So today its anounced babies want be allowed in if they dont have a ticket even if they where not born when tickets where ordered,
despite large parks around london town no camping will be allowed,
The cost of the security operation is going through the roof, while Mrs Jones still gets mugged for her pension,in another part of uk plc
Heathrow airport is bulding a temporary departure/arrival lounge,at huge cost,
Huge amounts of money are being spent on new buses and road lines for the two weeks,along with thousands of multi lingual signs
Paramedics are being transfered there from round the uk just incase a foreigner is ill, while Mrs Jones somewhere else has a heart attack and has to wait for one to arrive,if there are any available,
Fianlly all the sports stadiums that are currently branded need all branding obliterated for the duration.
What a huge waste of cash, we could have thousands of miles of cycle tracks,more academy schools,and better public transport in the rest of the uk plc.
But just perhaps some peeps might like the idea of a giant costly school sports day for 2 weeks.
how dare you question our masters, the olympics will bring benefits to the UK, all the politicians have said so, so it must be true.
The nearer it gets, the less i care about it. I might go abroad when it is on.
at least the tour de france is on at the same time.
Paramedics are being transfered there from round the uk just incase a foreigner is ill, while Mrs Jones somewhere else has a heart attack and has to wait for one to arrive,if there are any available,
They're all going in their own time and have to take annual leave or go in their time off, so normally services won't be effected.
It's OK, it's not like they chose to host it in the farthest corner of the country or anything...oh, hang on.
Noe at all outsie the south east - and then the costs in terms of congestion and so on are horrendous.
Scotland has had is sports / lottery funding cut to pay for the olympics
The whole idea is to show Britain off to the rest of the world and generate tourism, but if that is the attitude of a typical Brit I might get them to stay away.
Yes it could have built lots of thing, I love cricket, golf, rugby and cycling it would have helped those sports massively. It will and has had an effect on cycling. Cycle to work being the main one that is obvious.
It is costing a lot but hopefully we will get a return on that investment.
matt_outandabout - Member
It's OK, it's not like they chose to host it in the farthest corner of the country or anything...oh, hang on.
Well more people do live in the S.E than any other are of the country so it is a lot more central and accessible in terms of population than you make out.
Look on the bright side - great time for a holiday?
Remember, it's the London Olympics, not the UK Olympics. No other city in the UK would have won the right to stage it and all the events (save football and yachting?) have to be in and around London.
So why isn't London paying for it?
Subsidy Junkies?
I would love to see the real figures of how much extra £££s in tourism it generates versus how much it cost. Obviously if those figures are negative we will never see them.
So, if it's supposed to be a regeneration project, why wasn't it held somewhere that's depressed, like the Midlands who have lost a lot of heavy industry, or South Wales, where the steelworks shut down (and the mines) etc. There would be more room away from crowded London, which needs less help than other parts of the country. It would be easier from a security point of view too.
FFS, getting to work is going to be a nightmare. As for showcasing the UK, HELLO, London is only a small part of the UK and anyway, do visitors really want to see traffic jams and CCTV cameras?
i've never been less interested in the olympic than this time, right load of corperate bolloxs.
Well more people do live in the S.E than any other are of the country so it is a lot more central and accessible in terms of population than you make out.
Oh yeah, I forgot that the SE doesn't have overcrowded public transport, roads or airports. And of course it doesn't absort more than it's fair share of funding for transport, sport, development etc.
/sarcasm mode off
Thank god the world is not populated by narrow minded individuals who can't see past there nose.
London is the capital and the biggest draw for tourists, who you never know might decide to visit some other parts of the UK. The part of London that has been regenerated was a very run down area, other areas in the UK may have been more deserving and do need help but please embrace something that hopefully will have a positive effect on the whole country for a good few years.
Nothing ventured nothing gained.
right load of corperate bolloxs
IOC is just as corrupt as FIFA. I find the whole thing hugely distasteful, the government spunking all this cash for the spectacle of people running in circles, throwing bits of metal and jumping into pools of water. I understand how huge it is for the athletes, but really, who watches athletics at any other time, it's a minority sport.
Great for Britain they tell us. Is [i]anyone[/i] convinced by this?
Yes, I am. Sporting heroes, aspirations, pride - all that is worth it. My issues are only on how much we feel that we 'have' to spend, and once more it is a SE favouring thing.
How much money has gone into cycling because of the success of the British Cycling team? I would say biking has been a massive winner of the investment in our elite athletes. They have a chance to showcase their ability and skill on home soil and who knows maybe just one kid will be inspired and go onto to great things.
If you don't like it don't watch, don't go, go ride your bike. I promise not to come and whine at you riding your bike whilst you could be doing something different.
