![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jawnbcOn 02 October the International Olympic Committee will select the host city for the 2016 Olympic Summer Games. From an initial list of 7 cities we are down to four:
Bids
None of the four bids are perfect, but two had what are perhaps fatal flaws. Madrid's bid didn't seem to reflect an understanding of how Games are managed (particularly at the Executive level). Tokyo's seemed to flub how many venues would be new, updated, or usable "as is." This matters a lot when "we've already got lots of this in place" is the key message of your bid.
Chicago didn't have its budget 100% guaranteed until recently...but it is guaranteed, meaning government will pay the bills if the organizing committee cannot. Rio's deficiency is it's only hosted the Pan Am Games, aside from the football World Cup. But then other cities (Barcelona, Seoul) were similarly positioned and delivered great Games.
South America
The wild card in all of this is whether or not enough IOC members think it's time an Olympic Games finally went to South America--and if Brazil can deliver them. 20 years ago Brazil was a febrile dictatorship; today it's the 10th largest economy in the world and strongly democratic. There's still a lot of poverty and more crime than any Western European capital city. But most observers agree that Rio and Brazil are both ascendant in general.
The vote
Assuming Madrid is out on the first ballot, things will get very interesting then, since any of the other bids could find it's "time" for their region. I'm guessing Tokyo will go out next, so the 2018 Games will go to Pyeonchang. That leaves Chicago and Rio. Rio has left no gaps in its bid, which the IOC committee that inspected each city acknowledged: every other bid had something troubling. Chicago's fixed the financial guarantee issue.
In Copenhagen this week, the heads of government from Japan, Spain and Brazil are scheduled to speak: Obama's not. Many attribute Putin's live, in-person speech--in English--as what sealed the deal for Sochi 2014.
My heart and my betting mind are on the same page on this one...
- Chicago
- Madrid
- Rio de Janeiro
- Tokyo
Bids
None of the four bids are perfect, but two had what are perhaps fatal flaws. Madrid's bid didn't seem to reflect an understanding of how Games are managed (particularly at the Executive level). Tokyo's seemed to flub how many venues would be new, updated, or usable "as is." This matters a lot when "we've already got lots of this in place" is the key message of your bid.
Chicago didn't have its budget 100% guaranteed until recently...but it is guaranteed, meaning government will pay the bills if the organizing committee cannot. Rio's deficiency is it's only hosted the Pan Am Games, aside from the football World Cup. But then other cities (Barcelona, Seoul) were similarly positioned and delivered great Games.
South America
The wild card in all of this is whether or not enough IOC members think it's time an Olympic Games finally went to South America--and if Brazil can deliver them. 20 years ago Brazil was a febrile dictatorship; today it's the 10th largest economy in the world and strongly democratic. There's still a lot of poverty and more crime than any Western European capital city. But most observers agree that Rio and Brazil are both ascendant in general.
The vote
Assuming Madrid is out on the first ballot, things will get very interesting then, since any of the other bids could find it's "time" for their region. I'm guessing Tokyo will go out next, so the 2018 Games will go to Pyeonchang. That leaves Chicago and Rio. Rio has left no gaps in its bid, which the IOC committee that inspected each city acknowledged: every other bid had something troubling. Chicago's fixed the financial guarantee issue.
In Copenhagen this week, the heads of government from Japan, Spain and Brazil are scheduled to speak: Obama's not. Many attribute Putin's live, in-person speech--in English--as what sealed the deal for Sochi 2014.
My heart and my betting mind are on the same page on this one...
