son un asco los juegos olimpicos si tan mala suerte dan y encima se los abandona y son costosos a perdida encima sumale XDDD, que lo hagan si, pero ya no con el dinero del pueblo o nacion pq no creo que todos queramos seguir pagando nuestros impuestos sabiendo que solo traeran desastres economicos xd, sino hablales a los de Montreal y su deuda de mrd jajaXD
This comment needs more likes. I lived in San Diego when the billionaire family who owns the Chargers demanded a new stadium from the city. Voters rejected the tax increases to build it.
@@shiftymcgee9359same thing out here in Arizona with the Coyotes. They wanted to use tax payer money for their new stadium but couldn’t secure funds and they left
@@Eoin-B I’m aware the US is unique when it comes to private business pivoting its expenses to taxpayers. Edit: Probably unique in the extent of shifting private expenses to taxpayers.
One of the reasons the LA games were profitable was because they refused to build new venues to host the games. They used the coliseum, the forum, etc, and housed the athletes in existing college dorms. Most other host cities missed that little detail.
@@therealjaystone2344 Very true. Many nations felt that their bids were not giving a fair hearing when they offered. They then did not want to spend millions lobbying for it again.
2014 was also the same year IOC and many politicians were trying to push my country (Norway) to join the Olympics bid to host the games in Oslo, but the people were overwhelmingly against it after looking at the proposed budget so it never even joined the process; apparently IOC was really upset with us and it was insinuated that we could suffer consequences for it. I'd say time proved it was the correct decision.
@@kolrhcp Yeah, but it would have been the City of Oslo paying and the rest of Norway would have probably been against the government paying for it on Oslo's behalf (because then suddenly the other cities are paying for Oslo's supposed benefit) but also, while its true that to make money you have to spend money, you don't make money setting it on fire!
After the skyrocketing cost of venue construction, which are never used again, there has been talk of rotating the games through the same cities that already have all the necessary facilities with no need for a new city to bankrupt itself every four years. Unfortunately, this never seems to go anywhere. It would also cut down on the corruption in the IOC.
@@westrim I recently saw another video where they said Paris & LA were the only two cities bidding, everyone else had dropped out. So the IOC, with their backs to the wall, gave Paris 2024 & LA 2028. Grassroots movements have been spreading forcing cities to withdraw bids.
Or even worse. You got companies like Uber charging their restaurant partners for advertising on Uber Eats so you can help Uber make money. The IOC is basically charging cities the privilege of helping the IOC make money. A good scam.
You forgot to mention the 2012 London Olympics and their economic aftermath. Munich 1972 did reasonably well economically after the Olympic games, but the attacks on athletes during these Olympics tarnished the reputation of Munich and Germany for decades to come.
This had to do with the new stadiums being built only for the event, which cost the city that much over their budget. Few cities made money because they refuse to let the new stadium to be built.
almost noone remembers the attacks (or the 72 olympics in general) or associates them wkrh munich's image, outside germanic countries and israel. the only reason they even came back to media stage recently is israeli fm criticizing adidas
Don't forget, the IOC also wants a whole bunch of stuff given to their administrators (nice hotels, meals, golf...), and they won't pay any taxes on anything
I think you danced around it a bit. You correctly identified some of the reasons the modern Olympics has become a bad deal, but the reason it presages economic downturn is because any polity that would take that bad deal in order to get the publicity is probably poorly governed. And poor governance is a much better predictor of coming economic downturn.
Events like the Olympics remind me of the visits of royals during older times. It was quite the honor to host the king at your manor. But it could also leave your household flat broke. Sometimes the king would pay a visit just for that result.
even when the king is generous and gives away wealth it can go bad. (like mura mansa on his way to mekkah, he went through egypt and handed out so much gold that money became worthless and egypt went into recession) this was like 900 years ago.
Mostly not. But there are big exceptions where major sporting events catapulted countries/cities to long term new success or insane international PR boosts. Most notably: Tokyo Olympics, 1960. Seoul 1988. Barcelona 1992. Salt Lake City 2002. Beijing 2008. Vancouver 2010 - also the World Cup in Sweden 1958, Mexico 1986 and South Africa 2010. Also the worlds fair in Montreal 1967, Osaka 1970, Seville 1992 etc
yeah... but before Olympics there is usually big goverment spendings which overheats economy, idealy in already overheated economy and then they just cut the spendings ... so I would say there is high probability if done wrong ...
@@MAC-vi7fyyeah and the win of the European Championship football, sky was the limit in Greece in 2004. The crisis hit hard and people are still suffering.
I think that Paris will end up benefiting economically from the Olympics but not directly. Paris created a long term plan before the Olympics to modernize a lot of the infrastructure in the city. More focus on walking and biking, less on cars, more on transit. The Olympics causes Paris to implement many of those changes MUCH faster than they ever would have before and I think those changes will help the city and make it a better place to live and better off economically.
And then election protest blew it all up. I have faith that the French to find something to riot over just before the Olympics hit and create the mother of all scrambled egg.
They cleaned up the Seine river for the olympics, making it safe enough to swim in. Something that hasn't been done in many many decades. So that is at Lead one possitive outcome.
Paris will benefit only if the Parisans themselves can keep themselves under control. One election and they almost blew up the capital. I bet the French will soon enough find something new to riot over, throwing all their progress down the loo
This year I visited the remains of sports facilities after the Winter Olympics in Sarajevo. You could say that this Olympics was the last joyful thing that happened to this city. It was a really sad sight.
My father was the technician for all Bombarier snow groomers during the Sarajevo Olympics. He still tells stories of how it was for him as a westerner to be in a communist state
@@Darkest_matter Yes for both. Although if we are on the subject of genocides, there was also a genocide in Sarajevo that was even bigger. For several years of siege, it was impossible to function normally in this city. Today, you see tombstones in every city park because there was no other way to bury people who died every day. Imagine the city where every city park with trees, playgrounds fountains and resting people is also a graveyard.
As a schoolkid in 90s South Africa, we got to meet some Cape Town city government bigwig during our unsuccessful bid for the 2004 games. During our Q&A I asked about the likely debts given that the games invariably run at a loss for the host city/country (I'd just finished researching an assignment on Barcelona '92). Her response basically boiled down to "Some games make a loss, others make a profit, so we'll just... you know... do the second one..." which proved in one sentence that she was either an idiot, a liar, or both. By that point in my tweenhood I'd already clocked that some adults might be idiots, but this was my first time witnessing, face-to-face, an idiot (and/or liar) who was entrusted with the power to impact the economic welfare of an entire population. Not a happy epiphany, but certainly one that put the world into clearer perspective.
@@arturturkevych3816 Same for Euro 2028 ... minimal investment required and much of it was already planned regardless of the tournament. Olympics is very much different to football stadiums however.
13:40 a BIT shady? Please, things got so shady that if the shade generated translated into real world it would have solved the heat problem of the games.
The games should be awarded ONLY to the country that ALREADY has the infrastructure. There’s no need to build new stadiums and other venues when one already exist. Build the villages (if needed) as a away to boost affordable housing afterward
If countries and cities want to host, they should be able to, but it's irresponsible to let the IOC take all the money, without paying most of the costs of the building
Not a bad video & as a resident of Brisbane it makes me wonder about 2032. However there were a lot of successful games for countries without decline. 1988 Seoul games - South Korea has continued to prosper, 1996 Atlanta - US economy was starting the IT boom, 2000 Sydney - Australia has continued to prosper. However the cost of the games has gotten out of hand and needs to be resolved before nobody is interested in hosting any more.
As touched upon in the video. If any country has bad stuff going on, western media will report on it extensively long before the games start. Some examples i remember: Brasil using that much money while the people are living in favelas. Police crackdowns to make the cities look better. Russia had its doping and other things like propaganda before the games. Oil nations basically doing slave labour (Really in depth with interviews and statistics of how many died every day to host a sporting event). Norwegian media was full of see the smog in China, this leads to X amouth of death a year, and i can say with out a doubt i do not want to travel to a city where you can only see 10m infront of you and all are wearing masks to breath. So there is really no wonder why western countries and allies get better PR before and after the games, compared to the typical BRICKS countries hosting the event. As shown by South Korea/US/Australia on the positive sides, and since the media is positive its easy for tourism to flourish. I'm much more hesitant to travel to Brazil after the non stop negative cycle of news before the games. I always like to say that our propaganda in the west is all the things we don't get to hear about. As long as Australia is an allied Brisbane 2032 will be a success. Im sure we will not hear anything bad, and instead want to visit after.
