I think Chirac's comments on British farms etc. to other world leaders made the difference. If he hadn't opened his big fat mouth, this thread would have another spirit.
I hardly see this as decisive. But if I'm wrong, it's just plain scandalous regarding the work of the bidders. I hope the IOC took that decision because they thought it was the best choice.
Well, I can see people being annoyed at him for making those comments and voting "against" him. Just speculating...who knows how these things work but frankly, I don't trust any of it.
I'm thrilled Paris and New York, cities I love, didn't get "chosen" for the Games. They're a waste of money and a boon only to developers; who needs the unusable facilities and huge debts? As for Chirac's comments, for once he spoke the truth. And if it did turn the tide, all the better.
All of the France facilities are in place! They probably don't need to build anything. They've hosted other sporting events before! I read this last night at the Mirror by columnist Holt and it's so true! http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/oliverholt/ Paris deserves them. It has bid twice before. London hasn't. Many of the Paris venues, including the main stadium, are already built. London's aren't. The Paris transport system works. London's doesn't. A massive majority of Parisians want the Games. Londoners are less sure. Paris staged the 2003 athletics World Championships flawlessly. London promised to stage the 2005 athletics World Championships... then pulled out. Paris hasn't staged the Games since 1924. London did so in 1948. Oh yes, and the French government supports its sportsmen and women. Britain's doesn't. That's the worst bit about having Blair out in Singapore pretending to be an advocate for British sport.
So? As far as I know, the best an Olympic city has done is break even (Atlanta and maybe Sydney?). I don't see why Paris would be any different. I didn't read the plans too carefully, but I recall something about turning one of the canals into a swimming pool--and they would've had to build an Olympic Village and whatnot, right? So there had to be infrastructure costs. The Olympics are a ripoff. The IOC is corrupt. The "Olympic Movement" is a joke. Why does anyone care where this nonsense takes place? Besides, London is perfect if you are Parisian lover of the Olympics. You can take the Eurostar to the events and be back in time for dinner.
les JO de 2012 ont etait TRUQUéS, ça sera pareil pour 2016 et 2020 Les JO 2012 à vendre ? En août 2004 la BBC sont parvenus à "acheter" 54 voix du CIO pour l'attribution des JO 2012. http://www.sport.fr/autres/mul/37564.shtm. les future Gagnant des JO de 2016 et 2020, seront New York en 2016 et Madrid en 2020 sur à 100%, meme avec une candidature a 10 balles. http://www.sport24.com Un vote totalement illogique: Au vu des résultats du vote de la ville hôte des Jeux Olympiques 2012, on a bien du mal à comprendre la logique des membres du CIO. Les résultats des votes : 1er tour : Moscou éliminée Londres 22 voix, Paris 21, Madrid 20, New York 19, Moscou 15 2e tour : New York éliminée Madrid 32 voix, Londres 27, Paris 25, New York 16 3e tour : Madrid éliminée Londres 39 voix, Paris 33, Madrid 31 4e tour : Londres élue Londres 54 voix, Paris 50 ça commence vraiment a m'enerver ces connards qui achetent des voix pour leur candidature a 10 balles.
It matters for the economy, for unemployment ... JOBS, for having tourists! It's more important than you think. At least to Paris/France. If you watched the French news and saw how people wept, even grown men who worked/supported the bid, you'd see how important it was to them.
As we usually say : "trop bon, trop con !" We're definitely Samaranch's favorite mugs, check this great article (3 pages) : in french
c'est du depit....non? Pffft. Aggravation et jalousement. je n'ai pas pitié pour eux - un groupe des enfants criantes. ca serait bien... Paris a perdu deux fois (notablement, contre Beijing pour les JO 2008) Il semblait inquietant pour les Francais... non. Pas du tout. Ceux qui ont votes pour Moscou ont soutenis Madrid, l'elimination de Moscou augmente le nombre des votes pour Madrid... Donc, quand New York etais elimine, ils ont votes pour Londres dans le tour troisieme... Londres a gagne le vote des ceux qui vote pour New York et Madrid (qui etaient divise 50-50) Il etait tres logique... On achete rien!! je trouve ça stupide!
The 1984 Summer games in Los Angeles made a profit of over $200 million. If Paris had almost everything built (like LA '84) then breaking even or a profit wouldn't be out of the question. Let alone the tourist trade...
It was important in a job perspective. But I think people were really disapointed to be slapped in the face like while France decided to play th egame entirely. It's certainly blown out of proportions but it's also rather painful. We are the cuckold, never pleasant... Besides the intense lobbying, I think the IOC members took in consideration that there was also a better opportunity to make a difference in London, to live an Olympic legacy as it has been done in Barcelona ; this is always very valorising for the Olympic movement. On a personal note, as far as the fate of mankind isn't concerned, I prefer to lose fair than to win dirty...It's just a stupig froggy's opinion. Anyway, we've had the confirmation of what kind of values drive the World at the moment and this is the most sad. What I've just said doesn't apply to the British workers and sportsmen who will try to make brilliant games, I wish them well.
Completely agree. We've been screwed by the Madrid voters, we thought that they would vote for us, but it was 50-50. The still very influent Samaranch didn't want that the games took place in Paris but in London. For him the Olympics are a brand that must be developed and London had a young and dynamic image that fitted well with the ambitions of the IOC. Forget about sportsmanship and ethic values, it has nothing to do with the choices of the IOC, but very naïvely, the french believed that only those beautiful ideas were enough to get the Olympics (Hey guys, we live in a dirty, cynical, modern world ) P.S. : I'm not too sure about "lose fair > win dirty". I prefer this one : "il vaut parfois mieux faire une campagne honteuse qu'un résultat honteux." ("It's sometimes better to make a disgraceful campaign than to get a disgraceful result.")
