By John Considine
Last February, on this blog, Paul O'Sullivan asked if the 2014 Winter Olympics marked a tipping-point in the interest of cities towards hosting such events (here). It could be said that the costs of the Sochi Winter Olympics might frighten off potential hosts. In the run up to the event the voters in Bavaria, Germany voted against bidding for the 2022 Winter Olympics. At the time, I posted a piece on their decision (here) where I said "The victors claimed the vote demonstrated voters’ distrust of international sporting organisations as a result of doping and corruption scandals. They also claimed that the way that the international sporting organisations extract the economic benefits from the event left little for the host region. The losers claimed it would damage Germany’s sporting reputation. They also claimed the voters would regret their decision in years to come."
Last week Oslo, Norway decided to also step away from hosting the 2022 Winter Olympics. On the surface, it seems that the overall costs of the project were not the reason for Olso's decision. It seems that the straw that broke the camel's back related to some of the particular demands of the International Olympic Committee. It seems that IOC delegates wanted preferential treatment in Olso traffic. Not a big issue one would imagine. They wanted mobile phone subscriptions. A slightly bigger issue. And, they wanted a cocktail reception with the King of Norway - paid for by Norway. Probably an even bigger issue. It seems the perception around these demands carried as much weight as the overall costs.
Again, there is a difference of opinion on the implications of the decision. Those against hosting the games cite the above examples as illustrative of wasteful expenditure. Those in favour of hosting the games argue that the decision will cost the city large in terms of investment. These arguments will continue to get aired in Oslo for a while. Then it will be the turn of other cities to have similar debates.
Last week Oslo, Norway decided to also step away from hosting the 2022 Winter Olympics. On the surface, it seems that the overall costs of the project were not the reason for Olso's decision. It seems that the straw that broke the camel's back related to some of the particular demands of the International Olympic Committee. It seems that IOC delegates wanted preferential treatment in Olso traffic. Not a big issue one would imagine. They wanted mobile phone subscriptions. A slightly bigger issue. And, they wanted a cocktail reception with the King of Norway - paid for by Norway. Probably an even bigger issue. It seems the perception around these demands carried as much weight as the overall costs.
Again, there is a difference of opinion on the implications of the decision. Those against hosting the games cite the above examples as illustrative of wasteful expenditure. Those in favour of hosting the games argue that the decision will cost the city large in terms of investment. These arguments will continue to get aired in Oslo for a while. Then it will be the turn of other cities to have similar debates.
RSS Feed