So far we are doing it “smart”, utilising the Commonwealth Games infrastructure on the Gold Coast, spreading infrastructure spend across multiple local governments all the way out to Scenic Rim and up to Sunny Coast.
Do you remember the bad publicity the Gold Coast got due to public transit problems? Spreading it out over 120km is not going to help. I don't know how we did economically from all that, but some of the facilities get used still. Or used to. But really, on the Gold Coast (being a tourist town anyway), I doubt the cost/ benefit relationship was in our favour, it was just another logistical nightmare (just like schoolers, v8 supercars, Xmas time, etc).
Canada is kind of conflicted on another Winter Olympic game (summer is almost entirely off the table, the Montreal disaster is never going to be forgotten). In many ways, most of the facilities and improvements for Calgary and Vancouver were kept and used. New hockey stadiums were used by the hockey teams, upgraded ski facilities = ski hills still operating; luge sports facilities in Calgary = Canada's Olympic luge sports training facility since the games; the village was turned into housing, etc. The biggest issues were the security costs. Hosting the Olympics cost a FORTUNE in security-related costs which didn't leave a lasting legacy other than a bill. If Brisbane was already thinking of some new facilities and Australia doesn't mind making Brisbane a "sports city", then the infrastructure part can be fine. The issue is whether the other costs can be recuperated.
They should switch up the Olympics from a city to a nation hosting. Don't have to build as many athletic and hotel facilities if events are split between cities. The investments will be more into transportation links between cities, which has more potential to provide ongoing benefits after the games. Even World Cup, which was always hosted as a nation, has moved beyond that model and gone to multi-nation approach to split costs and reduce the need for new stadiums a single country won't need. Trying to do the Olympics in a single city or metro area seems so ridiculous by comparison.
You're ignoring the fact that the World Cup's decision to do this was widely criticised because it meant fans couldn't just go there and live there and interact with the city for a few weeks while the event was ongoing, instead they would need to travel across the world several times to try and catch their national team as the games went everywhere.
apparently this is what france is doing for the Paris Olympics. Not all the events will be held in Paris as there are events that will be held in Marseilles and notably the surfing event is being held half way across the world in Tahiti.
@@tpbvirusofficial6676you can do that in Europe where cities are 1hr drive at most (or at least a reasonable time) There are countries so large that you need to fly or drive the whole day to reach another city you might want to get to.
@@tpbvirusofficial6676surfing in Tahiti is both because there aren’t many world-class surfing venues in the world, but mainly because Tahiti is a semi-autonomous territory of France, so they can claim that “it’s in France”
This disaster happened here in Brazil with constructions stopped until today, the majority of the construction unfinished and some of that finished are unusable nowadays.
Pick 2-3 summer and 2-3 winter cities that already have infrastructure and rotate. Athens, Sydney, Los Angeles (or Atlanta) Vancouver, Lillehammer, Salt Lake City
You should have mentioned that part of the ballooning costs of the Olympics is that they keep adding new events/sports to the games. In 1896 there were 43 Gold Medals. In 2020 there were 339 Gold Medals. Every new sport or format requires a different facility, and the more specialized the facilities get for these niche sports, the less likely they are to be reusable into the future. They should be cutting Olympic events, not continually adding them.
I suggest the IOC should tender single competitions instead of the whole Olympics. Opening in London, Marathon in Athens, Sailing in Sydney, Soccer in Rio, etc. No single City can operate all venues profitably after those two weeks. So why don't we use those we already have instead?
@@Stupid_Rabbit Why wouldn't other parts get tons of bids? Which city wouldn't like to offer their multi-purpose stadium to do a single Olympic activity? All they'd need to do is renting their local multi-purpose stadium and some hotel rooms . And they get world-wide media cover. Sounds great.
Doesn't really make sense. We have this already, it's called world championships. The whole point of the Olympics is to get the athletes all together in one global event. That said, to me the value of the Olypmpic games is just not there any more. With the internet and a fair amount of specialised sports broadcasters, there is no shortage of sports entertainment, and even the fans of niche sports can find their personal favorites covered all year round.
As you said, Los Angeles the lone exception. 1932, no disaster, venues in nearly constant use afterwards by professional and collegiate sports including in 1984, which made over $200 million profit. For better or for worse, L.A. knows how to make money throwing a party, large or small.
the US knows how to commercialize sport in long-term, something that other countries can’t replicate, with few exceptions here and there (such as European soccer leagues).
Poland here. I remember preparation for Euro 2012 we co organised with Ukraine. I lived in one of host cities back then. Despite building the new stadiums was big effort, and it was criticised by many, they still exist and operates as object for various things. Also many non sport infrastructure was modernised like roads, railroads, etc. But more importantly, it was opportunity for the whole "west" to visit Poland, to see it's an modern country doing better and better. Place worth visitor again etc. So basically the marketing reason your said, much needed for that moment.
Because then that one area gets all of the benefits perceived for the Olympics. Worst case scenario that particular country is now the center of global political one uppmanship.
Better idea would be to not have the Olympics... it's just another way to separate people... pitting countries against each other in meaningless contests for no reason is a waste of time, money, and resources... we need to come together as a species... which is what humans are... buying into the notion that things like race and religion and place where you were born and political affiliation actually matter are what's going to keep the powers that be in power... perpetuating the current system will keep us from truly advancing... eventually we all need to come together and realize that we are one race...one species... and we have to learn to embrace science and outlaw religion... only then will we be able to actually get anything accomplished 💙
Rather than the Olympics being the harbinger of doom for a country, I think it's more a spotlight. Other issues were already cropping up but thanks to being an Olympic host any news or stories from those countries have a more recent memory that draws attention more readily. The war in Ukraine is an excellent example despite it being a rather dark one.
@@sebastianluna4608 That's exactly what I had in mind, though. That massacre legitimized the movement and became a rallying cry, and the focusing point was the approaching Olympics. And where is the PRI now?
@@sebastianluna4608They didn't die for nothing. Don't spit on their memories like that. Where is the PRI now? A shadow of what it was, and diminishing with every year. Struggles don't always have instant payoff.
@@sebastianluna4608 Seems all you learned was bitterness, and all you gleaned from that was hopelessness. I agree, we won't have a decent conversation in this venue.
The only things Los Angeles need to do for the 2028 summer games is infrastructure improvement, refurbish their existing venues, and build a new Olympic Village.
I have not seen any point to the Olympics for around 20 years now. I believe it is a vanity project and waste of money that could be better spent almost anywhere else.
One thing that Putin said and it was right was his proposal to keep the games in Greece forever. No need to deal with all the hassle of organizing and spending reckless amounts of money. All of this cash can go for charities!
I believe at least in the US hosted Olympics a lot of the facilities end up being reused by universities. In particular the Atlanta games. I do believe the cost is high especially security costs but at least in US the facilities appear to be used well
London has done well, in the long term, since the Olympics. Maybe not in the cold, hard $$$ value returns on what was spent, but entire areas in East London (mainly Stratford and Hackney Wick) have developed considerably, becoming a great place to live and visit. All the facilities are still there, and the original athletes' villages have expanded into homes and small towns. Well, the main stadium is now a football team stadium. However, the regeneration of the entire area is significant, and it is still developing 14 years later.
Words cannot describe how I disgusted I was when I learned that the IOC doesn't even pay the athletes anything - they have to fly there, live, eat etc off their own money.
Los Angeles is hosting in 2028 and the economy is already slumping, television and film are relocating elsewhere, major stores are closing, there’s so much going on here things are just closing, long time restaurants and other places are closing in record numbers.
I'm in agreement with people who think there should be one permanent host city for the games. All competing countries would put in money for maintenance and upkeep for facilities and infrastructure and would get a piece of the tourist revenue and other income proportionate to the amount spent.
