4 ms·

> many people travel to cities where sports matches, concerts, and other events (e.g., conventions, auto shows, etc.) are held in the stadiums. This also affect

> many people travel to cities where sports matches, concerts, and other events (e.g., conventions, auto shows, etc.) are held in the stadiums. This also affects other businesses in the city that benefit from the spending done by those that travel into the cities. Sure, but when slg says the financials are settled, presumably they mean stadiums are a bad investment even when all such tangible benefits are taken into account. The question is whether there are other intangible benefits - maybe a city with a sports team is happier; or has lower obesity; or an improved cultural life reduces brain drain; or the city can afford a mass transit system and needs one, but bundling it with a stadium breaks through some political deadlock; or it's just plain that voters support the stadium. A theory of intangible benefits would also be helpful in explaining why cities keep on bidding for the olympics, which is otherwise hard to rationalise.

TulliusCicero 5y ago
Quite possible that's the case, but I think it's unlikely that it outweighs the "intangible benefits" you'd get from other, more standard investments, like public transit or libraries.
sidr 5y ago
> why cities keep on bidding for the olympics, which is otherwise hard to rationalise. There was one bid for 2028 and one for 2032. Compare with 8+ bids in years past. There are fewer and fewer new cities that have never hosted before putting in bids (ostensibly due to insane construction costs/demands by the IOC). 3 out of 5 cities bidding for 2024 withdrew their bids and the other two got 2024 and 2028. 2032 seems to have gotten only one bid. What's happening is that this "intangible benefits" theory is dying as more and more of the world realizes that there are none. On the other hand the olympics and the world cup does seem like a good venue for authoritarian regimes to create spectacles.
- patentatt 5y ago
  > On the other hand the olympics and the world cup does seem like a good venue for authoritarian regimes to create spectacles. Off the top of my head: recent Olympic host countries include Russia, China, and Brazil . World Cup hosts includes Russia, Brazil, and Qatar. Yup, checks out. P.S. Ok, Brazil being in this list is debatable, as they are a democracy ... but with Bolsonaro in power I'll lump them in this group. Yes, I realize Bolsonaro wasn't in office for the Olympics or World Cup, or for the bidding process which happened many years earlier, but he's shitty enough that I'll take the editorial liberty of retroactively smearing his stain back in time. P.P.S. Yeah, if you want to do the same with Trump in the US I guess I can't disagree either. But the US hasn't hosted an Olympics for 20 years or a World Cup for even longer.
- fmajid 5y ago
  Not to mention Juan Antonio Samaranch, who ran the IOC from 1980 to 2001, was a Franco crony.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  Public interest in the Olympics also seems to be falling. IIRC the last two olympics had record low viewership. I know I didn't watch at all, and I used to watch most of the big prime time broadcast events 10 years ago. The same seems to be the case for many of my acquaintances.
  - brewdad 5y ago
    I still have an interest in quite a few Olympic sports. NBC's coverage, in the US, has made watching the Olympics unbearable. Things like spending half the broadcast on background/special interest stories instead of the competition. Only showing the US athletes and usually, but not always, the podium winners. Starting an event on one channel and then moving it to a different channel halfway through. etc.
    - Forgeties79 5y ago
      Their whole method is very bizarre to me. Even as someone who has worked in film and television for a decade, I can’t make heads or tails of their strategy. I mean there must be something they are seeing that we are not, I can’t imagine they do it over and over again like that without their reasons.
- jerrybender 5y ago
  > There was one bid for 2028 and one for 2032. The bidding procedure changed, one preferred bid is selected far earlier to avoid losers feeling frustrated and to lower costs.

TulliusCicero 5y ago

Quite possible that's the case, but I think it's unlikely that it outweighs the "intangible benefits" you'd get from other, more standard investments, like public transit or libraries.

sidr 5y ago

> why cities keep on bidding for the olympics, which is otherwise hard to rationalise. There was one bid for 2028 and one for 2032. Compare with 8+ bids in years past. There are fewer and fewer new cities that have never hosted before putting in bids (ostensibly due to insane construction costs/demands by the IOC). 3 out of 5 cities bidding for 2024 withdrew their bids and the other two got 2024 and 2028. 2032 seems to have gotten only one bid. What's happening is that this "intangible benefits" theory is dying as more and more of the world realizes that there are none. On the other hand the olympics and the world cup does seem like a good venue for authoritarian regimes to create spectacles.

patentatt 5y ago
> On the other hand the olympics and the world cup does seem like a good venue for authoritarian regimes to create spectacles. Off the top of my head: recent Olympic host countries include Russia, China, and Brazil . World Cup hosts includes Russia, Brazil, and Qatar. Yup, checks out. P.S. Ok, Brazil being in this list is debatable, as they are a democracy ... but with Bolsonaro in power I'll lump them in this group. Yes, I realize Bolsonaro wasn't in office for the Olympics or World Cup, or for the bidding process which happened many years earlier, but he's shitty enough that I'll take the editorial liberty of retroactively smearing his stain back in time. P.P.S. Yeah, if you want to do the same with Trump in the US I guess I can't disagree either. But the US hasn't hosted an Olympics for 20 years or a World Cup for even longer.
fmajid 5y ago
Not to mention Juan Antonio Samaranch, who ran the IOC from 1980 to 2001, was a Franco crony.
throwawayboise 5y ago
Public interest in the Olympics also seems to be falling. IIRC the last two olympics had record low viewership. I know I didn't watch at all, and I used to watch most of the big prime time broadcast events 10 years ago. The same seems to be the case for many of my acquaintances.
- brewdad 5y ago
  I still have an interest in quite a few Olympic sports. NBC's coverage, in the US, has made watching the Olympics unbearable. Things like spending half the broadcast on background/special interest stories instead of the competition. Only showing the US athletes and usually, but not always, the podium winners. Starting an event on one channel and then moving it to a different channel halfway through. etc.
  - Forgeties79 5y ago
    Their whole method is very bizarre to me. Even as someone who has worked in film and television for a decade, I can’t make heads or tails of their strategy. I mean there must be something they are seeing that we are not, I can’t imagine they do it over and over again like that without their reasons.
jerrybender 5y ago
> There was one bid for 2028 and one for 2032. The bidding procedure changed, one preferred bid is selected far earlier to avoid losers feeling frustrated and to lower costs.