13 ms·

Estimated cost of 2028 Los Angeles Olympics jumps to $6.9B

86 points by jmsflknr 8y ago

didgeoridoo 8y ago
Why do sites like this jam six identical entries into my browser history? Do they think I'm going to try to hit the back button, have it not work, and then I'll just go, "Well, I guess I'm stuck here! Maybe I'll click on some ads!"
- RobertDeNiro 8y ago
  In some ways, the state of the web is degenerating. Way too much tracking, everyone wants metrics on everything you do. And don't get me started on mobile ads.
  - didgeoridoo 8y ago
    Permissions, permissions, permissions. "This site wants to take a dump in your browser history. Allow?" should fix things nicely.
    - drb91 8y ago
      Yea I wish we could keep the browser in document mode and switch to app mode if someone is an asshole enough to embed an article in a single page app that loads the content asynchronously.
    - zanny 8y ago
      The alternative was back in the day when clickjackers could install Actionscript malware without a prompt that rootkitted the whole computer. Sandboxing and prompts are a definite win.
- brianpgordon 8y ago
  More likely there's a ticket in the icebox to fix it but for some reason the product owner never wants to allocate time to work on a bug to help users leave the site faster. :)
hanniabu 8y ago
I hope they build the facilities for long term use unlike other Olympic facilities built that end up crumbling a few years after.
- phamilton 8y ago
  > Local organizers plan to use existing venues such as Staples Center, Pauley Pavilion and the Rose Bowl. Only a few temporary facilities will be needed at relatively little cost. The U.S. has been pretty good on this front. Salt Lake City nailed it, almost all of the major additions are still actively used by the community (hockey, cross country skiing, ski jumping, etc).
- Aloha 8y ago
  So far the permanent venues built for 1932 and 1984, have had very long lives full of use - I see no reason why 2028 would be different based on their statements.
- duxup 8y ago
  Of all places LA seems capable of continuing to use the facilities. Still not sure that alone makes it a good choice, but I expect a lot will be in use in the future.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  LA has already said that almost all of the facilities used in the 28 Games will be existing facilities (or facilities under construction at the time of the bid). Only a handful of facilities need to be purpose-built for the games, like a velodrome for indoor cycling, and it is expected that those facilities will be kept after the games.
- Rebelgecko 8y ago
  They're not building anything major. They're reusing existing stadiums: Coliseum (seats ~80k and previously featured in 1932 and 1984 Olympics) New Rams stadium in Inglewood (seats ~80k. Being built privately with relatively small indirect subsidies) Rose Bowl (seats ~90k) And smaller preexisting venues (2 soccer stadiums, Staples Center, the beach, the ocean, etc). There's no new megastadiums being built. When I looked at their budget, I think the biggest facilities expense was $7 million to make an area at the Rams stadium safe for shooting and archery events.
justin66 8y ago
Are there any recent examples of the costs of hosting an Olympics paying very clear dividends over time, such that the costs of hosting the event were definitely worthwhile for the hosting city?
- dpflan 8y ago
  You piqued my interest. I would check this out and the effect of hosting the World Cup: 1. Economic Impact of the London 2012 Olympics (https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/2100/994 https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/2100/994) 2. Analysis of Impacts on China's Economy of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5369536 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5369536) 3. The Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games (https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/economics-hosting-olympic-games https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/economics-hosting-olympic-g...) 4. Google Scholar Search: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11&q=economic+impact+of+hosting+olympics&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11&q=eco...
- phamilton 8y ago
  Salt Lake City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympics#Economic_effect_of_the_2002_Winter_Olympics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympics#Economic_...
- Rebelgecko 8y ago
  The previous times it was in Los Angeles
- RandallBrown 8y ago
  I don't know about the dividends over time, but many olympics turn profits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games
  - justin66 8y ago
    That chart is good, at least as a start for further research. I'm not sure how much rigor some of the linked to sources really exhibit, but it's a start. I'd heard the Athens Summer Olympics was a disaster but putting a number on it is pretty sobering.
drb91 8y ago
Hosting the olympics is such an embarrassment to LA. https://nolympicsla.com/faq/ https://nolympicsla.com/faq/