It doesn't really. The Olympics are a huge waste of money and resources. That's no secret. It's also no surprise some well-developed countries can somehow stomach the huge costs, while quickly-growing 3rd world economies are taking too large of a bite, so they suffer more. Not to mention that professional sport is a retarded concept in the first place. Nobody cares who can jump higher or run faster or fart smellier. It brings nothing to the society, just artificial rivalry and made up conflicts for people with a desperate need to feel they belong somewhere, or live through achievements of complete strangers.
@@D1ndo So you are saying that a better analysis is not needed and you go ahead and throw your very own subjective opinion as a definitive conclusion 😂
@@_ata_3 I mean aside from their philosophy on sports they really just summarised the video, which didn't want to make the obvious conclusion that countries desperate for recognition take the obviously bad risk, which is not a surprise when u understand why they want to rebrand themselves.
The Olympics aren't worth all the hoopla. London or Paris are famous with or without their playing host to the games. But an Atlanta or Brisbane perhaps can exploit the "Olympics" label. As for LA in 2028, if it can't make a profit as the city did in 1984 (or even supposedly in 1932), their games won't be worth the effort.
Tbf LA doesn't really need to construct anything. Even for cricket they'll prob go for a "pop up" stadium. The brightline train opened would be nice tho
Great video! I did notice that you didn’t talk about US held Olympic Games, only mentioning Salt Lake Winter Olympics in one sentence and never mentioning 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. Were the negative effects just much less significant in a massive economy, or did the US spend less because they have perhaps less to prove? Having grown up in Atlanta, we have positive memories of the games. The building projects which were used to house athletes and visitors are now residential buildings downtown. People generally think it greatly improved the city for decades afterwards. Maybe this is the exception
As an Australian, I am ashamed that we are hosting the Olympics. When in primary school, I was taught that the athletes are heroes. No, they are not. Each medal costs us, on average, $8 million. Nobody anymore cares about the Olympics. We don't want it!
Yes, and the years of single-minded focus it takes to be able to compete at the Olympics turns talented athletes into limited, warped, under-developed human beings rather than heroes. I'm not blaming them but the system that prioritizes athletic development over the well-roundedness we would seek for anyone else.
Tired of the "recession is coming!" threat. Recessive periods come along with equivalent market opportunities if you are well informed and equipped, I've seen folks amass wealth in the midst of economic turmoil and even pull it off easily in favorable conditions. Invariably, the collapse is getting somebody somewhere rich
Choose quality stocks and follow them up. If you're not one for such complexities, work with an Advisor to grow your portfolio. You can't go wrong with a sound CFA.
You're right, I and a few Neighbors in Bel Air Area work with an advisor who prefers we Dollar cost averaging across other prospective sectors instead of a lump sum purchase. Following this, my portfolio grew by more than 40% in the 2nd quarter.
How can I participate in this? I sincerely aspire to establish a secure financial future and am eager to participate. Who is the driving force behind your success?
''Jessica Lee Horst'' is the licensed coach I use. Just research the name. You'd find necessary details to work with a correspondence to set up an appointment.
I appreciate it. After searching her name online and reviewing her credentials, I'm quite impressed. I've contacted her as I could use all the help I can get. A call has been scheduled.
One thing he didn't mention was the 1996 Olympic games in Atlanta Georgia USA. I was a kid back then and remember it even saw the torch come through my town. As far as I can tell Atlanta has been doing pretty darn good since then. I drive past the Olympic stadium a few times a year and I think they use that for events.
It doesn't have to lose money. Vancouver (2010) ended up making a slight profit after selling off the Olympic village apartments. Only a few new venues were built (and no stadiums) and they're largely still well utilized 14 years later. Much needed new train lines and highway improvements were rolled into the costs too and those are heavily used. Overall the main negative impact was a drastic rise in property values, exacerbating the cost of living crisis.
You are correct: "Hubris". And Brisbane is very guilty of this, the tertiary city of your home country which will host the 2032 iteration. I am 100% sure that budget overruns will be inevitable. But who cares? Australia is very rich, right?
If we must keep the Olympics as a sporting event, why not send it to Athens permanently. Participating countries can pay for entry so Greece can maintain the necessary infrastructure for the games.
The worst part of Beijing Olympics was the city didn’t even have the money to run it and the central government resorted to steal tax money from Shanghai that was reserved for new subway lines to the newly developed satellite cities.
this is just a dumb question. causation vs correlation. Wealthier countries hold the Olympic Games. Wealthier countries are most likely to have slower economic growth. Causation vs correlation. I’m sure there’s just as many examples for economies growing after Olympic growth just as many as there are for economics stagnating.
Are there, yes. But that is not the point of the video. Many countries now are using it as advertising to make themselves look powerful. The entity in control of spots seems to be fanning the flames of unhealthy competition.
That’s not a real thesis until you put in things like how you will measure it and over what time. No one should want to settle for simple economic growth. You need a relative measurement to other economies or some arbitrary minimum. Otherwise, a country could be called growing as it gets left behind. I think the last statement of the video is likely correct. I’m not sure he really argues what you seem to be debunking. Perhaps I missed it. IMO, the devil is in the details, but it’s not a great deal to do Winter Olympics as far as I can tell. There needs to be a real look into reforming the IOC and for looking at how the events can be made into a good infrastructure project instead of a wasteful one.
Westerners love to talk about how samrt they are for not wasting money hosting these events and in the same time they complain when a Middle Eastren country or a developing Asian counrty is selected to host them.
I agree with other comments about having one location for all games... But let's get unreasonable 🙃 and make it a floating city/ archipelago that can move about in international waters, all nations that compete help fund its construction and upkeep which isn't covered by Olympic "tourists" and "taxes" on businesses in the artificial Olympic archipelago.
1:37 there’s what’s called “The Madden Curse” where you’re the cover of the Madden video game and then you have a fall. But…. It’s rare for some things to have a long long time at the top. American football isn’t one of those areas where you get pounded weekly yet still shine. I think the Olympics is like this - you say “hey I’m at the top I can afford to flush billions in a crapper” umm, no. The world is more random than that. You will not magically stay on top.
With that 1984 olympics product logo, i have a sanyo betamax deck that says "proud sponsor of the 1984 olympics" in a big star on the front. Pretty cool
Prior to the event, everything is done to prevent disruption or embarrassment. Things get buried, delayed and pushed back, regardless of future cost, to preserve the showcase event. The bezel comes due afterward. Countries where the bribery, corruption, and burying of embarrassment is most intense have the most unrecognized costs after the games.
I don't believe people who are viewing the Olympics, are focusing on foolish spectacles like lights and fire works, they are more interested in seeing the athletes from all around the globe. Building one stadium and maintain it.
In those examples you talked about, it seems that countries decide to host the olympics during the time of economic boom and by the time the olympics happen the boom is already over
While everyone is focused on Biden/Harris and Trump, Brisbane should pull out of the 2032 games. Pulling out of the Commonwealth Games was one of the smartest thing Andrews did, given Birmingham are bankrupt.
Such flashy and garish festivities like the Olympics often stokes overspending and might be a burden for the national budget in years to come. Tourism and capital inflows can not offset the gigantic funds to provide all athletes with catering and construct sporting complexes.
This is what happened with Works’s Fair events, only the WF was not so huge. I lived in a place where one of those took place right as it ended and several years after. It was a scar in the landscape with properties no one could or would use. Two generations later, and the remaining ones are considered landmarks, but not useful assets. The city lost money, too. “Over a stagnating economy.” What an Auz way to say what cannot be said about France.
Most if not all these international gimmicks are a waste of time and money. From FIFA, to the Olympics, to the UN, to the EU. The only international entity that has ever benefited humanity has been empires and plagues.
Whilst you certainly couldn't call it an economic success, I do think the way London hosted the games was a cultural success, and does still have economic benefits to this day. The Olympic Stadium is in full use, the Olympic Park is vibrant and well looked after and the athlete's village is now a collection of modern flats. And at least from my perspective I feel like my fellow Brits look back on London 2012 quite fondly as a point the nation was completely united (a rarity these days lol)
I tuned out the Olympics almost two decades ago. I have much more important and enriching things to do with my time. I couldn’t care less if the Olympics were once again relegated to the dust bin of history.
