Post 13 beat the BBC to it 
But then the IOC members would lose all their bribesfrom the cities competing for the next Olympic extravaganza!
One thing to bear in mind is that the International Olympics Committee has been a Swiss corporation from the beginning. Much of the aggressive legal repression of possible competition by the IOC is the same sort of MegaCorpInc business ethics that outfits that WalMart are regularly castigated for.
Why do you think this is the year I decided to emigrate?
At least with the Jubilee we get a day off.
My brother and sister-in-law are Londoners and were able to get tickets to all the events they wanted to see at face value.
I didn’t complain about the disruption- the OP did. I complained about the greed of it all.
But if I wanted to go out, I couldn’t, thanks to Hitler’s burning stick- and what if I’m taken ill? I could die while the ambulance struggled through the crowds of yokels.
You should probably learn what ‘ditto’ means.
As for the post above, I fear irony is rearing its head here - nobody could post that with a straight face. ‘Hitler’s burning stick…’ - priceless.
There is really no reason for the Olympics to cost a host country a penny. The 1984 Los Angeles games turned a $200 million profit. All it takes is have a rational plan and sticking to it.
Britishisms are so adorable! When the torch was run through the area I lived in just prior to the Atlanta Olympics, I affectionately referred to it as the “flaming dildo.” 
Indeed. The key is that for L.A., they hardly built any new facilities. Just a new swimming stadium and a new velodrome, both as cheaply as possible.
Filbert’s attitude is exactly what pretty much everyone’s was when I was a kid and the Olympics came to Los Angeles in 1984. Pleasant surprise though … it was the best time ever to be in Los Angeles. Traffic went away, the streets were all decorated, Randy Newman came out with “I Love LA”, and all the aggravation of the city just seemed to evaporate into the general excitement.
I wish London an L.A. experience and not an Atlanta one!
Also the tennis stadium at UCLA, but that might have just been a coincidence. L.A. had the advantage that it had hosted the Olympics in 1932, so was able to reuse the Coliseum and some other facilities that were built back then. Also, while security was tight in 1984, I don’t think it was expensive as it is now.
In any case, what is the 11 billion pounds paying for? Does it leave you with cool new facilities that you can use for the 100 years?
I wish they’d add “Soccer Hooliganism” to the competition.
Germany’d give you a run for it, but my money’s still on the Brits.
Pretty much the only thing I really remember from LA is utterly relentless advertising - the MacDonalds pool, etc. The rules changed because of LA and advertising is no longer allowed at stadiums and generally. Afaik, the limit is ‘sponsorship’.
Instead of advertising, the Olympics relies on rinsing taxpayers.
It’s not that simple. Not every city has (a) lots of pre-existing facilities (b) a massive and by world standards very rich local market which makes sponsors willing and able to fund the whole thing.
This is the only event worth a damn. It should count for 15 or 20 medals.
I was kind of “meh” for this pitting, but reading that, I’m all for this pitting now.
Not too sure why the dig at the Atlanta games - they were the most attended Olympics in history exceeding the the tickets sold at the LA games and Barcelona combined*, and attendance figures since:
1996: 11 million spectators.
2000: 6.7 million spectators.
2004: 5.3 million spectators.
2008: 7 million spectators.
2012: 9 million spectators (est))
The Atlanta games eked out a $10 million profit, and were entire privately funded.
Perhaps you meant “Athens”, which was the least attended games since 1980, was entire publicly funded, which has greatly contributed to the country’s current financial and political problems. The IOC was glad to fuck the people of Greece royally (and by extension, the world) because they didn’t like the “overcommercialization” of the Atlanta games… and we’re still paying for that attitude.
Here is a PDF report showing the Games impact on London. Included are the attendance figures cited above.
Then they (a) shouldn’t be hosting the Olympics in the first place, or (b) bitch about the problems that arise when they do. Not every country is capable of hosting and they should realize that.
Does this mean that the Olympics should be restricted to only the biggest countries with the greatest infrastructure? Maybe. But them’s the breaks.
Sorry, I didn’t know that. I just remember them being marred by poor organization, athletes missing events because of traffic, a bomb blast, and Celine Dion at the opening ceremonies.