Although San Francisco, Los Angeles and Washington D.C. were contenders, Boston won.
The city was selected as the American bid to be considered for the 2024 Olympics this past week. At first glance, one would think that’s totally rad, right? The entire world getting a first-hand look at the city that essentially founded our country?
Here’s why it’s actually an awful idea.
Only 4.5 billion to host? Ya right.
It’s going to cost $100 million just to be considered by the IOC to be host for the 2024 games. And although the budget is set at $4.5 bill, it’s estimated it would cost at least $15-$20 billion in renovating 30 or more sports venues, parking lots and roads.
Don’t believe it? London’s 2012 games had a budget of $4 billion and it ballooned to $20.
Boston makes no gain, whatsoever.
Based on the 2012 games, here was London’s financial breakdown:
TV revenue: $713 million
International sponsorships: $310 million
Domestic sponsorships: $1.15 billion
Ticket sales: $988 million
Licensing: $119 million
Total revenue = $3.28 billion
FAR from the $20 billion in expenses. There is no way Boston makes money here, all at the taxpayer’s cost.
Ever since the tragedy in Munich, security has been at the forefront of every Olympic games. It’s a necessary expenditure — and it’s as expensive as you might think.
No one knows the exact amount it would cost to ensure the games’ safety, but estimates are running between $1-$2 billion based on information from the London Olympics alone.
Boston’s Infrastructure is insane
Remember Labyrinth? That’s Boston with an additional million people flooding the city for nearly three weeks straight.
The city’s infrastructure consists of a network of small, narrow streets originally built before the industrial revolution and meant to confuse the British!
It’s easy to get lost in Boston. The traffic is insane the way it is. And it’s a lot of city on a small piece of land that’s already over-developed. How does anyone expect the flood of traffic, not to mention the means and space needed to build new venues to meet the demands of the IOC, to go over smoothly?
Students will suffer
The games aren’t worth it
No, really … The whole argument for decades has been that with hosting the Olympics it will encourage tourism and help the local economy so great that the city will get back much more than it put in. According to this Time article, that’s not true:
“The Olympics, cities are often told, will boost tourism. One econometric study, however, showed that when other factors were controlled for, Atlanta saw no statistically significant change in retail sales, hotel occupancy, or airport traffic during the 1996 Olympics. During the Beijing Olympics in August of 2008, hotel bed nights dropped 39% compared to the prior year. For the 2000 Sydney Olympics, two researchers concluded that “in terms of purely measurable economic variables the [Games] had a negative effect on New South Wales and Australia as a whole.”
They’re already protesting?
Reports are that some locals are already protesting. Similar to what we saw in Brazil last year, many probably feel that $4-$20 billion would go a long way in helping healthcare, education and crime. I know, it’s crazy talk.
Even though the IOC won’t make a decision until 2017, the fact some are already causing a stir can’t be a good sign. I mean, after all, this is the town that dumped tea into the Harbor over taxation without representation. Imagine what could happen when the IOC slaps a multi-billion dollar ‘tax’ that allows millions of foreigners to run the city for weeks on end?