The problem isn't the olympics. The problem is the governments refuse to use existing infrastructure for the games and borrow hundreds of billions to build stadiums and stuff that will never be used again for anything. They also seem to have the idea that they will recoup the expense from all the money spend during the games by athletes, fans, and family. Never has that happened. The olympics don't predict disaster, they are merely a symptom of the disaster that is already in motion.
This is a problem with the Olympics. The bidding expects the creation of new infrastructure, and the IOC will pick cities that promise to build new infrastructure over those that don't They've played a bad game where nobody wants to sign up anymore though, and the Olympics will have to change if they want anyone to host them
Claiming there is a connection between the Crimea situation and the alleged post-Olympic economic downturn must be the most bizarre, preposterous, and far-fetched pile of rubbish I have ever heard.
Barcelona is an interesting case in point. The home of the IOC chairman, Samaranch, it used the 1992 Olympics to clean up its act, for example redeveloping much of the waterfront into appealing beaches. Those facilities now benefit residents as well as visitors, even if many of the Olympic venues were soon crumbling. But convincing the world that Barcelona is a must-see destination has steadily led to over-tourism. Having spent a lot of time there-- and I do like the city-- I don't really think it offers tourists enough to justify their massive, quality of life-destroying numbers and all the pressure being imposed on local housing from AirBnB and its imitators. But we have the Olympics to thank for a nice city being almost loved to death.
if hosting the olympics causes any problems, what if we just always have it in Greece, but have all the other countries pay for it and then some to make up for it? or go with the US because it's big and would be a reliable host, and could afford to pay for it on its own without much issue
This popped into my head: Countries naturally want to host the Olympics, when they're in an economic position of very good stability and growth. But since the bidding process for the Olympics takes 10-14 years, by the time the country actually hosts the Olympics, it's very unlikely for them to still be in the same phase of economic stability/growth that they were in when they were bold enough to bid for the Olympics (i. e. they'd have to have been in a likely 10+ year economic upswing *by then*). Very rarely are there economic upswings for a country that last more than 25 years (one such example would be Germany's Wirtschaftswunder after WW2). So most countries that host the Olympics will *inevitably* experience a bad economic turn at least by the time they host the event...
One solution is to host as a nation, allowing few different cities to host games according to what they can use afterward. Although, we would need these cities to be directly connected by train (any cheap mass transportation service).
In a practical world (which we don't live in) it'd be better to select a certain location to use for every major international events like the Olympics and the World Cup.
The problem with the Olympics is that there are no return of investment on the money spent on the infrastructure. If there are proper planning. The Olympic Village can turned into public housing where the hovernment can rent out to recover the money invested on building it. The Olympic stadium can be use to host big concert of for super star like Taylor Shift. However, mos of the time, the infrastructure build are allow to be rotten until it would need to be demolished.
The problem with the Olympics is that their purpose is to make the IOC rich, and to dupe cities and countries on spending vast fortunes to make the IOC rich. Same with the world cup
I was expecting an economic analysis. Make a synthetic counterfactual by weighting countries by similarity with the host country in the previous years, and see if there's a consistent difference.
There's another possible factor: things go in cycles. By the time an area is prosperous enough to bid, get, and have the Olympics, they're due for a downturn. The end of the Olympics is just the push needed.
I stopped paying attention to the Olympics decades ago. It's been a grift as long as I can remember. My only interaction with Olympics now is to actively oppose bids from my country (Canada). The money that was blown on Vancouver olympics, for example, could have alleviated a huge chunk of the housing crisis. It's bread and circuses, nothing more.
I hope that pointless spectacle never comes to my city. We've got better things to spend money on. I don't need it to be impossible to get around because of Olympic traffic and closures.
It doesnt predict, it is the cause of issue. Many governors advertise big events, and justify the huge depts as "tourism will bring money" But they don't. Its spacticles, smokes and mirrors. It can bring a burst of revenue at the time of the event, but they forget the "return of investment" calculation. Not to mention that massive projects are built FOR the event, not for a semi self-sustaining infrastructure that CAN hold any events like that in the future. Like why are they building hotels instead creating a giant festival ground with modular campsites? Why not keep the sport event establishment as lesirue and sport facilities all over the year? Seeing those neglected and deserted buildings is like building a bonfire out of money and shouting "I am rich" while shoveling more bills into the blaze...
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code ECONOMICS at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: incogni.com/ECONOMICS
First
Of course it can, as the Olympics itself creates economic disaster by creating debt to held the event.
son un asco los juegos olimpicos si tan mala suerte dan y encima se los abandona y son costosos a perdida encima sumale XDDD, que lo hagan si, pero ya no con el dinero del pueblo o nacion pq no creo que todos queramos seguir pagando nuestros impuestos sabiendo que solo traeran desastres economicos xd, sino hablales a los de Montreal y su deuda de mrd jajaXD
I like how you sell a product about cyber sec after cloud strike
France might be one of the few Olympics where it actually turns a profit, that and the US Olympics.
Most large sporting events end up losing money. That's why private companies don't build stadiums. They trick municipalities to do it.
This comment needs more likes. I lived in San Diego when the billionaire family who owns the Chargers demanded a new stadium from the city. Voters rejected the tax increases to build it.
@@shiftymcgee9359same thing out here in Arizona with the Coyotes. They wanted to use tax payer money for their new stadium but couldn’t secure funds and they left
@@shiftymcgee9359 See also the former St. Louis Rams.
The general mood there now is good riddance.
*In the USA. Our teams don't threaten to move to other cities that will pay for them.
@@Eoin-B I’m aware the US is unique when it comes to private business pivoting its expenses to taxpayers. Edit: Probably unique in the extent of shifting private expenses to taxpayers.
One of the reasons the LA games were profitable was because they refused to build new venues to host the games. They used the coliseum, the forum, etc, and housed the athletes in existing college dorms. Most other host cities missed that little detail.
And they're going to use the same facilities again in 2028. It'll be the 3rd Olympics in the coliseum.
And they didn't have to bid against other countries.
@@shorewallbecause for 2028 when other countries left the race because of controversies
@@therealjaystone2344 Very true. Many nations felt that their bids were not giving a fair hearing when they offered. They then did not want to spend millions lobbying for it again.
@@selanryn5849right on, Los Angeles!
2014 was also the same year IOC and many politicians were trying to push my country (Norway) to join the Olympics bid to host the games in Oslo, but the people were overwhelmingly against it after looking at the proposed budget so it never even joined the process; apparently IOC was really upset with us and it was insinuated that we could suffer consequences for it. I'd say time proved it was the correct decision.
You and your country lost nothing. Nobody even cares about the Olympics anymore aside from those who directly profit off it.
That's kinda funny because Norway is so rich that they could just pay for it without any taxes needed at all.
@@kolrhcp Yeah, but it would have been the City of Oslo paying and the rest of Norway would have probably been against the government paying for it on Oslo's behalf (because then suddenly the other cities are paying for Oslo's supposed benefit) but also, while its true that to make money you have to spend money, you don't make money setting it on fire!
@@Northex23 Yeah Oslo isn't that huge of a city to have an Olympic sized stadium either, it would be a waste.
Some people in my city, Seattle, started making noise about an Olympic bid about 20 years ago. They got shut down real quick.
After the skyrocketing cost of venue construction, which are never used again, there has been talk of rotating the games through the same cities that already have all the necessary facilities with no need for a new city to bankrupt itself every four years. Unfortunately, this never seems to go anywhere. It would also cut down on the corruption in the IOC.
You answered why it will never happen in the last sentence :D
"Unfortunately, this never seems to go anywhere. "
Why precisely do you think they went back to LA and Paris?
Why do you think it went back to London and Paris?
@@westrim I recently saw another video where they said Paris & LA were the only two cities bidding, everyone else had dropped out. So the IOC, with their backs to the wall, gave Paris 2024 & LA 2028. Grassroots movements have been spreading forcing cities to withdraw bids.
You'd still have to pay for 3-4 years of maintenance. Of specialty facilities which otherwise go unused. Let the IOC fund it's own little indulgence.
IOC playing the influencer scam since 1984: we will pay you with exposure. 👏👏
Ha, ha, good one! 👍
Or even worse. You got companies like Uber charging their restaurant partners for advertising on Uber Eats so you can help Uber make money.
