It's official: the Olympics result in the worst budget overruns of any megaproject


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/07/14/its-official-the-olympics-e.html


#2

Why not end up having the games hosted in just one venue all the time? Initial cost could be pooled from the various countries competing, proper infrastructure built, and then they don’t go to waste as many places are never used again. Possibly you could increase the frequency to every 3 years or something.


#3

But then the IOC wouldn’t have the ability to shift host bodies to drain every two years!

Oh, wait, sorry, that’s the real reason. cough National Pride, rah, rah, rah! Be the Olympic Host to show how amazing and awesome your country is before the entire world!


#4

I know you’re not speaking for yourself here, but if I may naively respond to the character you’re speaking through, it seems there wouldn’t be any reason why the countries couldn’t still act as the “host” in the sense of hanging their decorations and putting on the big shows, in exchange for a cut the the door, even if the venue is neutral.


#5

Athens was seriously considered for awhile as a permanent Olympic venue; the idea was proposed quite a few times, but the current state of Greece’s economy has put a damper on that idea. But China has been very vocal lately about proposing Beijing as a permanent Olympic city. If major cities keep rejecting the Olympics, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it happen.


#6

The Economist proposed the idea of letting the “winner” of the games to decide whether they get to host the next games or just outright sell the hosting rights to another country/city. On the surface, it seems like a good idea, just needing to work out how to determine the “winner”: total medal count/athletes in team?


#7

How does that benefit the parasites who run the IOC and corrupt local contractors and politicians?


#8

I personally enjoy the way the Olympics brings a spotlight to parts of the world that we don’t always get to see. Not sure that’s a good enough reason to keep doing it, but it adds to the appeal of the Olympics.


#9

Even if you have it in the same location, you could have a “host” country it centers around. Which means you could highlight smaller nations that typically would not host the games.


#10

So for example the Botswanian Olympics in Beijing? The farce thickens.


#11

I nominate the Moon. No one to displace, and currently not affiliated with any specific country as far as I know, despite the US flag. Transportation may prove to be a challenge, though.


#12

I actually love this idea. It might spark the next space race.


#13

Also, imagine the high jump!


#14

And volleyball :-0

The pole vault might involve a low orbit, though…


#15

I’m only seeing an upside to this.


#16

How long would it take a volleyball to come down in one-sixth gravity? Seems like the games could take an awful long time.


#17

As someone who has done/participated/enjoyed some Olympic sports (none of 'em team sports) and knew some people who have been to the Olympics, I can tell you I stopped watching the Olympics a long, long time ago.

Corrupt, corrupt, corrupt. Just boycott it.


#18

In defense of the Russians, half of the money spent on Sochi was graft.


#19

Having lived through the vampire cabal taking over and over-riding various local laws/regulations gorging themselves on perks etc I am not sure it is worth it (and I did enjoy the end product). Maybe if one could get rid of the IOC it would be worth it.


#20

Oooh, I like the idea of more countries, and not just rich ones. Another thought (probably naieve), could it go to more countries if they focused on the virtual audience and just used existing venues with limited or no seating? And relied on broadcasting to get an audience. I would bet that stadiums and physical infrastructure are the big costs.