Hey Marsiglia, j'étais dans ton coin à la mi-juin. Je peux même te dire que je suis passé par Lambézellec, lol. Par contre, c'est une légende, y'a pas plus de beu à partager que de Chouchen à volonté à Lambé.
I had been hearing about a French bid for Euro 2012 in case Paris would have lost the games. I don't know if it stii stands though, this could be the B-plan...Or another slap...
The Paris 2012 campaign was flawed from the beginning. 1) let's face it : we can't afford Olympic Games. Our debt today is already galactic-sized, and our economic situation desperate. What's the more important : finding a roof for the homeless, or building a nice swimming-pool ? And don't say Olympic Games bring money, it's not true. People in Albertville are still paying for the 1992 Olympics, and most of the buildings they built are now rusting under the sun. 2) Once again, like with the European Constitution, the jingoism and uniformity of medias was sickening. Sometimes, it was like the 1942 news from Pathé-Gaumont : "Thanks to the legendary spirit of the Gallic warrior, the eternal and almighty France is about to thwart the perfid Albion, whose only strengths depend on bribery and deceit...". We've all heard things like this recently. As I said, sickening. This is not my France. 3) Some people in the french commitee thought culture was our best point (it's common knowledge that Brits have no culture at all). Result, who they chose as ambassadors ? Johnny Halliday, Jean-Paul Belmondo, David Douillet, Catherine Deneuve... The IOC didn't marvel at Johnny Halliday ? How weird. 4) Major flaw, the Paris 2012 project was built on this equation : France = Paris, and Paris = France. This is absolutely NOT TRUE. The gap between the capital and the province, today, is irretrievable, as the recent referendum proved. We (I mean the non-parisian french) don't care a single second for what happens in Paris. May those arrogant parisians bury themselves under their poodles' droppings. In short : "être né sous le signe de l'hexagone c'est pas ce qu'on fait de mieux en ce moment et le roi des cons sur son trône ne me faites pas dire qu'il est Allemand..."
I think the consensus amongs economists is that hosting the Olympic Games is a losing proposition (just like building publicly funded stadiums). No matter how much talk there is of jobs and tourism, much of the work is short term, and normal tourists are scared off by the prospect of sharing the city with the olympic hordes. I don't think Paris's biggest problem is a lack of tourists... See http://www.forbes.com/2004/05/19/cx_da_05192012games_print.html for a discussion of the economics. Re. LA 84: "Los Angeles in 1984 may be a special case--an Olympics that made a profit. But that was possible because L.A. was bidding in the wake of Munich, a Games stained by terrorism, and Montreal, a financial disaster for the host city. Plus, it had little competition, Matheson says. " And I really don't see why anyone should be embarrassed by this, or bitter. France isn't Greece--we have a healthy self-image, perhaps even too healthy--I don't think we need the Olympics to shore up our collective ego. PS. the attacks in London today highlight just how expensive the security for the Olympics is likely to be... that's a cost that unfortunately is likely to be many times greater than whatever bs estimate the bidding cities gave.
PH, I don't think it is reasonable to say that the French bid was marvellous and then became utter crap. Of course, there was a good share of jingoism but there was a will of humility as well. The IOC asked : " Show us that you love the Games ", you can't say that the French bidders haven't been doing that (even too much in my opinion, I was tired of Paris 2012 and all the self-centered mediatic campaign though this is another proof of the mediocratic power), and they've been properly slapped in the face. So, I can understand the disapointment of those who worked on the project, even more if you consider that the IOC was always saying : your bid is perfect. The fact is, the dossier is not that much, that was the trap. Once again, I think there are good reasons to be disapointed as a Frenchman, there's nothing wrong with that. Anyway, yesterday is already the past...
Finally, I think the reason why they chose London is pretty self-evident : economy. UK economy is doing well, while France is in poor shape. If you look at the recent games, they were awarded mostly to countries which have a good economic growth : Korea, Spain, Australia, China. Greece was in for cultural reasons. They won't give the Games to a country with decreasing economy, would be foolish. By 2012, France will probably turn into a third-world banana republic, anyway (they call me the messenger of gloom ).
As I already stated, London was somewhat more attractive in terms of opportunities to promote the Olympic movement through the renovation of a vast part of the city. Paris was more of a magnificent showcase. Concerning the French economy, French companies are doing well, thanks for them even at slow growth. It's rather French people who are finding this hard. PS : We're already a banana republic...
Don't believe UK's in a perfect shape, they certainly are in a much better shape than us but they've still lots of problems. I've found that on another forum (in french, sorry) : The list would be probably longer with France, but still ...
I never said Brits were perfect. They voted for Margaret Thatcher, after all. Family debt and housing prices (which are linked, of course) could send them down to hell fairly rapidly, as you said. However, as an academic, if you'd give me the choice between Cambridge University and, let's say, L'Université de Reims, I wouldn't need to read the contract twice. At least, their university classrooms don't stink of piss. Of course, University is undoubtly the area where the french situation is the most desperate today, so I guess I shouln't consider everything according to my own situation, even though I'm the center of the world.
The olympics are a heaping steam of sh1t. Corrupt, and it really does dick for the city that wins the bid, except add tons of publicly funded debt to the taxpayers. Good riddince.