The IOC is basically charging cities the privilege of helping the IOC make money. A good scam.
You forgot to mention the 2012 London Olympics and their economic aftermath. Munich 1972 did reasonably well economically after the Olympic games, but the attacks on athletes during these Olympics tarnished the reputation of Munich and Germany for decades to come.
Germany's image has been tarnished for 100 years
You forgot Tokyo 1960, followed by one of most rapid growth in modern history
This had to do with the new stadiums being built only for the event, which cost the city that much over their budget. Few cities made money because they refuse to let the new stadium to be built.
China boomed after Beijing 2008 too
almost noone remembers the attacks (or the 72 olympics in general) or associates them wkrh munich's image, outside germanic countries and israel.
the only reason they even came back to media stage recently is israeli fm criticizing adidas
Don't forget, the IOC also wants a whole bunch of stuff given to their administrators (nice hotels, meals, golf...), and they won't pay any taxes on anything
I think you danced around it a bit. You correctly identified some of the reasons the modern Olympics has become a bad deal, but the reason it presages economic downturn is because any polity that would take that bad deal in order to get the publicity is probably poorly governed. And poor governance is a much better predictor of coming economic downturn.
A shout out from Brisbane, the Poverty Games are due here in 2032.
That's the trend the channel has been going on for a while - a lot of "information" and equivocating - but that's also like most economists.
That's a very good point
Events like the Olympics remind me of the visits of royals during older times. It was quite the honor to host the king at your manor. But it could also leave your household flat broke. Sometimes the king would pay a visit just for that result.
even when the king is generous and gives away wealth it can go bad. (like mura mansa on his way to mekkah, he went through egypt and handed out so much gold that money became worthless and egypt went into recession) this was like 900 years ago.
@@Darkest_matter Excellent example!
Problem is that countries always overdo. If they just keep it simple and don't build gigantic venues for 1time use...
You build venues for years to come
They have to as part of the agreement to host the Olympics.
There are already places which can host it economically.
And the Olympics venue takes an outrageously large percentage of the profits while having barely any expenses, unlike the host city.
@@shadowninja6689 I think you mean Olympic organization. The venues do pretty terrible after the Olympics.
Correlation does not imply causation.
That said, no, the Olympics or any other international games (such as FIFA) aren't worth it.
Mostly not. But there are big exceptions where major sporting events catapulted countries/cities to long term new success or insane international PR boosts.
Most notably: Tokyo Olympics, 1960. Seoul 1988. Barcelona 1992. Salt Lake City 2002. Beijing 2008. Vancouver 2010 - also the World Cup in Sweden 1958, Mexico 1986 and South Africa 2010. Also the worlds fair in Montreal 1967, Osaka 1970, Seville 1992 etc
yeah... but before Olympics there is usually big goverment spendings which overheats economy, idealy in already overheated economy and then they just cut the spendings ... so I would say there is high probability if done wrong ...
As a Greek i find this video rather depressing
2004 Athens Summer Olympics..
Was ancient Olympics the reasson Rome won over the Greeks ?
@@OrjanGrahn-ou7im What?
@@MAC-vi7fyyeah and the win of the European Championship football, sky was the limit in Greece in 2004. The crisis hit hard and people are still suffering.
So, the Greeks opened the Pandora Box...
I think that Paris will end up benefiting economically from the Olympics but not directly. Paris created a long term plan before the Olympics to modernize a lot of the infrastructure in the city. More focus on walking and biking, less on cars, more on transit. The Olympics causes Paris to implement many of those changes MUCH faster than they ever would have before and I think those changes will help the city and make it a better place to live and better off economically.
And then election protest blew it all up. I have faith that the French to find something to riot over just before the Olympics hit and create the mother of all scrambled egg.
They cleaned up the Seine river for the olympics, making it safe enough to swim in. Something that hasn't been done in many many decades. So that is at Lead one possitive outcome.
Paris will benefit only if the Parisans themselves can keep themselves under control. One election and they almost blew up the capital. I bet the French will soon enough find something new to riot over, throwing all their progress down the loo
@@philinator71 Sad that it takes a corrupt "sports" bread and circus to clean up a river.
The 1952 Olympics in Helsinki did a lot of good for the city and Finland as a whole as well.
This year I visited the remains of sports facilities after the Winter Olympics in Sarajevo. You could say that this Olympics was the last joyful thing that happened to this city. It was a really sad sight.
My father was the technician for all Bombarier snow groomers during the Sarajevo Olympics. He still tells stories of how it was for him as a westerner to be in a communist state
@@eco909 it was a socialist state and yes, it was definitely richer during that time too
@@eco909What did he think was particularly memorable?
isn't sarajevo the capital city? i get confused sarajevo and sbrenica. sbrenica is where the genocide happened, i think.
@@Darkest_matter Yes for both. Although if we are on the subject of genocides, there was also a genocide in Sarajevo that was even bigger. For several years of siege, it was impossible to function normally in this city. Today, you see tombstones in every city park because there was no other way to bury people who died every day. Imagine the city where every city park with trees, playgrounds fountains and resting people is also a graveyard.
As a schoolkid in 90s South Africa, we got to meet some Cape Town city government bigwig during our unsuccessful bid for the 2004 games. During our Q&A I asked about the likely debts given that the games invariably run at a loss for the host city/country (I'd just finished researching an assignment on Barcelona '92). Her response basically boiled down to "Some games make a loss, others make a profit, so we'll just... you know... do the second one..." which proved in one sentence that she was either an idiot, a liar, or both.
By that point in my tweenhood I'd already clocked that some adults might be idiots, but this was my first time witnessing, face-to-face, an idiot (and/or liar) who was entrusted with the power to impact the economic welfare of an entire population. Not a happy epiphany, but certainly one that put the world into clearer perspective.
The idiots get promoted
Then you got the 2010 World Cup which proved the whole theory right, unfortunately
In Brazil we often blame the World Cup for the subsequent economic troubles, but the two events combined certainly makes for a lot of wasted money...
Yeah, in Brazil's case, either the World Cup, OR the Olympics would have been justified. Doing both in the same decade was too much.
Olympics, Fifa world cup, and stripclubs have a better track record of predicting a country's economic future than economists😂
Fifa World Cup is fine in a country where football is a religion such as in Europe and South America.
@@DieNibelungenliad even in a huge, football-obsessed country like Brazil, some stadiums were not used after the World Cup.
@@cx5307 that’s because attendance at Brazilian football league matches is anemic. They don’t need World Cup size stadiums for their domestic league.
@@cx5307 Germany didn't even have to lift a finger to host the Euro 2024. All of the infrastructure and stadiums were there.
@@arturturkevych3816 Same for Euro 2028 ... minimal investment required and much of it was already planned regardless of the tournament. Olympics is very much different to football stadiums however.
13:40 a BIT shady? Please, things got so shady that if the shade generated translated into real world it would have solved the heat problem of the games.
It's the way aussies speak, we often underplay words when we mean the opposite... so in this case he meant shady af
The games should be awarded ONLY to the country that ALREADY has the infrastructure. There’s no need to build new stadiums and other venues when one already exist. Build the villages (if needed) as a away to boost affordable housing afterward
If countries and cities want to host, they should be able to, but it's irresponsible to let the IOC take all the money, without paying most of the costs of the building
Not a bad video & as a resident of Brisbane it makes me wonder about 2032. However there were a lot of successful games for countries without decline. 1988 Seoul games - South Korea has continued to prosper, 1996 Atlanta - US economy was starting the IT boom, 2000 Sydney - Australia has continued to prosper. However the cost of the games has gotten out of hand and needs to be resolved before nobody is interested in hosting any more.
As touched upon in the video. If any country has bad stuff going on, western media will report on it extensively long before the games start. Some examples i remember: Brasil using that much money while the people are living in favelas. Police crackdowns to make the cities look better. Russia had its doping and other things like propaganda before the games. Oil nations basically doing slave labour (Really in depth with interviews and statistics of how many died every day to host a sporting event). Norwegian media was full of see the smog in China, this leads to X amouth of death a year, and i can say with out a doubt i do not want to travel to a city where you can only see 10m infront of you and all are wearing masks to breath. So there is really no wonder why western countries and allies get better PR before and after the games, compared to the typical BRICKS countries hosting the event. As shown by South Korea/US/Australia on the positive sides, and since the media is positive its easy for tourism to flourish. I'm much more hesitant to travel to Brazil after the non stop negative cycle of news before the games.