mc32 8y ago
Why do countries continue making concessions and spending money on these showcases? Let someone else waste their tax dollars on building and hosting money losing Olympic events.
- Aloha 8y ago
  Los Angeles is treating this like an infrastructure project - it gained numerous benefits from the last two times it hosted, and will likely gain more of the same this time. Los Angeles of all cities (based on history) has a good chance of running a profitable Olympics.
  - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
    From the article. >The bid contains nothing in the way of improved infrastructure, relying instead on public transportation projects already in the works. But LA 2028 faces challenges. And they're planning on reusing buildings. >Local organizers plan to use existing venues such as Staples Center, Pauley Pavilion and the Rose Bowl. Only a few temporary facilities will be needed at relatively little cost. And they don't know what they're spending the money on. >Organizers have been talking with City Council members about where to spend the money and are expected to present a plan next fall.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    Olympics facilities are not infrastructure.
    - 123jay7 8y ago
      Trains to airports are though.
  - Eric_WVGG 8y ago
    Although I am somewhat "anti-Olympics," my acquaintances in Salt Lake City say the 2002 Olympics were very successful in sort of modernizing the entire city. There is apparently a very clear before-and-after with regards to infrastructure, public spaces, transit, etc., all for the better. But that was a rare exception, as far as I can tell. Most Olympic cities appear to have that kind of effect as a goal and fall short. I read a proposal a while back that the summer Olympics just get permanently moved to Greece and that sounds like a great idea to me.
baxtr 8y ago
Maybe they should book a trip to Athens, Greece, before spending more. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/gallery/2014/aug/13/abandoned-athens-olympic-2004-venues-10-years-on-in-pictures https://www.theguardian.com/sport/gallery/2014/aug/13/abando...
- craftyguy 8y ago
  This is not the first time LA has hosted the games.
  - drb91 8y ago
    The last time was also a mistake.
    - Aloha 8y ago
      How so?
      - drb91 8y ago
        > The Host City Contract, as written by the IOC, stipulates where any profits would go. 20% goes to Olympic organizing bodies and the part that LA gets to keep can ONLY be used for youth sports initiatives—not affordable housing, homelessness, or a variety of other places...these potential surplus revenues could go. As written in the contract, there is no mechanism for the mayor, City Council, bid committee, and most importantly, the people of Los Angeles to weigh in on where any profits should go. It’s not profit by the traditional meaning of having cash in pocket. Why not just invest in youth sports and bypass the whole investment charade? I still think it’s a bad use of money but it’s better than hosting an infamously corrupt body in a different city every 2 years to MAYBE generate some youth sports profits as happened in 84.
        gamblor956 8y ago
        Why not just invest in youth sports and bypass the whole investment charade? I still think it’s a bad use of money but it’s better than hosting an infamously corrupt body in a different city every 2 years to MAYBE generate some youth sports profits as happened in 84. First, and importantly -- both previous LA Olympics generated real profits, as in, actual economic profits. Not unicorn fantasy profits like most tech companies embrace (ahem Groupon, Uber, Twitter, Tesla, etc.). Second--while you may not care about the Olympics or sports, literally billions of people around the world--and millions of people in Los Angeles--do care about the Games. The Games are both a celebration of sport, health, community, unity, and a vessel for raising money to fund youth athletics.
temp1831 8y ago
>This time, organizers said they based the budget on “real” dollars, looking across the next decade to predict expenses and revenues in terms of when the money is actually spent or received. To be interpreted as: It takes multiple revisions of the budget before somebody in the city government was even realistic enough to apply a discount rate to future cash flows.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  No, the original budget was based on an LA 2024 Olympics. After LA accepted the LA2028 Games, the budget needed to be revised. Due to the...uncertainty...of the Trump administration's impact on the economy, it took a while to determine a reasonable forecast for inflation over the next decade.
galonk 8y ago
