[Euphoria]

We actually don't have a lot of elite level athletic facilities, including pools. That Pan Am facility, which would likely be reused in an Olympics, was needed infrastructure. There's a direct relationship between the number of facilities and the amount of participation. Anyone who books ice times, has been on a swim team, has been part of a gymnastics club, understands this. The only reason my son can participate in speed skating is because we happen to be lucky enough to have a short-track speed skating facility near our home. Milton has a downhill skiing club, so there are opportunities there, and guess what, the facility has produced Olympians. Athletic infrastructure provides opportunities for participation. An Olympics inspires and models excellence in sport.

 

[rbt]

The City of Toronto would have 4-5 Olympic pools. The United Kingdom, a country of 65 million people, only has 10 such pools. We simply don't need that many pools!

Poor example considering the UK got about 3% of the medals in swimming events on their home turf. Maybe it is enough but, coincidentally, the USA has the most Olympic sized/quality pools and also got about 30% of the medals.

 

[Johnny Au]

The Skyriders trampoline place produced medal-winning Olympians, and yet, it occupies one unit in an industrial strip mall.

 

[salsa]

 

[pman]

We actually don't have a lot of elite level athletic facilities, including pools. That Pan Am facility, which would likely be reused in an Olympics, was needed infrastructure. There's a direct relationship between the number of facilities and the amount of participation. Anyone who books ice times, has been on a swim team, has been part of a gymnastics club, understands this. The only reason my son can participate in speed skating is because we happen to be lucky enough to have a short-track speed skating facility near our home. Milton has a downhill skiing club, so there are opportunities there, and guess what, the facility has produced Olympians. Athletic infrastructure provides opportunities for participation. An Olympics inspires and models excellence in sport.

Doesn't the Olympics require an aquatic complex with 20,000 spectator seats? In that case we can't reuse the 6,000-seat Pan Am pool complex. Then there's the matter of how we would ever make use of a 70,000-seat stadium afterwards.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

View attachment 54707

That of course is a parody account - if the unanimous comment didn't give it away.

AoD

 

[animatronic]

That of course is a parody account - if the unanimous comment didn't give it away.

AoD

We seem to have a parody council these days so at times it's hard to tell

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

We seem to have a parody council these days so at times it's hard to tell

Parody council was last term (where everything that couldn't happen did) - this one is fairly tame and business like, save the antics of a few of the zoo escapees.

AoD

 

[christiesplits]

The 2024 Toronto Olympics: Just one more big, vague idea
Boosters tend to only talk up the supposed benefits of the Olympics, ignoring the costs and glossing over the recent experiences of host countries.

http://www.metronews.ca/views/toron...to-olympics-just-one-more-big-vague-idea.html

 

[diminutive]

Poor example considering the UK got about 3% of the medals in swimming events on their home turf. Maybe it is enough but, coincidentally, the USA has the most Olympic sized/quality pools and also got about 30% of the medals.

That's grasping.

To start, the US is 5 times bigger than the UK. If you scaled up the UK 5 times they'd have ~15% of medals. Even assuming that none of that came from the US medal count, that's well within normal variance for medal counts in a single games. Any remaining difference could easily be explained by differences in athletic funding or similar operational things.

Moreover, the post I was responding to argued that PanAms/Olympics contribute to society's overall fitness and athletic enjoyment. Using Olympic medals as a stand-in for overall fitness is just asinine. Maybe the US would be better off if it spent less in elite sports facilities and provided actual community pools. Maybe then more than half the country would know how to swim.

 

[diminutive]

http://www.metronews.ca/views/toron...to-olympics-just-one-more-big-vague-idea.html

I really agree with the last line: "But still, I think my biggest frustration comes back to the fact that this Olympic talk is just part of the same old pattern. Again and again, to the neglect of day-to-day issues like transit service and housing, civic leaders in Toronto insist on taking up the torch for big and vague ideas. And then, almost always, the public gets burned."

Olymppic boosters keep acting as if this is somehow something original. Even if Toronto's never hosted the Games, it's the most cliche kinda approach to urban development. It's been cliche for decades now. There's nothing new about this idea that securing some kind of SUPEREVENT with BRIGHT FLASHING LIGHTS will change things.

 

[Euphoria]

The problem for both sides of the debate at this point is the lack of details. We need to see concrete proposals that illustrate that hard-nosed thinking has gone into producing the best models. Without the details, we have nothing to go on but past examples of Games, good and bad. I do think the ideas have to come forward in short order, because city council has to make a decision soon. That's if a letter goes out. It might not.

 

[ksun]

The media always talks about "recent experience" as if they are horrifying enough to deter Toronto from a serious bidding, as if holding the games itself is being fiscally irresponsible. But exactly what recent experiences are like?

2012 London - broke even
2008 Beijing - $150m profit
2004 Athens- $15b loss
2000 Sydney - $ 2b loss
1996 Atlanta - $10m profit
1992 Barcelona - $10m profit
1988 Seoul - $300m profit
1984 Los Angeles - $250m profit

Seems only two games incurred losses in the past 30 years. So are we assuming Toronto can manage the project as badly as Athens to be pessimistic?
The issue is all about the "possibility of a large loss" - so why take the risk? I'd say it is pretty typical of Toronto or even Canada, always too risk averse, seldom strive to be something great. Put Beijing or Los Angeles aside, if Atlanta and Barcelona can turn a small profit, why the hell can't Toronto? I just don't understand.

 

[animatronic]

The problem for both sides of the debate at this point is the lack of details. We need to see concrete proposals that illustrate that hard-nosed thinking has gone into producing the best models. Without the details, we have nothing to go on but past examples of Games, good and bad. I do think the ideas have to come forward in short order, because city council has to make a decision soon. That's if a letter goes out. It might not.

But don't forget that there "is no bid team". Does anyone seriously believe that there isn't?

 

[animatronic]

The media always talks about "recent experience" as if they are horrifying enough to deter Toronto from a serious bidding, as if holding the games itself is being fiscally irresponsible. But exactly what recent experiences are like?

2012 London - broke even
2008 Beijing - $150m profit
2004 Athens- $15b loss
2000 Sydney - $ 2b loss
1996 Atlanta - $10m profit
1992 Barcelona - $10m profit
1988 Seoul - $300m profit
1984 Los Angeles - $250m profit

Seems only two games incurred losses in the past 30 years. So are we assuming Toronto can manage the project as badly as Athens to be pessimistic?
The issue is all about the "possibility of a large loss" - so why take the risk? I'd say it is pretty typical of Toronto or even Canada, always too risk averse, seldom strive to be something great. Put Beijing or Los Angeles aside, if Atlanta and Barcelona can turn a small profit, why the hell can't Toronto? I just don't understand.

First, those are just operating numbers. They ignore infrastructure, military/police and a number of other major cost categories. Second, if we actually did turn an operating profit 40% of the surplus goes to IOC/COC and 60% goes to amateur sports. City can't keep any and can't use operating revenue for infrastructure.

For a real look at the costs see The Guardian's breakdown of London's budget: http://www.theguardian.com/sport/datablog/2012/jul/26/london-2012-olympics-money the amount of taxpayer spend is staggering.