Olympic "Gold" isn't really gold is it?

[Bikni]

The market value of the medals is irrelevant, its all about what they mean.

If a guy like Phelps for some reason goes bankrupt in like 10 years lets say, he can probably flog each of his medals for obscene values and live comfortably again for the rest of his life. Another athlethe like Carl Lewis for example i cant even imagine how much he 1 of his gold medals would fetch in an auction these days.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

Anyway, they could make the medals out of the gold-coloured aluminium foil they wrap chocolate bars in and an athlete would be over the moon to win it.

[Azgraal]

It just seems odd to me that they can spend all this money on added security and building giants stadiums and whatever else, but can't even hand out a real gold medal.

You do know that "gold, silver, bronze" is simply a symbolism given to the awards, right? they could make it out of watermellon jelly on a tinfoil wrapper and still call it gold, silver of bronze medal, were they regarded as such.

Dont be so literal, words dont always mean their primary meaning.

[zerocarbs]

Hundreds of millions suffer from these two illnesses, imagine how much of an impact the Olympics could have just with this project alone.

Two diseases that in most cases are preventable. But you're saying it's better that billionaires are making millions from tax payers to build these facilities. Never mind the fact that it will be more likely to hurt the economy than bring any kind of benefit in the long run.

[Bikni]

Regarding the cost of the Olympics only stupid people that like to protest about everything will say its a waist of money. To start with they completly refurbished a big shunk of London with loads of sports complex, offices, habitation etc.

In terms of tourism there's no biggest post card then the Olympics, and the Brits really now how to do it, i mean every single outdoor event i have seen so far looks absolutely stunning and immaculate, some of the pictures of London are really beautiful, im pretty sure the city of London will have made a excellent investment with tourism revenue in the following years.

Business wise, was watching a report on BBC about an event organized for the businesses involved in the Olympics, like Intel, Oracle and loads more companies, hosted by the British prime minister, where they pleged allready 2Billion investment in the UK, and the Olympics aren't even finished.

Theres a reason countries almost go to "war" when they are applying to host this sort of events, Olympics, World Cups etc.

[Aquinan]

The olympics will bring in billions.............

Stop looking at the short term costs and look at it as more of a long term thing.

no, just no


having lived in two post olympic cities (one summer one winter) working in tourism industry i can tell you the host loses out big time

[zerocarbs]

Regarding the cost of the Olympics only stupid people that like to protest about everything will say its a waist of money. To start with they completly refurbished a big shunk of London with loads of sports complex, offices, habitation etc.

In terms of tourism there's no biggest post card then the Olympics, and the Brits really now how to do it, i mean every single outdoor event i have seen so far looks absolutely stunning and immaculate, some of the pictures of London are really beautiful, im pretty sure the city of London will have made a excellent investment with tourism revenue in the following years.

Business wise, was watching a report on BBC about an event organized for the businesses involved in the Olympics, like Intel, Oracle and loads more companies, hosted by the British prime minister, where they pleged allready 2Billion investment in the UK, and the Olympics aren't even finished.

Theres a reason countries almost go to "war" when they are applying to host this sort of events, Olympics, World Cups etc.

They better start working on selling a lot of pictures.

[minteK917]

You have to wonder if the infrastructure is so needed then why didn't the tax payers just agree to pay for it before politicians used the Olympics as an excuse to spend money.

You arent thinking far ahead enough. I come from a city that hosted them in 1976. What it did is boost the city economy pretty massively at the time. City fight for world wide events, they always give you money. Not directly but every commerce in your city see major boost in sell/rent/etc. This is called boosting your economy If the games cost you 5 billions and your whole city will make way more. Its rolling the economy. The contract for those new infrastructure are taken by local campany and the likes. This is like investing money into those company, but instead of only wasting your own, you have the rest of the world coming into your city spending their well earned cash.

Over the years our stadium cost over 1.6 billion $US. The second most expensive in the world. Yet over all those years since 1976 it produce way more money then this with thousands of MBA games, football events, many other events and most recentlly major league soccer.

[Socialhealer]

OP is about 90 years slow in the head, those gold medals haven't been all gold in decades and i thought everyone knew this?

Just seems like you're hating on us Brits through your own lack of intelligence which I think is the only point I think you have proven in this thread.

[zerocarbs]

Over the years our stadium cost over 1.6 billion $US. The second most expensive in the world. Yet over all those years since 1976 it produce way more money then this with thousands of MBA games, football events, many other events and most recentlly major league soccer.

I have to seriously doubt that you know what you're talking about because I've read books on the subject. And from city to city the story is always the same.