"The London Olympics cost $19 billion, three times the original $6.5 billion budget, while the Tokyo Olympics are estimated to cost over $25 billion, four times the originally announced budget. There are similar stories from the Games in Athens, Montreal, and Sochi." -- Deadspin The budget will definitely keep multiplying until it's at least double digits. The initial budget was a fantasy.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  The budget estimates for LA have increased because of estimated inflation between now and 2028. There are no new additional/unforeseen costs in this budget. LA has hosted the Olympics several times and there members of the last organizing committee on the 2028 committee. They know what costs to anticipate and plan for...
  - rapsey 8y ago
    >There are no new additional/unforeseen costs. And why would anyone expect those on government contracts.
    - mixmastamyk 8y ago
      Los Angeles has hosted the Olympics twice already and has enough infrastructure to do the job. Sure there will be some expenses, like painting over graffiti and busing homeless out of main areas. But, it is not like they are building major infrastructure like Athens or Rio. There are some LA Metro improvements being done but they were planned and tax introduced before the Olympic win, I believe.
      - popz41 8y ago
        I would disagree on "having enough infrastructure", after moving to SoCal a few years back. LAX is a complete nightmare. One can easily spend 20-30 mins trying to drive from the airport entrance to the terminal. The horseshoe design cannot handle capacity.
Aloha 8y ago
"The new figure represents a $700 million increase over previous estimates, with organizers saying they had to adjust for inflation after L.A., which originally bid for the 2024 Games, agreed to wait four more years." Not much of a news story here - wait four years, inflation goes up - when you're looking at 6b, 700m in inflation seems reasonable with the state of inflation in the economy.
- ra1n85 8y ago
  >with the state of inflation in the economy. Could you provide a reference there? A 10%+ increase over four years seems excessive.
  - Aloha 8y ago
    https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/ https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-infl... It comes out to about 2% a year.
  - ericsoderstrom 8y ago
    1.024^4 = 1.10 Inflation is usually targeted between 2% and 2.5%. So an estimated 10% over four years seems reasonable.
kevmo 8y ago
Nice.
outside1234 8y ago
Serious question - is this what is driving the construction of transit in LA?
- mixmastamyk 8y ago
  Partially, but probably not the main driver. The city is getting more dense, despite the work of NIMBYs. There are some LA Metro improvements being done but they were planned and tax introduced before the Olympic win, I believe.
  - jcranmer 8y ago
    The advantage of the Olympics is that it helps to steamroll over NIMBY objection and ensure that politicians are actually willing to commit funding to transit projects.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  Partially, yes. This is the drive behind the "28 by 28" initiative at LA Metro, where the goal is to complete 28 pre-planned projects before the games. (The original plan, sans Olympics, was to complete about 5-6 of them.) These projects include the Subway to UCLA, the LAX People Mover and Metro connector, the "Regional Connector" downtown, the extension of the Gold Line in the San Gabriel Valley, hundreds of miles of bike lanes, and various freeway upgrades. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eight_by_%2728 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eight_by_%2728)
- zanny 8y ago
  I'd hope a metro area of 13 million people could drive transit construction in the 21st century in the general case, but cities all over the US continue to impress on their total failure to do so.
gamblor956 8y ago
Had to comment on all the FUD being spread in these comments. (Note: I am a volunteer with LA 2028 but I'm not on the committee so my thoughts don't represent those of the LA 2028 Committee, just my own as an informed volunteer. 1) Cost increases over the past year have all been to account for estimated inflation between now and 2028. This is deliberate--the committee wants to have a realistic budget to target revenue goals against, not a fairy-tail budget, even if it looks bad early on. 2) LA is not building many new facilities for the Olympics. Almost all of the facilities will be existing facilities, like Staples, the United Airlines LA Coliseum, the Rams/Chargers(?) stadium, the pools at Loyola Marymount, UCLA and USC, the tracks and fields at all three colleges, the port of Long Beach, Santa Monica Beach, etc. Athletes will be housed at UCLA and USC (again), and the media center will be paid for and built by NBC largely at existing facilities. The facilities that will need to be built: a velodrome for indoor cycling. A rock wall for the climbing events, location undetermined, but which is expected to remain after the event. BMX courses in Big Bear, which the resorts there have said they will maintain after the event depending on location. 