gig.
It would've brought jobs, money, jobs and money....and been a feather in Obama's cap...and the Republicans(and those MANY who NOW claim to be "other than" Republican) are so happy that didn't happen....it's obvious where their real interest lies and it's NOT supporting the U.S.
You:
Waaaaaaa "Its just not fair!!"
"Those racist republicans, its all their fault"
"The IOC is racist"
"My messiah was supposed to rule the world"
Wait..... "The whole world is racist" It is JUST NOT FAIR
Me:..... But Rio got the olympics and they are a non white people
When I heard the news I knew the blogs and forums was going to be a hot topic. Good job RIO. I guess there will be plenty of hate for Obama now..lol US had to at least try. I thought Chicago was a bad city choice right now because of economics and crime. I would had picked New York city, Dallas, Phoenix or Boston. Miami and Houston are coastal cities that in the late summer are prone to hurricanes.
Economically, Barcelona (1992), Sydney (2000), Athens (2004) and Beijing
(2008) were all profitable Games for the cities/countries in question.
However the longer term profits - from tourism etc - make the staging of those Games in those cities even more profitable.
Once again for the slow learners :
Before a bid is presented to the IOC - each bid must undergo a cost/benefit analysis.
Cost is measured on several levels : financial costs, enviromental costs, opportunity cost, inconvenience costs etc.
Benefits are measured on several levels : financial profit, infrastructure benefits, tourist benefit, economic added value.
If the bid satisfies the cost/benefit approval process : the bid is accepted by the IOC and is then assessed by the IOC on other criteria.
The fact of the matter is that the location which gets the Games benefits as follows :
1.The economic activity generated in the buidling of the stadiums/infrastructure generates incomes and taxes for the local/national economy.
2.The actual staging of the Games generates income and taxes from foreign tourists, from visitors from within the country, income acrruing from TV rights, income from advertising etc.
3.Long term effects of the staging the Games ensuring recurring income from tourisism, free advertising for the location worldwide, increase in international esteem from staging the games, long term benefit from infrastructure investment for travel (rail/tube/lightrail).
It makes economic sense for any city to try to win the nomination to stage the Olympic Games,
Wow! a Google scholar insulting everyone. How unique!
When I heard the news I knew the blogs and forums was going to be a hot topic. Good job RIO. I guess there will be plenty of hate for Obama now..lol US had to at least try. I thought Chicago was a bad city choice right now because of economics and crime. I would had picked New York city, Dallas, Phoenix or Boston. Miami and Houston are coastal cities that in the late summer are prone to hurricanes.
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.
) are so happy that didn't happen....it's obvious where their real interest lies and it's NOT supporting the U.S.
