US at risk of losing both 2028 and 2034 Olympics, says Pound (www.reuters.com)

submitted 3 months ago by filoria@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] CaptainKickass@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago

The Olympics is a huge financial drain for any country that hosts it

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 11 points 3 months ago

Los Angeles has made money on the last two times it hosted the Olympics and will probably make money on the third.

[-] CaptainKickass@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Would love to see anything that supports your assertion

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/092416/what-economic-impact-hosting-olympics.asp

It doesn't generally benefit the community

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 10 points 3 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1932_Summer_Olympics

First paragraph cites the likely profit of $1 million

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_Summer_Olympics

Fourth paragraph includes "As a result of low construction costs, due to the use of existing sport infrastructure, coupled with a reliance on private corporate funding,[5] the 1984 Games generated a profit of over US$250 million."

As for the 2028 Olympics, most venues are existing, with some temporary venues for minor events and shifting of some events to other areas with adequate infrastructure including Oklahoma City. Upgrades to city infrastructure like LAX and the region's mass transit network were already planned and deemed necessary before bidding for the Olympics; the only difference has been in pushing forward some schedules.

There don't seem to be any glaring white elephant projects for 2028. A lot of what kills most budgets is building mass infrastructure that doesn't get used. That isn't happening in Los Angeles.

[-] Don_Dickle@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I will take that bet. I will say this that nowadays everyone just reads headlines or memes it off others. People don't wake up early or subscribe to the olympics no matter what the platform is. It has been 30 years since 1984. Shit has changed so you can't use that as an example. Oh by the bet you have to donate to your local humane shelter that is no kill.

[-] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 2 points 3 months ago

I get to watch the Olympics this year for 8 bucks on Peacock. Absolutely terrible UI, have to refresh the browser periodically because it causes Firefox to eat RAM, but I can watch any event I want, whenever I want. Kinda sweet. Some of us exist and have been begging for something like this for years.

Just because you don't care about the Olympics doesn't mean others share your opinion.

[-] Don_Dickle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I know but lemmy is free and open so it is easier for me to give my blunt opinion on here than it was on reddit without getting banned.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 3 months ago

Funding for television rights goes to the IOC, not the hosting city. It has been that way always.

And I provided an example of how Los Angeles came out ahead in the last two Olympics and showed that the city is implementing the same strategy for this Olympics.

The reason a lot of cities go over budget is because they build too much and don't have uses for the infrastructure after the games. That isn't an issue for Los Angeles; Los Angeles has everything it needs for the Olympics already.