3) Tax dollars are not being wasted on this event. The purpose of the budget is to raise private funding, i.e., donations or sponsorships. LA 2028 is working with NBC (first time in history organizers have worked with broadcasters) to sell a joint package so that they aren't competing against the broadcaster. The lack of tax dollars also means that it's not a choice between the Olympics and housing, etc. In fact, the Olympics are spurring the use of tax dollars on housing and transportation infrastructure, including the acceleration of nearly 40 years of public transit building into 12 years. The public transit lines planned have already led to thousands of new housing units being built in LA county in proximity to those lines. 4) The LA Olympics have been profitable. Every. Single. Time. The 84 Olympics are still the most profitable in history by whatever metric you use, especially once adjusted for inflation. The returns from the 84 Olympics are still being used to fund K12 athletics today. As in 84 and 32, LA wasn't the first choice for the Olympics and its plan every time has been the overwhelming re-use of existing facilities. (Even the LA Coliseum was built more than a decade before the Olympics as a war memorial.) 5) LA is capable of holding an Olympics next year, if necessary. The only other city with sufficient facilities to hold an event of this magnitude on such short notice is London, which has maintained most of its facilities from the 2012 Games.
- 8y ago
dugluak 8y ago
If you think about it as an entertainment/sport industry with a product that comes out every 4 years that number doesn't seem too bad. wonder how many jobs it creates.
twa927 8y ago
Maybe it's time to start hosting olympics in the same place? And make all countries participate in costs? There are multiple arguments for this: https://www.google.com/search?q=hosting+olympics+in+the+same+place https://www.google.com/search?q=hosting+olympics+in+the+same...
- Rebelgecko 8y ago
  That's one of the advantages of doing it in Los Angeles. There's already stadiums here, several of which have been used for previous Olympic games
- fiftyfifty 8y ago
  At the very least the host should be chosen based on it's current ability to host the games, not rely on tens of billions of dollars worth of construction projects to get there. LA is probably one of the few places with most of the venues already in place. The other option would be to host different sports in different countries, so the burden get's spread out more. It's kind of ridiculous that countries have to build artificial rivers now and all kinds of ridiculous crap. Why not host the kayaking somewhere there is a natural river they can use.
- test6554 8y ago
  Maybe it’s time to forbid them from receiving any taxpayer funds and require them to take donations or sell tickets/merchandise/media rights only.
benj111 8y ago
"some political leaders are already talking about improvements, asking for a study on ways to pay for street and sidewalk fixes. None of that would be part of LA 2028’s budget " The problem with 'budgets' for things like this is that they show exactly what you want them to show. The current leaders want to show that the project is cheap and on budget, so of course that new road isn't included in the budget. The next leaders will want to show how bad the previous incumbents were with finances for the Olympics, so of course that road will be included in the budget.
gumby 8y ago
Apparently they’re using the same contractors hired for the high speed rail, More seriously: this always happens; what’s the point of hosting an olympics anyway? Even a permanent location would be better.
- linuxftw 8y ago
  It's a wealth transfer for the politically connected, same as anything else. Why should we care who the fastest runner on the planet is? Or the fastest cyclist? In what way does it enhance the lives of the great majority of people?
  - gumby 8y ago
    Although I don't see the point of professional sport I don't deny that some people rely like it. My point is that bidding your city to host the olympics, or other such activities, usually ends up not making anybody happy.
    - linuxftw 8y ago
      For good reason. If people want to be surrounded by a ton of strangers, they'd move to NYC.
partiallypro 8y ago
I hate this traveling Olympics nonsense. It's such a scam. Just hold the summer Olympics every year in Greece. I don't understand how sports get such a pass on corporate welfare. It's not just an Olympics problem, the NCAA, NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB all fleece tax payers. The NFL is the worst though.
- linuxftw 8y ago
  I think the Olympics are the worst offenders. At least NFL stadiums get used for a few years. Olympic stadiums quickly become ghost towns after the event.
- pdq 8y ago
  I agree with you, except that I'd put the Olympics at the bottom. They have their beauty pageant/silent auction/bid every two years, where cities across the world bid against each other for a single year Olympic event, and the process is riddled with bribery. The NFL (and all other pro sports teams) at least sign a multi-decade contract. Still a terrible deal for tax payers, but not as bad as the Olympics.

