[AlvinofDiaspar]

Have you ever been to Commonwealth Stadium? It was built for the '78 Commonwealth games. It's butt ugly. BMO field is no great shakes, but Kelly wasn't wrong.

But, I agree AoD -- Toronto should gracefully bow out of any further World Cups... and Olympic Games.

Well, isn't it ironic that you have someone complaining about the cost of the Olympics lambasting Edmonton for reusing their perfectly fine facility because it isn't "good enough". You're complaining about Rosie? She isn't my style, but I tend to take self-absorbed hypocrites even less seriously.

AoD

 

[animatronic]

What facts? I'm not seeing 6 billion in security costs in your link.

I said security was around $2b. The actual running (vs infrastructue capital costs) was $6b.

"However, the actual "Games-time" cost ran close to £3bn when adding on £514m for venue security and £137m for "operational provisions" as well as extra money for more lavish ceremonies, all of which came from the public purse."

 

[Tuscani01]

Yeah, that's not how it works. The final costs for Beijing, London and now Rio are all in the CAD$30-57B range. Every initial Olympics budget ends up underestimating costs by a factor of 2-3x. Anyone pretending this can be done on the cheap is either delusional or lying.

The $5b I ballparked for logistics and security is less than the $6b spent in London - as reported by the UK government. Don't throw around BS terms like "wildly over inflated" when the facts state otherwise.

https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/london-2012-final-cost-london-2012-games-revealed-135956051.html

And how about the revenue?

Convenient to mention that London's cost was in the $30-$57 billion range, but then leave out the fact that only $4 billion of that total wasn't covered by sponsors and other revenue sources. At the end of the day, the taxpayers were only left with $4 billion of the cost.

Also, a large chunk of that cost went towards infrastructure that would have been built regardless of whether or not the games were happening.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Another predictable 'we don't have the money' article from the Globe's tenured wet blanket. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...ster-of-hosting-the-olympics/article25728670/

If Canada does not have the money, then the SOG should just leave planet Earth.

Did you read the article? It didn't say we don't have the money. Instead it goes through the six stages of Olympic despair, where this money you refer to is wasted in massive overruns for limited use or value. I thought the article was a good summary of historic Olympic ROI.

 

[P23]

I said security was around $2b. The actual running (vs infrastructue capital costs) was $6b.

"However, the actual "Games-time" cost ran close to £3bn when adding on £514m for venue security and £137m for "operational provisions" as well as extra money for more lavish ceremonies, all of which came from the public purse."

Right, see why I can't take your arguments at face value?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Right, see why I can't take your arguments at face value?

It's ironic that the no-side has also ended up playing the numbers games.

AoD

 

[Filip]

Did you read the article? It didn't say we don't have the money. Instead it goes through the six stages of Olympic despair, where this money you refer to is wasted in massive overruns for limited use or value. I thought the article was a good summary of historic Olympic ROI.

Where do you think this despair comes from? Money.

 

[animatronic]

I also forgot to add that the media village and other facilities were to be located at the West Donlands - so with the 2008 SOG we would have had a largely developed Portlands and West Donlands. While I fully agree that these sites will get developed over time, I don't want to be 50 years old to appreciate them once they're built. We're all getting older and Toronto doesn't seem to know what execution means unless there's deadlines.

Also, a large chunk of that cost went towards infrastructure that would have been built regardless of whether or not the games were happening.

So which is it? The non-games infrastructure wouldn't get built any time soon without the Olympics (so the Olympics are necessary) or the non-games infrastructure would have been built regardless (in which case you don't count the spending)? Can't have it both ways.

 

[animatronic]

Right, see why I can't take your arguments at face value?

That squiggly little L shape is a "pound" sign. Maybe you are forgetting to multiply all the numbers by 2?

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Well, isn't it ironic that you have someone complaining about the cost of the Olympics lambasting Edmonton for reusing their perfectly fine facility because it isn't "good enough". You're complaining about Rosie? She isn't my style, but I tend to take self-absorbed hypocrites even less seriously.

AoD

Seriously -- he didn't complain about a perfectly fine facility. He complained that the World Cup organizers didn't put a game in Toronto, and he complained, legitimately, that Commonwealth Stadium, with its track and CFL carpet, is a terrible soccer stadium. Both of those complaints are legitimate, but the main one was that the WC organizers, in order to have everyone play on carpet, seem to have decided to bypass one of the few true soccer pitches in the country.

One of Kelly's more ominous comments was that, with 500 days to go, Rio has nothing even close to finished. Brazil is getting kicked in the teeth by an economic downturn. Do you think Rio will be a success? I mean, it might look fine on television next year, but it looks to be quite a fiasco. You want to subject Toronto to that?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

So which is it? The non-games infrastructure wouldn't get built any time soon without the Olympics (so the Olympics are necessary) or the non-games infrastructure would have been built regardless (in which case you don't count the spending)? Can't have it both ways.

Is it fair to consider say, RER costs in an Olympic bid, even if the end impact of the games is accelerating and ensuring the work it is in place? What about say, in a plausible Toronto scenario, the costs of earthworks and flood protection at the Portlands to house the athletes village? I think we need to be honest about what is and isn't ultimately a real cost.

AoD

 

[P23]

That squiggly little L shape is a "pound" sign. Maybe you are forgetting to multiply all the numbers by 2?

Oh I'm well aware. You're the one that keeps putting the little S with the lines through it in front of everything.

 

[Filip]

So which is it? The non-games infrastructure wouldn't get built any time soon without the Olympics (so the Olympics are necessary) or the non-games infrastructure would have been built regardless (in which case you don't count the spending)? Can't have it both ways.

The games are a catalyst to have these things built within relevant timelines.

I go back to my original comment; had Toronto been successful in 2008, 7 years ago we would have had a completed West Donlands and Portlands. Today, the Portlands (sans SOG) are a solid 30 years away.

 

[animatronic]

Is it fair to consider say, RER costs in an Olympic bid, even if the end impact of the games is accelerating and ensuring the work it is in place? I don't think so. What about say, in a plausible Toronto scenario, the costs of earthworks at say the Portlands to house the athletes village and floodproof the area? I think we need to be honest about what is and isn't ultimately a real cost.

AoD

That's reasonable - the UPX shouldn't be part of the Pan Am cost estimate but Tim Horton's Field, the Aquatics Centre and the Velodrome absolutely should .

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

One of Kelly's more ominous comments was that, with 500 days to go, Rio has nothing even close to finished. Brazil is getting kicked in the teeth by an economic downturn. Do you think Rio will be a success? I mean, it might look fine on television next year, but it looks to be quite a fiasco. You want to subject Toronto to that?

Why the Rio analogue? Toronto's execution of the Pan Am suggest it has more in common with London than Rio.

AoD