I always like to say that our propaganda in the west is all the things we don't get to hear about. As long as Australia is an allied Brisbane 2032 will be a success. Im sure we will not hear anything bad, and instead want to visit after.
So far we are doing it “smart”, utilising the Commonwealth Games infrastructure on the Gold Coast, spreading infrastructure spend across multiple local governments all the way out to Scenic Rim and up to Sunny Coast.
London did well from it.
Do you remember the bad publicity the Gold Coast got due to public transit problems? Spreading it out over 120km is not going to help.
I don't know how we did economically from all that, but some of the facilities get used still. Or used to. But really, on the Gold Coast (being a tourist town anyway), I doubt the cost/ benefit relationship was in our favour, it was just another logistical nightmare (just like schoolers, v8 supercars, Xmas time, etc).
Canada is kind of conflicted on another Winter Olympic game (summer is almost entirely off the table, the Montreal disaster is never going to be forgotten). In many ways, most of the facilities and improvements for Calgary and Vancouver were kept and used. New hockey stadiums were used by the hockey teams, upgraded ski facilities = ski hills still operating; luge sports facilities in Calgary = Canada's Olympic luge sports training facility since the games; the village was turned into housing, etc.
The biggest issues were the security costs. Hosting the Olympics cost a FORTUNE in security-related costs which didn't leave a lasting legacy other than a bill. If Brisbane was already thinking of some new facilities and Australia doesn't mind making Brisbane a "sports city", then the infrastructure part can be fine. The issue is whether the other costs can be recuperated.
They should switch up the Olympics from a city to a nation hosting. Don't have to build as many athletic and hotel facilities if events are split between cities. The investments will be more into transportation links between cities, which has more potential to provide ongoing benefits after the games. Even World Cup, which was always hosted as a nation, has moved beyond that model and gone to multi-nation approach to split costs and reduce the need for new stadiums a single country won't need. Trying to do the Olympics in a single city or metro area seems so ridiculous by comparison.
You're ignoring the fact that the World Cup's decision to do this was widely criticised because it meant fans couldn't just go there and live there and interact with the city for a few weeks while the event was ongoing, instead they would need to travel across the world several times to try and catch their national team as the games went everywhere.
apparently this is what france is doing for the Paris Olympics. Not all the events will be held in Paris as there are events that will be held in Marseilles and notably the surfing event is being held half way across the world in Tahiti.
@@tpbvirusofficial6676you can do that in Europe where cities are 1hr drive at most (or at least a reasonable time)
There are countries so large that you need to fly or drive the whole day to reach another city you might want to get to.
@@tpbvirusofficial6676surfing in Tahiti is both because there aren’t many world-class surfing venues in the world, but mainly because Tahiti is a semi-autonomous territory of France, so they can claim that “it’s in France”
@@gideonk123 like algeria used to be.. algeria made their own football team in secret to drum up support for the independance movement.
This disaster happened here in Brazil with constructions stopped until today, the majority of the construction unfinished and some of that finished are unusable nowadays.
That was the goal.
I think the big one is they committee leep demanding new stadiums rather than using ones that already existed
That's basically why Los Angeles was profitable
Pick 2-3 summer and 2-3 winter cities that already have infrastructure and rotate.
Athens, Sydney, Los Angeles (or Atlanta)
Vancouver, Lillehammer, Salt Lake City
You should have mentioned that part of the ballooning costs of the Olympics is that they keep adding new events/sports to the games. In 1896 there were 43 Gold Medals. In 2020 there were 339 Gold Medals. Every new sport or format requires a different facility, and the more specialized the facilities get for these niche sports, the less likely they are to be reusable into the future. They should be cutting Olympic events, not continually adding them.
I suggest the IOC should tender single competitions instead of the whole Olympics. Opening in London, Marathon in Athens, Sailing in Sydney, Soccer in Rio, etc. No single City can operate all venues profitably after those two weeks. So why don't we use those we already have instead?
The issue with that is you will get some parts like the opening that will get tons of bids and others very little if any.
@@Stupid_Rabbit Why wouldn't other parts get tons of bids? Which city wouldn't like to offer their multi-purpose stadium to do a single Olympic activity? All they'd need to do is renting their local multi-purpose stadium and some hotel rooms . And they get world-wide media cover. Sounds great.
@olska9498 I mean cities would likely bid for the most popular sports like football rather than roller speed skating.
@@Stupid_Rabbit then you will have smaller cities, eager to be known, bid for the smaller events. Literally classic demand and offer balance.
Doesn't really make sense. We have this already, it's called world championships. The whole point of the Olympics is to get the athletes all together in one global event.
That said, to me the value of the Olypmpic games is just not there any more. With the internet and a fair amount of specialised sports broadcasters, there is no shortage of sports entertainment, and even the fans of niche sports can find their personal favorites covered all year round.
I remember once hearing that the real winners in the Olympics, are the sponsors.
As you said, Los Angeles the lone exception. 1932, no disaster, venues in nearly constant use afterwards by professional and collegiate sports including in 1984, which made over $200 million profit. For better or for worse, L.A. knows how to make money throwing a party, large or small.
the US knows how to commercialize sport in long-term, something that other countries can’t replicate, with few exceptions here and there (such as European soccer leagues).
Poland here. I remember preparation for Euro 2012 we co organised with Ukraine. I lived in one of host cities back then. Despite building the new stadiums was big effort, and it was criticised by many, they still exist and operates as object for various things. Also many non sport infrastructure was modernised like roads, railroads, etc. But more importantly, it was opportunity for the whole "west" to visit Poland, to see it's an modern country doing better and better. Place worth visitor again etc. So basically the marketing reason your said, much needed for that moment.
I saw only paris and new york bothered to bid. Seems like it's losing it's shine.
Why can't they have the Olympics in the same place every time? Greece would be the obvious choice.
Because then that one area gets all of the benefits perceived for the Olympics.
Worst case scenario that particular country is now the center of global political one uppmanship.
Great idea, greece doesn't have an economy to lose!
This video tackled that proposal
ruclips.net/video/VpMgn0S3QOE/видео.htmlsi=Fj629-Ok_HlvNgvZ
Better idea would be to not have the Olympics... it's just another way to separate people... pitting countries against each other in meaningless contests for no reason is a waste of time, money, and resources... we need to come together as a species... which is what humans are... buying into the notion that things like race and religion and place where you were born and political affiliation actually matter are what's going to keep the powers that be in power... perpetuating the current system will keep us from truly advancing... eventually we all need to come together and realize that we are one race...one species... and we have to learn to embrace science and outlaw religion... only then will we be able to actually get anything accomplished 💙
@@petersarubbi least obvious bait
Rather than the Olympics being the harbinger of doom for a country, I think it's more a spotlight. Other issues were already cropping up but thanks to being an Olympic host any news or stories from those countries have a more recent memory that draws attention more readily. The war in Ukraine is an excellent example despite it being a rather dark one.
And that spotlight has helped at times. South Korea and Mexico both had democracy activists leverage the games heavily to see substantial gains.
@@sebastianluna4608 That's exactly what I had in mind, though. That massacre legitimized the movement and became a rallying cry, and the focusing point was the approaching Olympics. And where is the PRI now?
@@sebastianluna4608They didn't die for nothing. Don't spit on their memories like that. Where is the PRI now? A shadow of what it was, and diminishing with every year. Struggles don't always have instant payoff.
@@sebastianluna4608 Seems all you learned was bitterness, and all you gleaned from that was hopelessness. I agree, we won't have a decent conversation in this venue.
The only things Los Angeles need to do for the 2028 summer games is infrastructure improvement, refurbish their existing venues, and build a new Olympic Village.
I have not seen any point to the Olympics for around 20 years now. I believe it is a vanity project and waste of money that could be better spent almost anywhere else.
One thing that Putin said and it was right was his proposal to keep the games in Greece forever. No need to deal with all the hassle of organizing and spending reckless amounts of money. All of this cash can go for charities!
yeah but who tf wants to go to that sh*thole
I have to give it to monke, from time to time he says something which makes a lot of sense, I actually chuckled at his "transformers" joke.