86 points by jmsflknr 8y ago

Why do sites like this jam six identical entries into my browser history? Do they think I'm going to try to hit the back button, have it not work, and then I'll just go, "Well, I guess I'm stuck here! Maybe I'll click on some ads!"

RobertDeNiro 8y ago
In some ways, the state of the web is degenerating. Way too much tracking, everyone wants metrics on everything you do. And don't get me started on mobile ads.
- didgeoridoo 8y ago
  Permissions, permissions, permissions. "This site wants to take a dump in your browser history. Allow?" should fix things nicely.
  - drb91 8y ago
    Yea I wish we could keep the browser in document mode and switch to app mode if someone is an asshole enough to embed an article in a single page app that loads the content asynchronously.
  - zanny 8y ago
    The alternative was back in the day when clickjackers could install Actionscript malware without a prompt that rootkitted the whole computer. Sandboxing and prompts are a definite win.
brianpgordon 8y ago
More likely there's a ticket in the icebox to fix it but for some reason the product owner never wants to allocate time to work on a bug to help users leave the site faster. :)

hanniabu 8y ago

I hope they build the facilities for long term use unlike other Olympic facilities built that end up crumbling a few years after.

phamilton 8y ago
> Local organizers plan to use existing venues such as Staples Center, Pauley Pavilion and the Rose Bowl. Only a few temporary facilities will be needed at relatively little cost. The U.S. has been pretty good on this front. Salt Lake City nailed it, almost all of the major additions are still actively used by the community (hockey, cross country skiing, ski jumping, etc).
Aloha 8y ago
So far the permanent venues built for 1932 and 1984, have had very long lives full of use - I see no reason why 2028 would be different based on their statements.
duxup 8y ago
Of all places LA seems capable of continuing to use the facilities. Still not sure that alone makes it a good choice, but I expect a lot will be in use in the future.
gamblor956 8y ago
LA has already said that almost all of the facilities used in the 28 Games will be existing facilities (or facilities under construction at the time of the bid). Only a handful of facilities need to be purpose-built for the games, like a velodrome for indoor cycling, and it is expected that those facilities will be kept after the games.
Rebelgecko 8y ago
They're not building anything major. They're reusing existing stadiums: Coliseum (seats ~80k and previously featured in 1932 and 1984 Olympics) New Rams stadium in Inglewood (seats ~80k. Being built privately with relatively small indirect subsidies) Rose Bowl (seats ~90k) And smaller preexisting venues (2 soccer stadiums, Staples Center, the beach, the ocean, etc). There's no new megastadiums being built. When I looked at their budget, I think the biggest facilities expense was $7 million to make an area at the Rams stadium safe for shooting and archery events.

justin66 8y ago

Are there any recent examples of the costs of hosting an Olympics paying very clear dividends over time, such that the costs of hosting the event were definitely worthwhile for the hosting city?

dpflan 8y ago
You piqued my interest. I would check this out and the effect of hosting the World Cup: 1. Economic Impact of the London 2012 Olympics (https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/2100/994 https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/2100/994) 2. Analysis of Impacts on China's Economy of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5369536 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5369536) 3. The Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games (https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/economics-hosting-olympic-games https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/economics-hosting-olympic-g...) 4. Google Scholar Search: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11&q=economic+impact+of+hosting+olympics&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11&q=eco...
phamilton 8y ago
Salt Lake City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympics#Economic_effect_of_the_2002_Winter_Olympics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympics#Economic_...
Rebelgecko 8y ago
The previous times it was in Los Angeles
RandallBrown 8y ago
I don't know about the dividends over time, but many olympics turn profits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games
- justin66 8y ago
  That chart is good, at least as a start for further research. I'm not sure how much rigor some of the linked to sources really exhibit, but it's a start. I'd heard the Athens Summer Olympics was a disaster but putting a number on it is pretty sobering.

drb91 8y ago

Hosting the olympics is such an embarrassment to LA. https://nolympicsla.com/faq/ https://nolympicsla.com/faq/

mc32 8y ago

Why do countries continue making concessions and spending money on these showcases? Let someone else waste their tax dollars on building and hosting money losing Olympic events.

