I wonder how much Los Angeles will end up losing on the games?
I am not a fan of hot-climate cities like LA getting the Summer Olympics.
While the record highs are darn hot, the average daytime max temperature is still less than 85 F. It’s very dry, as well, which helps. Of course, just by sheer bad luck we might see the Olympics happen in a heatwave, but that could happen almost anywhere.
Here is a thread from last month, when this was still speculation.
Not a penny. we know how to do things and turn a profit around these parts. I doubt there will be much additional infrastructure needed, and we’re always ready to rip-off international tourists!
It will make getting to Dodger games a bit more hectic. So that two weeks we go to see the Padres instead.
If they reinstate baseball, even as a demo sport, expect Dodger Stadium to be the venue, so don’t worry about it.
Is 11 years enough time to finally get the Coliseum renovated?
I will note that the L.A. games of 1984 were profitable, as were Atlanta and Salt Lake City. Since a lot of the infrastructure is already in place, a large investment is not needed.
Wait - there’s no more IOC voting for Olympic sites?
No, they voted to award the next two Summer sites at once, to make sure there’d be one for 2028. Since that time, enough candidate cities dropped out to leave only those two.
There were only two cities bidding for 2024, and it was looking like the only city that wanted 2028 was whichever lost 2024. So it made sense to award both at once.
Hot climate? Los Angeles?
That, and I think the IOC is concerned, under the current system (monumental costs, waste of space and resources, crippling debt), no other cities will desire the Olympics - if the loser of 2024 got cold feet before the next decision point, who else is left?
Bill Simmons had the mayor on his Ringer podcast and they discussed a bunch of stuff about 2028. A lot of the points they made seemed reasonable, such as being able to use existing facilities for events and the athletes’ village. They are going to do some work on the Coliseum, and hold the track events there.
I wonder if this might be the start of a permanent rotation. Paris, LA, Somewhere in Asia,(maybe Japan-Korea) then start over.
A good plan. The Olympics should go where the facilities already are. Then, Host cities will be motivated to maintain the venues.
Unfortunately, very few places, even ones that recently hosted, still have the facilities in working-enough order to bring back the games. Here is Rio after only 6 months. London looks like they could host again tomorrow, if needed. Beijng - Maybe. Athens - don’t even ask.
That’s the aquatics center in the first picture. Why is there a doorway at the far end of the pool?
Well, Tokyo is hosting in 2020, so perhaps they could leave the facilities in place. (Seems unlikely, though, given the high real estate values there.)
So you can bring in heavy equipment for resurfacing, tiling etc without having to lower and raise it up and down a 2-metre vertical wall.
Is there any particular reason cities need special venues for the olympics? I imagine most large cities already have swimming pools, tracks, stadiums, gymnasiums, etc. They probably don’t have as much seating for spectators as olympic facilities do, but then the seats seem have empty for a lot of olympic events anyways.
Seems like if they can’t get cities to fork over the big bucks for big olympic complexes, they could just allow cities to do the games on the cheap, renting out University sports facilities, dorms, buying out a few hotels and maybe build one or two extra buildings as needed, rather than sinking billions into special purpose projects that go to seed as soon as the games are over.