The olympics don't necessarily generate tourism. People assume everything will be booked up, busy, and twice the usual price. So they stay at home.
Tourism in Greece actually dropped during their olympics, even in the islands that were completely unaffected.
Oh yeah, I forgot that the SE doesn't have overcrowded public transport, roads or airports. And of course it doesn't absort more than it's fair share of funding for transport, sport, development etc.
/sarcasm mode off
This point is a separate point to you first point, your jumping from one point to the next. I was challenging your implied idea that the Olympics should be placed geographically centrally for a maximum number of people to visit.
Heathrow airport is bulding a temporary departure/arrival lounge,at huge cost
So they are building extra facilities to accommodate extra passengers - presumably these passengers are paying fares? And hence will bring in more money?
Anyone know what the TV rights for the Olympics are worth? It's only the biggest TV event in the entire world (possibly - might be the second 🙂 )
I imagine a lot of people will come to see it, and they'll be spending a lot of money whilst they are here.
Great for Britain they tell us. Is anyone convinced by this?
Of course not, but I do have an open mind, unlike apparently some on here, and I will wait for the figures before making a judgement.
Some people of course like to make judgments so much they don't wait for figures and evidence.
Of course they should have been more central. Manchester would have been a much better proposition but the UK government with its south east bias refused to get behind a Manchester Olympics bid.
As it is the whole of the UK is paying for London to have this and will be no benefit only minuses outside of the south east. Scotland has lost a huge chunk of its sports funding to pay gr this
Its an embarrassment. Its going to be a bit crap as well - thats obvious Look at the logo and the mascots
Populus central, not geographical. The more populous central would probably be somewhere like Oxford or Northampton.
As it is the whole of the UK is paying for London to have this and will be no benefit only minuses outside of the south east. Scotland has lost a huge chunk of its sports funding to pay gr this
Separate point. There are lots of other points for and against the Olympics but I am talking about location for maximum number of people to have access. So populus central, not geographical.
Did Manchester prepare a bid? I can't see how they'd have won. And anyway regardless of geographical location London has far better transport links than anywhere else in the UK. It's one of Europe's major air hubs for a start.
And I've explained about 10 times on here why the logo and mascot are the way they are. But you'd all rather have a great big WHINGE than do any thinking.. how sodding British of you 🙁
Heathrow airport is bulding a temporary departure/arrival lounge,at huge cost
So they are building extra facilities to accommodate extra passengers - presumably these passengers are paying fares? And hence will bring in more money?
If it is like vancouver 2010, they built a temporary terminal but that was more for the purposes of handling the extra baggage that comes with the athletes and all the tv crews, etc. there the temp terminal was used the day after closing only.
And I've explained about 10 times on here why the logo and mascot are the way they are
Have missed that, please can you explain again?
Molgrips - manchester wanted to bid a few years ago but got no significant backing from the UK government so failed badly
So why are the logo and mascots so crap then molgrips - 'cos they are - they are embarassingly crap.
There are two possible reasons for a Manchester bid not getting govt backing:
1) their bid was rubbish
2) It's a conspiracy against the North!
Re the mascots - remember they are meant to appeal globally. I'd imagine that they decided Europe and North America wouldn't give two hoots about these things, but Asian countries would be really into them so they designed them with a few billion Asians in mind.
It's just a guess mind, but it would explain why a country stocked with design talent made something looking like that.
There are lots of other points for and against the Olympics but I am talking about location for maximum number of people to have access.
Populus central does not meen more accessible - the issues with transport and increased cost of accomodation are barriers.
Manchester (twice) and Birmingham (once) bid unsuccessfully. After Atlanta, it was made clear that only world cities would get the games so London was our only option if we were to win.
Tourism does go down often and West End Theatre are very worried about next summer, whether it is a good thing or not, I have no idea and we will never have any decent data to evaluate.
London taxpayers have paid for part of it because it has been included in the Mayoral Levy added to our council tax, approximately £1billion.
Mefty - those bids got no significant support from central government.
Scottish taxpayers have paid a part of it as well and will receive no benefit at all
As long as the spin is in full force and London is making all the profit, with the rest fighting for leftovers, that is good enough for me. Just don't ask me to pay for the extra.
Miserabilists really do need to get a grip of reality. The Olympics are going to be fantastic. The atmosphere will be great, the legacy of facilities and feel good factor will be great, the regeneration is already amazing. I do worry about bad weather and terrorism but if they do not materialise (too much in the case of rain)then all will be well.
As for the people who think it should be in Manchester, FFS, get a life. Manchester is not a world city like London, Sydney etc and was never a runner.
Oh, and its going to help lift us out of the economic slough of despond as well.