Aloha 8y ago
Los Angeles is treating this like an infrastructure project - it gained numerous benefits from the last two times it hosted, and will likely gain more of the same this time. Los Angeles of all cities (based on history) has a good chance of running a profitable Olympics.
- ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
  From the article. >The bid contains nothing in the way of improved infrastructure, relying instead on public transportation projects already in the works. But LA 2028 faces challenges. And they're planning on reusing buildings. >Local organizers plan to use existing venues such as Staples Center, Pauley Pavilion and the Rose Bowl. Only a few temporary facilities will be needed at relatively little cost. And they don't know what they're spending the money on. >Organizers have been talking with City Council members about where to spend the money and are expected to present a plan next fall.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  Olympics facilities are not infrastructure.
  - 123jay7 8y ago
    Trains to airports are though.
- Eric_WVGG 8y ago
  Although I am somewhat "anti-Olympics," my acquaintances in Salt Lake City say the 2002 Olympics were very successful in sort of modernizing the entire city. There is apparently a very clear before-and-after with regards to infrastructure, public spaces, transit, etc., all for the better. But that was a rare exception, as far as I can tell. Most Olympic cities appear to have that kind of effect as a goal and fall short. I read a proposal a while back that the summer Olympics just get permanently moved to Greece and that sounds like a great idea to me.

baxtr 8y ago

Maybe they should book a trip to Athens, Greece, before spending more. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/gallery/2014/aug/13/abandoned-athens-olympic-2004-venues-10-years-on-in-pictures https://www.theguardian.com/sport/gallery/2014/aug/13/abando...

craftyguy 8y ago
This is not the first time LA has hosted the games.
- drb91 8y ago
  The last time was also a mistake.
  - Aloha 8y ago
    How so?
    - drb91 8y ago
      > The Host City Contract, as written by the IOC, stipulates where any profits would go. 20% goes to Olympic organizing bodies and the part that LA gets to keep can ONLY be used for youth sports initiatives—not affordable housing, homelessness, or a variety of other places...these potential surplus revenues could go. As written in the contract, there is no mechanism for the mayor, City Council, bid committee, and most importantly, the people of Los Angeles to weigh in on where any profits should go. It’s not profit by the traditional meaning of having cash in pocket. Why not just invest in youth sports and bypass the whole investment charade? I still think it’s a bad use of money but it’s better than hosting an infamously corrupt body in a different city every 2 years to MAYBE generate some youth sports profits as happened in 84.
      - gamblor956 8y ago
        Why not just invest in youth sports and bypass the whole investment charade? I still think it’s a bad use of money but it’s better than hosting an infamously corrupt body in a different city every 2 years to MAYBE generate some youth sports profits as happened in 84. First, and importantly -- both previous LA Olympics generated real profits, as in, actual economic profits. Not unicorn fantasy profits like most tech companies embrace (ahem Groupon, Uber, Twitter, Tesla, etc.). Second--while you may not care about the Olympics or sports, literally billions of people around the world--and millions of people in Los Angeles--do care about the Games. The Games are both a celebration of sport, health, community, unity, and a vessel for raising money to fund youth athletics.

temp1831 8y ago

>This time, organizers said they based the budget on “real” dollars, looking across the next decade to predict expenses and revenues in terms of when the money is actually spent or received. To be interpreted as: It takes multiple revisions of the budget before somebody in the city government was even realistic enough to apply a discount rate to future cash flows.

gamblor956 8y ago
No, the original budget was based on an LA 2024 Olympics. After LA accepted the LA2028 Games, the budget needed to be revised. Due to the...uncertainty...of the Trump administration's impact on the economy, it took a while to determine a reasonable forecast for inflation over the next decade.

galonk 8y ago

"The London Olympics cost $19 billion, three times the original $6.5 billion budget, while the Tokyo Olympics are estimated to cost over $25 billion, four times the originally announced budget. There are similar stories from the Games in Athens, Montreal, and Sochi." -- Deadspin The budget will definitely keep multiplying until it's at least double digits. The initial budget was a fantasy.