@@commandermcnash5137 when you say lots of things, once or twice, you will hit the bullseye :D
"I got a baseball park we built in the 90s, take it or leave it"
I believe at least in the US hosted Olympics a lot of the facilities end up being reused by universities. In particular the Atlanta games. I do believe the cost is high especially security costs but at least in US the facilities appear to be used well
London has done well, in the long term, since the Olympics. Maybe not in the cold, hard $$$ value returns on what was spent, but entire areas in East London (mainly Stratford and Hackney Wick) have developed considerably, becoming a great place to live and visit. All the facilities are still there, and the original athletes' villages have expanded into homes and small towns. Well, the main stadium is now a football team stadium. However, the regeneration of the entire area is significant, and it is still developing 14 years later.
😂😂😂😂
In France, that's not a prediction, it's just the cherry on top.
"Olympic or Chernobyl" would be a fun game.
Thank you for highlighting the plight of migrant workers and the abuses they face in the Middle East
The Olympic stadium in Montreal is an eyesore, a money pit and due to the construction method, probably too expensive to demolish.
But where do the doing Olympics rank on the Global Economic Leaderboard?
Words cannot describe how I disgusted I was when I learned that the IOC doesn't even pay the athletes anything - they have to fly there, live, eat etc off their own money.
Los Angeles is hosting in 2028 and the economy is already slumping, television and film are relocating elsewhere, major stores are closing, there’s so much going on here things are just closing, long time restaurants and other places are closing in record numbers.
The Montreal Games debt was borne by the province (Quebec), not the federal tax payer.
This was largely recouped by tobacco taxes.
I'm in agreement with people who think there should be one permanent host city for the games. All competing countries would put in money for maintenance and upkeep for facilities and infrastructure and would get a piece of the tourist revenue and other income proportionate to the amount spent.
To tackle this question accurately a longer video is needed
That's right, it needs better statistical analysis.
It doesn't really. The Olympics are a huge waste of money and resources. That's no secret. It's also no surprise some well-developed countries can somehow stomach the huge costs, while quickly-growing 3rd world economies are taking too large of a bite, so they suffer more.
Not to mention that professional sport is a retarded concept in the first place. Nobody cares who can jump higher or run faster or fart smellier. It brings nothing to the society, just artificial rivalry and made up conflicts for people with a desperate need to feel they belong somewhere, or live through achievements of complete strangers.
@@D1ndo So you are saying that a better analysis is not needed and you go ahead and throw your very own subjective opinion as a definitive conclusion 😂
@@_ata_3 I mean aside from their philosophy on sports they really just summarised the video, which didn't want to make the obvious conclusion that countries desperate for recognition take the obviously bad risk, which is not a surprise when u understand why they want to rebrand themselves.
@@crazydragy4233 Yea, like you can do a cultural and political study of the games with plain economic theory assumptions
The Olympics aren't worth all the hoopla. London or Paris are famous with or without their playing host to the games. But an Atlanta or Brisbane perhaps can exploit the "Olympics" label. As for LA in 2028, if it can't make a profit as the city did in 1984 (or even supposedly in 1932), their games won't be worth the effort.
Tbf LA doesn't really need to construct anything. Even for cricket they'll prob go for a "pop up" stadium. The brightline train opened would be nice tho
Great video! I did notice that you didn’t talk about US held Olympic Games, only mentioning Salt Lake Winter Olympics in one sentence and never mentioning 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. Were the negative effects just much less significant in a massive economy, or did the US spend less because they have perhaps less to prove?
Having grown up in Atlanta, we have positive memories of the games. The building projects which were used to house athletes and visitors are now residential buildings downtown. People generally think it greatly improved the city for decades afterwards. Maybe this is the exception
Using mostly preexisting infrastructure is good and makes it reasonable
There is a similar correlation to record height setting skyscraper construction followed by an economic crash.
As an Australian, I am ashamed that we are hosting the Olympics. When in primary school, I was taught that the athletes are heroes. No, they are not. Each medal costs us, on average, $8 million. Nobody anymore cares about the Olympics. We don't want it!
Agree 100%
Olympics are just a continuation of the old BREAD and CIRCUSES syndrome.
Yes, and the years of single-minded focus it takes to be able to compete at the Olympics turns talented athletes into limited, warped, under-developed human beings rather than heroes. I'm not blaming them but the system that prioritizes athletic development over the well-roundedness we would seek for anyone else.
Tired of the "recession is coming!" threat. Recessive periods come along with equivalent market opportunities if you are well informed and equipped, I've seen folks amass wealth in the midst of economic turmoil and even pull it off easily in favorable conditions. Invariably, the collapse is getting somebody somewhere rich
Choose quality stocks and follow them up. If you're not one for such complexities, work with an Advisor to grow your portfolio. You can't go wrong with a sound CFA.
You're right, I and a few Neighbors in Bel Air Area work with an advisor who prefers we Dollar cost averaging across other prospective sectors instead of a lump sum purchase. Following this, my portfolio grew by more than 40% in the 2nd quarter.
How can I participate in this? I sincerely aspire to establish a secure financial future and am eager to participate. Who is the driving force behind your success?
''Jessica Lee Horst'' is the licensed coach I use. Just research the name. You'd find necessary details to work with a correspondence to set up an appointment.
I appreciate it. After searching her name online and reviewing her credentials, I'm quite impressed. I've contacted her as I could use all the help I can get. A call has been scheduled.
One thing he didn't mention was the 1996 Olympic games in Atlanta Georgia USA. I was a kid back then and remember it even saw the torch come through my town. As far as I can tell Atlanta has been doing pretty darn good since then. I drive past the Olympic stadium a few times a year and I think they use that for events.
Good point ! Atlanta’s Olympic Stadium was used by the Atlanta Braves for 20 years after the Games and now being used by Georgia State University.
It doesn't have to lose money. Vancouver (2010) ended up making a slight profit after selling off the Olympic village apartments. Only a few new venues were built (and no stadiums) and they're largely still well utilized 14 years later. Much needed new train lines and highway improvements were rolled into the costs too and those are heavily used.
Overall the main negative impact was a drastic rise in property values, exacerbating the cost of living crisis.
You are correct: "Hubris".
And Brisbane is very guilty of this, the tertiary city of your home country which will host the 2032 iteration. I am 100% sure that budget overruns will be inevitable. But who cares? Australia is very rich, right?
If we must keep the Olympics as a sporting event, why not send it to Athens permanently. Participating countries can pay for entry so Greece can maintain the necessary infrastructure for the games.
The worst part of Beijing Olympics was the city didn’t even have the money to run it and the central government resorted to steal tax money from Shanghai that was reserved for new subway lines to the newly developed satellite cities.
Choosing to host the game is an act of hubris by economies unwittingly at their apotheosis.
I’d love to see a similar video on F1 racing!
this is just a dumb question. causation vs correlation. Wealthier countries hold the Olympic Games. Wealthier countries are most likely to have slower economic growth. Causation vs correlation. I’m sure there’s just as many examples for economies growing after Olympic growth just as many as there are for economics stagnating.
Perhaps. But I couldn’t tell you counter examples.
Plenty of less wealthy countries like Brazil and Russia also host the olympics.
Are there, yes. But that is not the point of the video. Many countries now are using it as advertising to make themselves look powerful. The entity in control of spots seems to be fanning the flames of unhealthy competition.
That’s not a real thesis until you put in things like how you will measure it and over what time. No one should want to settle for simple economic growth. You need a relative measurement to other economies or some arbitrary minimum. Otherwise, a country could be called growing as it gets left behind.
I think the last statement of the video is likely correct. I’m not sure he really argues what you seem to be debunking. Perhaps I missed it. IMO, the devil is in the details, but it’s not a great deal to do Winter Olympics as far as I can tell. There needs to be a real look into reforming the IOC and for looking at how the events can be made into a good infrastructure project instead of a wasteful one.
This comment tells me you actually didn't watch the video and jumped right into the comments after seeing the title.
The IOC should be declared an international criminal organization. FIFA fits this model, too.
add the united nations, too.... all they do is sit around and talk or bully weaker countries but nothing is said about america.