[lopk]

How much does it cost to print out a college diploma? Like maybe a couple cents.

What does it stand for? A hell of a lot more (inb4 college diplomas don't mean anything or some other trolly response)

Something doesn't need to be expensive to have worth (ever thought about that $100 bill? probably didn't cost $100 to make).

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

Two diseases that in most cases are preventable.

One type of diabetes is preventable. The other is genetic.

But you're saying it's better that billionaires are making millions from tax payers to build these facilities.

The facilities are already built. This is a way of making them useful after the second week in august. The grant to convert the doping lab into a research lab is coming from the government, and partly from a pharmaceutical company.

Never mind the fact that it will be more likely to hurt the economy than bring any kind of benefit in the long run.

Please elaborate. How is medical research going to hurt the economy exactly?

[Adam Jensen]

Anyway, they could make the medals out of the gold-coloured aluminium foil they wrap chocolate bars in and an athlete would be over the moon to win it.

Bingo.

No one really cares what the fucking medal is made of (except the OP) because that's not the point of the medal.

[zerocarbs]

The facilities are already built.

They were free right?

Please elaborate.

All part of corporate welfare.

[minteK917]

I have to seriously doubt that you know what you're talking about because I've read books on the subject. And from city to city the story is always the same.

How long term are those book talking about? Our 1976 games were considerate one of the most expensive and worse money wise ever made, it still made profit though. The problem is the stadium was not even complete 10 years after the olympic, yet after 20 years or so it eventually turned into a profitable infrastructure even at a 1.6 billion total price tag(they had alot of problem with how flashy it is!). They dont ruin your city economy at all. Big city always have to invest big money to grow eventually, olympics just an opportunity, theres more to a country economy then infrastructure and taxes.

There is alot of world wide event big city compete for, for this very reason. Exemple F1. It cost you money for sure, but the cash comes from other side eventually. Its not a waste to market your city, unless you do it terribly wrong. I dont think London is doing it wrong at all.

Take it this way in the short term, the population all though our games were a terrible idea and cost us too much money. Yet 30 years later our province now battles to have another of our city host winter games or another summer game, the population is mostly behind the idea because we saw the long term result once.

Also: Greece economic condition has nothing to do with their games haha(thats pointed at the op). I live in Canada we had multiple games, we are one of the most economicaly stable country right now?

[vizzle]

Also: Greece economic condition has nothing to do with their games haha(thats pointed at the op). I live in Canada we had multiple games, we are one of the most economicaly stable country right now?

The problem with Greece is they flushed all their resources into development for the Olympics, so they didn't have enough to keep them afloat afterwards. The Olympics does drain the economy, but long-term benefits eventually outweight the expenses. Greece couldn't sustain itself long enough to reap the benefits so they collapsed. There's a reason cities like Beijing and London have spent billions, billions, billions on their Olympics, knowing that they would run into a deficit. It's because that long-term, it's good for the city.

But then again, I'm sure a random forum poster named Ateup knows much more about this stuff than the heads of financial industries and financial analysts from all around the world who advise rich cities to go for it. Because he's read books.

[Alilei32]

You brits know this is costing you over a billion dollars to sit there and give away glorified trinkets right?

At least they are being very generous and not keeping any for themselves

[minteK917]

The problem with Greece is they flushed all their resources into development for the Olympics, so they didn't have enough to keep them afloat afterwards. The Olympics does drain the economy, but long-term benefits eventually outweight the expenses. Greece couldn't sustain itself long enough to reap the benefits so they collapsed.

They have more structural problems then the game developments. Their spending was just genrally uncontrolled and very cheap lending. Lack of any reform during economic hard times. Games or not greece was going bankrupt. It only look worse because they waited so long before doing anything, their debt is now more money then their own economy.

[semetrik22]

winning an olympic medal is like killing the time lost proto drake. you're never gonna use the mount it's all about the achievement.

[Deleted]

Two diseases that in most cases are preventable. But you're saying it's better that billionaires are making millions from tax payers to build these facilities. Never mind the fact that it will be more likely to hurt the economy than bring any kind of benefit in the long run.

Well that's certainly convincing argument you have there. Allow me to retort.

Jobs for UK graduates = good
UK graduates paying taxes = good
Comapnies making money from new drugs = good
Companies paying tax on the drugs they sell = good
Patients getting treatment = good
The UK being seen to be at the forefront of scientific research = good

Yes companies will make millions, and much of that will go back into the UK economy. But I'm sure you know best, after all, it's not like nations are competing for the right to host the games or anything.