Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#31

Post by philwelch »

lordnacho wrote: post #12
jordank wrote: post #6

Or alternatively, why must the Olympics be held in one place at all? The infrastructural burdens of large events are massive. The World Cup distributes this burden throughout cities and even regions.

The WC is a waste as well. It's even more egregious actually, because there are more than enough existing stadiums to play the world's most popular sport. Yet FIFA still insists on new stadiums being built for just a few matches.

FIFA doesn't insist on building new stadiums so much as they award bids to countries that don't already have sufficient stadium capacity. Brazil and Qatar need/needed to construct stadiums, and so does Russia probably, but had they accepted the England and USA bids for 2018 and 2022, respectively, no stadium construction would have been required (at most, perhaps some renovation). In fact, either country could host a World Cup with only a few months' notice.

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#32

Post by arcoarkona »

having the olympics costs a country X amount, and earns a country Y amount.

for some reason I think most people put Y at 0, and say that the country has wasted X (talking only about the 'price tag' of hosting). I can't tell whether people doing that are being dishonest to support a narrative, or whether they actually think that hosting an olympics earns a country nothing.

you can argue that Y is often or always less than X, but I rarely see Y even acknowledged.

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#33

Post by allendoerfer »

rospaya wrote: post #30
allendoerfer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most European countries this is not a problem. Each club which plays in its countries top division already has a big enough dedicated football stadium. It becomes a problem when you let FIFA bribe BRIC or even third world country politicians (or vice versa). Then you get stadiums located in deserts or rainforests without a club nearby that is even remotely capable of filling it on a weekly basis. I like what the…

> For most European countries this is not a problem. Each club which plays in its countries top division already has a big enough dedicated football stadium. Most in this case is maybe 5-6. Even in rich football countries like Germany, not every 1st tier club has a 40k+ stadium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_stadiums_in_G...

Edit: Sorry, I read your comment to quickly, thought you were saying, that there are only 5-6 stadiums that big in Germany.

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#34

Post by z3t4 »

The investment in infrastructure will usually benefit the locals for years.

Doing the math on infrastructure is not that simple. Ex: How much would it be worth, if one million people saved 30 minutes every day? Or that you live in a city where you can practice virtually any sport on the highest level!?

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#35

Post by braythwayt »

geuis wrote: post #29
braythwayt wrote: post #3

I think this is a piece of learned trolling, satire designed to provoke us into thinking hard about what the IOC really is. The IOC profits from the selection process as much as it does from the games. The bribes, the payments, everything involved in this horrible “competition” fills their coffers with money. If the games were held in the same place every year, there would be no bribes to rig bids. There would be no…

I agree with everything you wrote, except for the first 10 words. This isn't a trollish idea. It's a practical solution that solves a real problem. Any time in conversation this topic comes up, I make the same argument that it doesn't make financial sense to move from city to city like a plague.

It’s practical in the sense that it would logically work.

But it’s impractical in the sense that it doesn’t actually satisfy the needs of anybody in the IOC or the bid committees that try to get tax money to enrich themselves, or the needs of politicians who want to bask in the halo of “winning and hosting the games."

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#36

Post by yxhuvud »

Gys wrote: post #8
sp332 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to imagine that prime real estate like that would be "uninhabited".

'Greece has an extremely large number of islands, with estimates ranging from somewhere around 1,200 to 6,000, depending on the minimum size to take into account. The number of inhabited islands is variously cited as between 166 and 227.' Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_of_Greece And it would not even have to be uninhabited I guess. Greece is very poor and really needs any investments it can get…

Most islands that are uninhabited is that for a reason.

Frankly, it is probably better to create a new island than trying to find an unused one.

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#37

Post by pmelendez »

arcoarkona wrote: post #32

having the olympics costs a country X amount, and earns a country Y amount. for some reason I think most people put Y at 0, and say that the country has wasted X (talking only about the 'price tag' of hosting). I can't tell whether people doing that are being dishonest to support a narrative, or whether they actually think that hosting an olympics earns a country nothing. you can argue that Y is often or always less…

I think in this case the author is well-aware of Y:

"Though Olympic boosters say the Summer Games allow a city to showcase itself to a global audience, only two Games, both in Los Angeles, have ever made a real profit"

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#38

Post by briandear »

lordnacho wrote: post #5

I'd be all for it. A permanent site can rely on repeat business and a permanent economy can grow around it. A sort of Mecca for sports. The current process is a shambles. It's basically about telling the world how prosperous the host is, and for the IOC members it's all about milking the process for money. You end up building a ghost town someplace every four years at huge cost. I suppose the same arguments apply for…

Winter Olympics in Greece? Nonsense. Chamonix vs Greece -- there is just no comparison. Very few people plan world class ski vacations in Greece. That's like having surfing competitions in New Jersey. Sure there's an ocean, but that doesn't make it good.

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#39

Post by briandear »

This idea of having the Olympics in Greece permanently is nonsense. Greece doesn't even have the fiscal discipline to pay their bills let alone be responsible for a multi-billion dollar tradition. A strategically timed transit strike by aggrieved workers would derail the Games. I'm not sure how anyone could even suggest the Grerk government could be trusted to be a steward of such an important event given their propensity for fiscal disaster.

Re: We should host the Olympics in the same place every time

#40

Post by mc32 »

I'm glad Boston too a stand and bowed out. I'm just hopeful SF can withstand the temptation. LA, well, it's a lost cause anyway.

My hope is Boston's decision gets people to scrutinize the Olympics because as claimed, it seems the benefits are outweighed by the opportunity loss of the diverted funds, etc.

For an example of the waste produced by hosting these large sporting events one only needs to look at the past world cup in Brazil --stadiums in the middle of very low population density. A total waste of capital and labor.

Post reply on HN