|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 pm Post subject: Vancouver Olympics could show surplus: Organizer |
 |
|
As if.
| Quote: |
Vancouver Olympics could show surplus: Organizer
ROD MICKLEBURGH
From Friday's Globe and Mail
VANCOUVER � The multi-billion dollar 2010 Winter Olympics may show a surplus, Olympics boss John Furlong hinted Thursday.
"Our goal is to leave a positive financial legacy," said Mr. Furlong, after announcing that the Games' massive business plan detailing the nuts and bolts of running and paying for the Olympics will finally be made public on May 8.
The president and CEO of the 2010 Olympic organizing committee (VANOC) further underscored the prospect of a surplus when he told reporters to expect "a few pleasant surprises" in the long-delayed business plan.
Mr. Furlong's rosy outlook comes little more than a year after VANOC had to go cap in hand to the provincial and federal governments for an extra $110 million to cover rising construction costs.
Since receiving the extra funds, however, VANOC has reported consistently that its venue construction program is on time and within its revised building budget of $580 million.
All but three Olympic sporting venues in Vancouver and Whistler are due to be completed by the end of the year.
Operating costs of staging the Games have been set at $1.7 billion. However, VANOC has provided few details on how that figure will be met, other than to say the funds will come from ticket sales, television revenue, and corporate sponsorships. |
I put the odds of it not being 40% over budget at about 1/1000000000. As if.
The Olympics are just an excuse for unneeded capital expenses, legacy projects and (in the future, unused) facilities.
By the by, tickets for the hockey games will be around 325-500$ (according to The Fan 590 Toronto) a seat for team Canada. In a country where the median income is 12$/hour/person and the average tax rate 45%.
Rally round the flag! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with your assesment, even though I love the Olympics. I think the Olympics should get a pass (on my own sentimental reasons) but watching Halifax bid for the Commonweath Games just made me groan. I think these things should be limited to huge cities and rich countries only. And certainly there should be all efforst made to minimize the costs.
And lest we forget, Quebec taxpayers finished paying for the Montreal games late last year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
And lest we forget, Quebec taxpayers finished paying for the Montreal games late last year. |
The Montreal games are something of a textbook example of how not to run your Olympics. The LA games kind of used them as an anti-template. Use existing facilities, etc.
What was the final analysis of the Calgary games? Nearly 20 years later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think the olympics are a good idea for semi-rich countries. The Han river was cleaned up to attract the Olympics. In countries on the edge of development, it helps with infrastructure and improves living standards. Beacuse of the olympics I think the average Bejing citizen will have a better quality of life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
| I think the olympics are a good idea for semi-rich countries. The Han river was cleaned up to attract the Olympics. In countries on the edge of development, it helps with infrastructure and improves living standards. Beacuse of the olympics I think the average Bejing citizen will have a better quality of life. |
The question is why do people want to visit a city? Why do they want to start businesses there? Why do software companies locate in places like California, Seattle, New York, Austen and not Detroit or Pittsburgh? Why do people want to live and work in places like London, Hong Kong, New York, San Fran, Tokyo, etc?
There's a great confluence of things: art, culture, shopping, sports, recreation, concerts, etc. It's very hard to get good staff if you're in Dayton, Ohio. At the end of the day people want to live and enjoy their lives. One can easily look at any one thing and go "ah gosh, do we really have to put in a pedestrian mall?" At the end of the day there's a critical mass of "stuff other than your day job" that makes or breaks a city.
Put the Olympics under the microscope and, sure, why? Meh. Who cares? But I dunno. Seoul is just a little more interesting because of the '88 games. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