As usual you miss the point, post Atlanta, only a "world city" can win it, London is the only one in this country that meets this criteria, whether the other bids failed through lack of support is an irrelevance.
Londoners have paid for it twice, first through National taxes, like everyone else and then again through the council tax.
London is making all the profit
If a London business does well, the tax on their profits and wages goes into the national pot. Did you not know this?
hh45 - so I should celebrate the fact that Scotland is paying for something that will bring no benefit anywhere near to Scotland and indeed has already caused lasting damage to Scotland grass roots sport an will continue to do so for years?
Legacy? None here bar cuts
Feel good factor - get real
atmosphere? riiiiiiight
Oh, and its going to help lift us out of the economic slough of despond as well.
Can I have some of what you are smoking?
has already caused lasting damage to Scotland grass roots sport
Are there no Scottish people in the Olympics then?
Scotlands grassroots sporting budget has been cut significantly to pay for this junket.
Thats less playing fields, less training course for coaches, less coaches, less opportunity for people to partake in sport. thats major damage to sport in scotland
At last some people who hope that it will be a wonderful spectacle.
I don't believe that none of the visitors to the Olympics will not use their time here to visit other parts of the UK.
Maybe they will go home and tell their friends how wonderful and welcoming the country was and how they want to come back and that their freinds should join them on a fortnight jaunt around the UK taking in all the best bits.
If I can I'll tell them to avoid the north because all it seems is a lot of whining from up there.
Populus central does not meen more accessible - the issues with transport and increased cost of accomodation are barriers.
Good point, however I would say on that point that the S.E overall has the best transport and connections. Perhaps the metric should be a averaged (time to travel)*(price of trip)*some factor type thing. I'm not sure accommodation would be much cheaper anywhere else though profiteering would not be any less in another part of the country.
Maybe they will go home and tell their friends how wonderful and welcoming the country was
😆
Bear - it would be the first time ever in the history of the olympics. greece for example lost tourists as a result
lost tourists during the olympics yes I don't doubt, but did it result in lost revenue as surely prices were inflated during the games?
molgrips - Member"London is making all the profit"
If a London business does well, the tax on their profits and wages goes into the national pot. Did you not know this?
LOL! London not a different country? Yes, yes ... I know we share the pot.
I just hate the negativity over something because it doesn't fit in with someones ideal / location or perception.
It will be great for lots of people, let them enjoy it, nothing good to say then keep quiet.
I'm going on holiday that fortnight 😀
Another vanity project moneypit so that a few UK bigwigs can invite their international tosspot counterparts over for a dinner party or 14 at everyone's expense
I wouldn't mind so much if they were offering decent access to events at sensible prices but it's extortionate and even the oganisation of the sales is risible. CLosing off public spaces that are within sight of events (box hill, is it ?) is the final insult IMO
The IOC should **** off and realise that single-city events are a shitty idea
Anyhow, weather's been nice 😉
Scotlands grassroots sporting budget has been cut significantly to pay for this junket.Thats less playing fields
Hang on - they are digging them up? Or do you mean fewer NEW playing fields?
TJ - you make some fair-ish points but Scotland is the minority. National teams will be staying (and hence spending money, bringing some life etc) to places all over the country and not just London. Certainly as far as Midlands and I know that not the whole country but nowhere would benefit the whole country. I'm sorry your grass roots spending has been cut - we suffered the loss of Beastway that was bad enough but i expect some of those cuts get blamed on Olympics as it is a way to blame nasty English and in fact would have been cut anyway.
as others have pointed out Londoners have paid for it in all sorts of subtle ways so that's not a good argument.
As for 'cuts' that is a different argument. The Olympic spending was perfect for sustaining jobs through the last four years downturn even if more by luck than judgement.
As for drugs, like all athletes I am drug free!
I'm in Yorkshire, love live sport, bid for tickets, got some and can't wait. I always wanted to go to the Olympics but now I can do it for a few quid of petrol and a tent in my mates garden. I can't be doing with this front-line service mentality - it's coincidence its happening during austere times but if any smartarses in 2005 were predicting the crash then it sure as hell didn't stop them spending like mad. Yeah spend it all on hospitals and schools and make the world turn grey. Sure the politicians are tossing themselves off over it and I hate that and the mentality of the IOC but it's a spectacle of sport and loads and loads of people will enjoy it.
I find it obscene - Lord Coe needs to join the real world and 'engage' with the ordinary Joe.
As for 'cuts' that is a different argument. The Olympic spending was perfect for sustaining jobs through the last four years downturn even if more by luck than judgement.
In the south east. In Scotland it has meant cuts in several ways.