gamblor956 8y ago
The budget estimates for LA have increased because of estimated inflation between now and 2028. There are no new additional/unforeseen costs in this budget. LA has hosted the Olympics several times and there members of the last organizing committee on the 2028 committee. They know what costs to anticipate and plan for...
- rapsey 8y ago
  >There are no new additional/unforeseen costs. And why would anyone expect those on government contracts.
  - mixmastamyk 8y ago
    Los Angeles has hosted the Olympics twice already and has enough infrastructure to do the job. Sure there will be some expenses, like painting over graffiti and busing homeless out of main areas. But, it is not like they are building major infrastructure like Athens or Rio. There are some LA Metro improvements being done but they were planned and tax introduced before the Olympic win, I believe.
    - popz41 8y ago
      I would disagree on "having enough infrastructure", after moving to SoCal a few years back. LAX is a complete nightmare. One can easily spend 20-30 mins trying to drive from the airport entrance to the terminal. The horseshoe design cannot handle capacity.

Aloha 8y ago

"The new figure represents a $700 million increase over previous estimates, with organizers saying they had to adjust for inflation after L.A., which originally bid for the 2024 Games, agreed to wait four more years." Not much of a news story here - wait four years, inflation goes up - when you're looking at 6b, 700m in inflation seems reasonable with the state of inflation in the economy.

ra1n85 8y ago
>with the state of inflation in the economy. Could you provide a reference there? A 10%+ increase over four years seems excessive.
- Aloha 8y ago
  https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/ https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-infl... It comes out to about 2% a year.
- ericsoderstrom 8y ago
  1.024^4 = 1.10 Inflation is usually targeted between 2% and 2.5%. So an estimated 10% over four years seems reasonable.

kevmo 8y ago

Nice.

outside1234 8y ago

Serious question - is this what is driving the construction of transit in LA?

mixmastamyk 8y ago
Partially, but probably not the main driver. The city is getting more dense, despite the work of NIMBYs. There are some LA Metro improvements being done but they were planned and tax introduced before the Olympic win, I believe.
- jcranmer 8y ago
  The advantage of the Olympics is that it helps to steamroll over NIMBY objection and ensure that politicians are actually willing to commit funding to transit projects.
gamblor956 8y ago
Partially, yes. This is the drive behind the "28 by 28" initiative at LA Metro, where the goal is to complete 28 pre-planned projects before the games. (The original plan, sans Olympics, was to complete about 5-6 of them.) These projects include the Subway to UCLA, the LAX People Mover and Metro connector, the "Regional Connector" downtown, the extension of the Gold Line in the San Gabriel Valley, hundreds of miles of bike lanes, and various freeway upgrades. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eight_by_%2728 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eight_by_%2728)
zanny 8y ago
I'd hope a metro area of 13 million people could drive transit construction in the 21st century in the general case, but cities all over the US continue to impress on their total failure to do so.

gamblor956 8y ago

Had to comment on all the FUD being spread in these comments. (Note: I am a volunteer with LA 2028 but I'm not on the committee so my thoughts don't represent those of the LA 2028 Committee, just my own as an informed volunteer. 1) Cost increases over the past year have all been to account for estimated inflation between now and 2028. This is deliberate--the committee wants to have a realistic budget to target revenue goals against, not a fairy-tail budget, even if it looks bad early on. 2) LA is not building many new facilities for the Olympics. Almost all of the facilities will be existing facilities, like Staples, the United Airlines LA Coliseum, the Rams/Chargers(?) stadium, the pools at Loyola Marymount, UCLA and USC, the tracks and fields at all three colleges, the port of Long Beach, Santa Monica Beach, etc. Athletes will be housed at UCLA and USC (again), and the media center will be paid for and built by NBC largely at existing facilities. The facilities that will need to be built: a velodrome for indoor cycling. A rock wall for the climbing events, location undetermined, but which is expected to remain after the event. BMX courses in Big Bear, which the resorts there have said they will maintain after the event depending on location. 3) Tax dollars are not being wasted on this event. The purpose of the budget is to raise private funding, i.e., donations or sponsorships. LA 2028 is working with NBC (first time in history organizers have worked with broadcasters) to sell a joint package so that they aren't competing against the broadcaster. The lack of tax dollars also means that it's not a choice between the Olympics and housing, etc. In fact, the Olympics are spurring the use of tax dollars on housing and transportation infrastructure, including the acceleration of nearly 40 years of public transit building into 12 years. The public transit lines planned have already led to thousands of new housing units being built in LA county in proximity to those lines. 4) The LA Olympics have been profitable. Every. Single. Time. The 84 Olympics are still the most profitable in history by whatever metric you use, especially once adjusted for inflation. The returns from the 84 Olympics are still being used to fund K12 athletics today. As in 84 and 32, LA wasn't the first choice for the Olympics and its plan every time has been the overwhelming re-use of existing facilities. (Even the LA Coliseum was built more than a decade before the Olympics as a war memorial.) 5) LA is capable of holding an Olympics next year, if necessary. The only other city with sufficient facilities to hold an event of this magnitude on such short notice is London, which has maintained most of its facilities from the 2012 Games.

