PDA

View Full Version : 2012 London bid



Clare Halsted
-14th January 2005, 23:08
Having just attended the British Sporting Forum day presenting full details of the bid, it really is impressive. Wonderful facilities; all athletes able to stay in the Village, within 15 mins of 2/3 of all venues;(fencing in a prime spot next to the stadium); amazing transport system eg bullet trains 7 mins from St Pancras to Stratford; extensive legacy including new homes and a large park as well as the terrific boost to UK sport.
Public support is looked at by the IOC - they do their own polls in the bidding countries.
For fencing, holding the Olympics here will make a huge difference - guaranteed places for a start so imagine what effect the race for those will have! But all Olympic sports will benefit with spin offs for the whole country.
I would almost be prepared to bet that anyone who looks at the full details will be happy to support the London bid. (As long as they aren't French, Spanish, American or Russian that is).
Look out for the imaginative short film that includes an amusing scene featuring 2 of our most stylish foilists!

Clare

Troll
-17th January 2005, 19:43
yes, yes i totally agree. if we have the olympics in Engalnd it will be very good for our english fencers (eg me.) it will be a simple hop from all these forighn countrys and it might help there consintration. i totally agree :girl1:

Athos
-17th January 2005, 21:59
I think having the Olympics here will be great. Obviously it'd be great to have the opportunity to go as a spectator without travelling abroad, but the long terms benefits sound great - and long overdue for sport in this country!

NLSC Sabreur
-18th January 2005, 09:08
Hmmm....

Wembley stadium fiasco, the Millenium Dome, the 2005 World Athletics Championships that were supposed to be in London but UK couldn't manage. If the UK can't manage relatively simple projects then how on Earth is the Olympics going to be well run?

Were looking at vast costs to build huge facilities that no-one will have the funds to run after the Olympics. The British Olympic Committee have made a lot of fancy claims about how spending vast sums of money will have spin off benefits for every sport involved. But why not just spend the money on sports and let some other country cope with the massive costs, huge debts and vast unused buildings that hosting the Olympics incurs?

As the letter in the Sword noted if fencing is not shown on television then the public are not going to know about it anyway. Being shown on interactive digital channel 23783565 with an audience figure of 27 will not count as reaching a mainstream audience. If you want to increase fencing you have to deal with the key problem and that is a shortage of good coaches. Is there any active club out there that has difficulty in recruiting people if it makes an effort?

There is quite enough building work and tourists already in London. If someone has billions to spend then the best thing they could do for London is to rebuild the crumbling and overwhelmed sewer system or the more decrepid parts of the Underground.

fencingmaster
-19th January 2005, 07:39
quote "British Olympic Committee have made a lot of fancy claims about how spending vast sums of money will have spin off benefits for every sport involved. But why not just spend the money on sports " Absolutely..especially the youth group who will (should) be the competitors in 2012.

bucket
-19th January 2005, 11:06
I agree with fencingmaster- we should give up on the olympics and try and get the facilities together in all sports that need it to wipe the floor with other countries.

e.g. Austrailia- nothing against Austrailia personally, but they seem to be better at everything than us

anyway, they way they build stuff in this country we'll be lucky if the venues are finished by 2015.

gbm
-18th February 2005, 10:42
A fencer! on the 2012 bid site...
http://www.london2012.com/en/news/press+room/images/accenture.htm

pigeonmeister
-18th February 2005, 11:38
Originally posted by NLSC Sabreur
Hmmm....

There is quite enough building work and tourists already in London. If someone has billions to spend then the best thing they could do for London is to rebuild the crumbling and overwhelmed sewer system or the more decrepid parts of the Underground.


So true. The Olympics are not about sporting pride, it's a pr excercise in getting more tourists to go to London. It's also a politically friendly way of spending huge amounts to improve London's infrastructure (and avoid spending money in deprived areas). This also amounts to Londoners thinking that as they contribute more to the national economy, have a million trendy coffeeshops, and have more 'world heritage sites' they are more important.

Personally I would rather chew my arm off than live in London so I don't really want to increase the national debt for something that won't affect my life in Birmingham at all.