Best example is Greece hosting the Olympics 2004. 10 years later, Greece was broke and had to be saved by the EU.
Westerners love to talk about how samrt they are for not wasting money hosting these events and in the same time they complain when a Middle Eastren country or a developing Asian counrty is selected to host them.
Host the Olympics where there's already in built infrastructure or just maintain one venue for every Olympics to come.
I agree with other comments about having one location for all games... But let's get unreasonable 🙃 and make it a floating city/ archipelago that can move about in international waters, all nations that compete help fund its construction and upkeep which isn't covered by Olympic "tourists" and "taxes" on businesses in the artificial Olympic archipelago.
1:37 there’s what’s called “The Madden Curse” where you’re the cover of the Madden video game and then you have a fall.
But…. It’s rare for some things to have a long long time at the top. American football isn’t one of those areas where you get pounded weekly yet still shine.
I think the Olympics is like this - you say “hey I’m at the top I can afford to flush billions in a crapper” umm, no. The world is more random than that. You will not magically stay on top.
With that 1984 olympics product logo, i have a sanyo betamax deck that says "proud sponsor of the 1984 olympics" in a big star on the front. Pretty cool
Peak early 80's aesthetic.
Prior to the event, everything is done to prevent disruption or embarrassment. Things get buried, delayed and pushed back, regardless of future cost, to preserve the showcase event. The bezel comes due afterward. Countries where the bribery, corruption, and burying of embarrassment is most intense have the most unrecognized costs after the games.
Correlation does not equal to causation.
I credit this RUclips channel with making me realize that economics is my passion.
Great video. It would be interesting to see another related video focussing more broadly on the subject of "Sportswashing".
I don't believe people who are viewing the Olympics, are focusing on foolish spectacles like lights and fire works, they are more interested in seeing the athletes from all around the globe. Building one stadium and maintain it.
I would love a separate video just for Turin (Italy), its history, the olympics and the economy thereafter.
4:46: There was even the McDonalds “If America Wins, You Win!” promotion. It blew up in their faces.
In those examples you talked about, it seems that countries decide to host the olympics during the time of economic boom and by the time the olympics happen the boom is already over
While everyone is focused on Biden/Harris and Trump, Brisbane should pull out of the 2032 games. Pulling out of the Commonwealth Games was one of the smartest thing Andrews did, given Birmingham are bankrupt.
Such flashy and garish festivities like the Olympics often stokes overspending and might be a burden for the national budget in years to come. Tourism and capital inflows can not offset the gigantic funds to provide all athletes with catering and construct sporting complexes.
This is what happened with Works’s Fair events, only the WF was not so huge. I lived in a place where one of those took place right as it ended and several years after. It was a scar in the landscape with properties no one could or would use. Two generations later, and the remaining ones are considered landmarks, but not useful assets. The city lost money, too.
“Over a stagnating economy.” What an Auz way to say what cannot be said about France.
Great video!
Construction is the biggest expense, can’t build stadiums and expect them to pay off within a few weeks, no matter how big the event is.
Most if not all these international gimmicks are a waste of time and money. From FIFA, to the Olympics, to the UN, to the EU. The only international entity that has ever benefited humanity has been empires and plagues.
Whilst you certainly couldn't call it an economic success, I do think the way London hosted the games was a cultural success, and does still have economic benefits to this day. The Olympic Stadium is in full use, the Olympic Park is vibrant and well looked after and the athlete's village is now a collection of modern flats.
And at least from my perspective I feel like my fellow Brits look back on London 2012 quite fondly as a point the nation was completely united (a rarity these days lol)
I tuned out the Olympics almost two decades ago. I have much more important and enriching things to do with my time. I couldn’t care less if the Olympics were once again relegated to the dust bin of history.
The problem isn't the olympics. The problem is the governments refuse to use existing infrastructure for the games and borrow hundreds of billions to build stadiums and stuff that will never be used again for anything. They also seem to have the idea that they will recoup the expense from all the money spend during the games by athletes, fans, and family. Never has that happened. The olympics don't predict disaster, they are merely a symptom of the disaster that is already in motion.
This is a problem with the Olympics.
The bidding expects the creation of new infrastructure, and the IOC will pick cities that promise to build new infrastructure over those that don't
They've played a bad game where nobody wants to sign up anymore though, and the Olympics will have to change if they want anyone to host them
Claiming there is a connection between the Crimea situation and the alleged post-Olympic economic downturn must be the most bizarre, preposterous, and far-fetched pile of rubbish I have ever heard.
Barcelona is an interesting case in point. The home of the IOC chairman, Samaranch, it used the 1992 Olympics to clean up its act, for example redeveloping much of the waterfront into appealing beaches. Those facilities now benefit residents as well as visitors, even if many of the Olympic venues were soon crumbling. But convincing the world that Barcelona is a must-see destination has steadily led to over-tourism. Having spent a lot of time there-- and I do like the city-- I don't really think it offers tourists enough to justify their massive, quality of life-destroying numbers and all the pressure being imposed on local housing from AirBnB and its imitators. But we have the Olympics to thank for a nice city being almost loved to death.
if hosting the olympics causes any problems, what if we just always have it in Greece, but have all the other countries pay for it and then some to make up for it? or go with the US because it's big and would be a reliable host, and could afford to pay for it on its own without much issue
This popped into my head: Countries naturally want to host the Olympics, when they're in an economic position of very good stability and growth. But since the bidding process for the Olympics takes 10-14 years, by the time the country actually hosts the Olympics, it's very unlikely for them to still be in the same phase of economic stability/growth that they were in when they were bold enough to bid for the Olympics (i. e. they'd have to have been in a likely 10+ year economic upswing *by then*).
Very rarely are there economic upswings for a country that last more than 25 years (one such example would be Germany's Wirtschaftswunder after WW2). So most countries that host the Olympics will *inevitably* experience a bad economic turn at least by the time they host the event...
One solution is to host as a nation, allowing few different cities to host games according to what they can use afterward. Although, we would need these cities to be directly connected by train (any cheap mass transportation service).
In a practical world (which we don't live in) it'd be better to select a certain location to use for every major international events like the Olympics and the World Cup.
The problem with the Olympics is that there are no return of investment on the money spent on the infrastructure. If there are proper planning. The Olympic Village can turned into public housing where the hovernment can rent out to recover the money invested on building it. The Olympic stadium can be use to host big concert of for super star like Taylor Shift. However, mos of the time, the infrastructure build are allow to be rotten until it would need to be demolished.
The problem with the Olympics is that their purpose is to make the IOC rich, and to dupe cities and countries on spending vast fortunes to make the IOC rich.
Same with the world cup
Ditch the Commonwealth Games. It's anachronistic and a waste of money.
Think they’re already dead and irrelevant in this world
I was expecting an economic analysis. Make a synthetic counterfactual by weighting countries by similarity with the host country in the previous years, and see if there's a consistent difference.
There's another possible factor: things go in cycles. By the time an area is prosperous enough to bid, get, and have the Olympics, they're due for a downturn. The end of the Olympics is just the push needed.
I stopped paying attention to the Olympics decades ago. It's been a grift as long as I can remember. My only interaction with Olympics now is to actively oppose bids from my country (Canada). The money that was blown on Vancouver olympics, for example, could have alleviated a huge chunk of the housing crisis.
It's bread and circuses, nothing more.
It makes sense to do it in cities that already have the stadiums and infrastructure to do it.
I hope that pointless spectacle never comes to my city. We've got better things to spend money on. I don't need it to be impossible to get around because of Olympic traffic and closures.
It doesnt predict, it is the cause of issue.
Many governors advertise big events, and justify the huge depts as "tourism will bring money"
But they don't. Its spacticles, smokes and mirrors.
It can bring a burst of revenue at the time of the event, but they forget the "return of investment" calculation.
Not to mention that massive projects are built FOR the event, not for a semi self-sustaining infrastructure that CAN hold any events like that in the future.
Like why are they building hotels instead creating a giant festival ground with modular campsites?
Why not keep the sport event establishment as lesirue and sport facilities all over the year? Seeing those neglected and deserted buildings is like building a bonfire out of money and shouting "I am rich" while shoveling more bills into the blaze...