8y ago

dugluak 8y ago

If you think about it as an entertainment/sport industry with a product that comes out every 4 years that number doesn't seem too bad. wonder how many jobs it creates.

twa927 8y ago

Maybe it's time to start hosting olympics in the same place? And make all countries participate in costs? There are multiple arguments for this: https://www.google.com/search?q=hosting+olympics+in+the+same+place https://www.google.com/search?q=hosting+olympics+in+the+same...

Rebelgecko 8y ago
That's one of the advantages of doing it in Los Angeles. There's already stadiums here, several of which have been used for previous Olympic games
fiftyfifty 8y ago
At the very least the host should be chosen based on it's current ability to host the games, not rely on tens of billions of dollars worth of construction projects to get there. LA is probably one of the few places with most of the venues already in place. The other option would be to host different sports in different countries, so the burden get's spread out more. It's kind of ridiculous that countries have to build artificial rivers now and all kinds of ridiculous crap. Why not host the kayaking somewhere there is a natural river they can use.
test6554 8y ago
Maybe it’s time to forbid them from receiving any taxpayer funds and require them to take donations or sell tickets/merchandise/media rights only.

benj111 8y ago

"some political leaders are already talking about improvements, asking for a study on ways to pay for street and sidewalk fixes. None of that would be part of LA 2028’s budget " The problem with 'budgets' for things like this is that they show exactly what you want them to show. The current leaders want to show that the project is cheap and on budget, so of course that new road isn't included in the budget. The next leaders will want to show how bad the previous incumbents were with finances for the Olympics, so of course that road will be included in the budget.

gumby 8y ago

Apparently they’re using the same contractors hired for the high speed rail, More seriously: this always happens; what’s the point of hosting an olympics anyway? Even a permanent location would be better.

linuxftw 8y ago
It's a wealth transfer for the politically connected, same as anything else. Why should we care who the fastest runner on the planet is? Or the fastest cyclist? In what way does it enhance the lives of the great majority of people?
- gumby 8y ago
  Although I don't see the point of professional sport I don't deny that some people rely like it. My point is that bidding your city to host the olympics, or other such activities, usually ends up not making anybody happy.
  - linuxftw 8y ago
    For good reason. If people want to be surrounded by a ton of strangers, they'd move to NYC.

partiallypro 8y ago

I hate this traveling Olympics nonsense. It's such a scam. Just hold the summer Olympics every year in Greece. I don't understand how sports get such a pass on corporate welfare. It's not just an Olympics problem, the NCAA, NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB all fleece tax payers. The NFL is the worst though.

linuxftw 8y ago
I think the Olympics are the worst offenders. At least NFL stadiums get used for a few years. Olympic stadiums quickly become ghost towns after the event.
pdq 8y ago
I agree with you, except that I'd put the Olympics at the bottom. They have their beauty pageant/silent auction/bid every two years, where cities across the world bid against each other for a single year Olympic event, and the process is riddled with bribery. The NFL (and all other pro sports teams) at least sign a multi-decade contract. Still a terrible deal for tax payers, but not as bad as the Olympics.