Insipiens
-18th February 2005, 13:42
the money being spent in developing London for the Olympics (or that would be spent) will not be available if the Olympics don't happen - most of it will come from sponsorship and media rights, so if London doesn't get the Olympics we won't get the money.

Insipiens
-18th February 2005, 13:44
If I recall correctly, in the lsat 20 years the olympics have generally been run at a profit - although we all know that Montreal is still paying for the 1976 games.

[Past performance does not guarantee future results]

pigeonmeister
-18th February 2005, 14:18
Originally posted by Insipiens
If I recall correctly, in the lsat 20 years the olympics have generally been run at a profit - although we all know that Montreal is still paying for the 1976 games.

[Past performance does not guarantee future results]

MONTREAL, 1976: Debt: >1 billion (globe and mail; abcnews.com)
LAKE PLACID, 1980: Debt: $11 million
CALGARY, 1988: Debt: $910 million
BARCELONA, 1992: Debt: US$1.4 billion
SYDNEY, 2000: Games billed as self-financing by politicians were a $2.3-billion loss (Auditor General New South Wales Report on Sydney (2000) Olympics)
EXPO '86: Debt: $311 million (paid by provincial lottery)

Check out the figures from this (admitatly anti-games) site.


Are Olmpics Profitable (http://www.creativeresistance.ca/awareness01/2002-dec02-do-the-olympics-generate-money-for-the-economy-no-games-coalition.htm)

Australian
-18th February 2005, 18:19
Originally posted by bucket
e.g. Austrailia- nothing against Austrailia personally, but they seem to be better at everything than us.

:party:

Rdb811
-18th February 2005, 18:34
Originally posted by pigeonmeister
MONTREAL, 1976: Debt: >1 billion (globe and mail; abcnews.com)
LAKE PLACID, 1980: Debt: $11 million
CALGARY, 1988: Debt: $910 million
BARCELONA, 1992: Debt: US$1.4 billion
SYDNEY, 2000: Games billed as self-financing by politicians were a $2.3-billion loss (Auditor General New South Wales Report on Sydney (2000) Olympics)
EXPO '86: Debt: $311 million (paid by provincial lottery)

Check out the figures from this (admitatly anti-games) site.


Are Olmpics Profitable (http://www.creativeresistance.ca/awareness01/2002-dec02-do-the-olympics-generate-money-for-the-economy-no-games-coalition.htm)

Not the most convincing of sites - they factor in t=infrastructure costs - e.g. rail links - in a lot of cases (like London) this would have to be spent anyway to some extent or another.

uk_45
-26th February 2005, 12:27
Ahh but if it's paris barry gets a nice holiday to paris!

Dublte
-2nd March 2005, 19:38
If it comes to england im there... wud definately like to go nd watch at least some event. preferably fencing!!

Aidyboy
-12th March 2005, 13:20
Yeh that would be great. I'd definitely go and watch the épée. In fact I might start saving up just in case!:tongue:

Winwaloe
-8th April 2005, 17:36
99.9999999% in agreement with NLSC Sabreur (I never completely agree with anything unless I have said it myself) The Olympic bid is a ruse by smiley TB (probably supported by the wide moth frog) to spend loads of other peoples money to make him and his look good. (Actually it surprises me that the population of this Country is so stupid as to believe anything he says but that's another story). - Yes I know I will get a slapped wrist for the political bit but those who dare etc

Fencing will not be seen on TV as static sprinting, syncronised womens tiddlywinks and slug putting will all be favoured. Fencing will attract those that fence but how many British fencers will there be and how many will be in the medals (yes we know it's the taking part but that's just spin). Fencing certainly needs the money but it needs it to sponsor the biggest possible group of potential contenders so that the GB team managers have a greater choice and the contenders have a greater advantage.
I have no idea if the story of one top fencer training in his coach's garage with the tumble dryer on to get a feel for high humidity is true but, if it is, 10/10 for inspiration, 10/10 for perspiration and 0/10 for those that control the funding the created the need!