Christmas costs a lot of money - do you hate that too? And who the hell came up with a fat bloke in red for a mascot?
On the plus side it'll be a great time for a riot (outside London) given the number of police that are being called in. Strangely the Scottish forces aren't being trained (well no word on it so far) in English law so there's a get out clause. I really fancy a trip to France (101st will be on duty in london village) but i fancy the traffic will be terrible doon there. So it's the west coast highlands for me.
Oh and not a huge net profit for UK plc as the majority of companies will be multinationals and HMRC will probably cut them a nice tax deal.
But of course - all the big sponsors will no doubt have huge write-offs, but the gov can say that it's private sector fundingHMRC will probably cut them a nice tax deal.
(and they get all the tickets too 👿 )
It will bring us the fiscal spirit of the last European country to host these fantastic events, the Greeks!
Woohay!
Not 🙁
Oh and not a huge net profit for UK plc as the majority of companies will be multinationals and HMRC will probably cut them a nice tax deal.
Where do you get the idea it will be a net profit for the UK at all? Even if you include the most spurious income it will still be a huge net loss. As for Londoners paying for it in all sorts of ways - well maybe, but at least you get most of the benefit from it, unlike the rest of the country who are still paying lots towards it.
however I would say on that point that the S.E overall has the best transport and connections.
So why are most of the events going to be so awkward to get to for those (the majority of people in this country) coming from outside London? Or was your last word supposed to be "congestion"?
I'm also with TJ on the funding issues for anything other than elite Olympic sport. This is nothing to do with the recession - such diversion of funds was planned right from when London won.
Cheer up you lot!
If there was ever a time when the UK needed a bit of a national party...
We all love cycling, right? Remember how, for a few weeks, cycling was cool and positive PR all over the place in 2008, well we'll get something similar however well the Brit squad do. And we get an ace new velodrome in London 🙂
We should be proud of our country, support our team and make the best of a once-in-a-lifetime party...
TandemJeremy - Member
hh45 - so I should celebrate the fact that Scotland is paying for something that will bring no benefit anywhere near to Scotland and indeed has already caused lasting damage to Scotland grass roots sport an will continue to do so for years?
Is it only Scottish money paying for the 2014 Commonwealth Games then? Swings and roundabouts - I'm all in favour of both events, 2014 mainly because it has prompted a long overdue refurbishment of the Commonwealth pool in Edinburgh.
In fact, speaking of Commonwealth Games, where were they held in 2002? With that in mind, why should there be a central England bias to sporting events when other cities are more capable (ie London)?!?
Regarding 2012, I agree that the logo is awful, reminds me of Lisa Simpson doing unspeakable things - but it is a strong brand that you recognise...
It will be great for lots of people, let them [s]enjoy[/s] pay for it
Is it only Scottish money paying for the 2014 Commonwealth Games then?
yes - all funding from the UK s refused IIRC. 2014 is funded totaly from within Scotland
Whats worse under barnett formula Scotland gets a % of the total UK spending - But IIRC the Olympic funding was excluded from this calculation. So Scotland loses out again.
Any chance we could divert the fireworks from the Olympics and see if we can use them to detach Scotland from us, and whilst we are at it send all those that are down here taking jobs from the english back over the border.
Worse than the Aussies for a whinge.
The economic rationale for the project was that the private sector would raise the money needed. But the financial crisis meant it was unable to borrow, so the government bailed out the Games, with public funding increasing by £5.9bn – almost triple the original budget. According to the House of Commons public accounts committee, less than 2% of the budget has ended up coming from the private sector.But despite the public bailout, London 2012 will not be leaving behind the type of public-spirited legacy equated with 1851 and 1951. Instead developments will be entirely private, sold off piecemeal to the highest bidder. The Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park – the first park in Britain for 150 years – will not be run by the Royal Parks Agency, but by private companies; and the places within it, from the Olympic village to the venues, will be private. Or at least that was the intention, although the debacle over the sell-off of the stadium revealed how easily these deals can collapse.
Meanwhile, a £1bn bid by the Wellcome Trust to buy the Olympic Park and village and create a "Silicon Valley for Europe" – in conjunction with two universities, and providing a museum, social housing and 7,000 jobs – was turned down by the Olympic Park Legacy Company. One reason was that it didn't offer "value for money" to the taxpayer. The village has now been sold to a consortium led by Qatar's royal family.
The funding is being cut from all sorts of socially useful projects to pay for this. Much of the supposed 'legacy' and the targets for increased participation are being quietly dropped. This is while the government slashes the budget for sport in schools.
Look on the positive side. The golden legacy! West Ham will get a nice new stadium, and..... erm..... erm......
Anyone know what the TV rights for the Olympics are worth? It's only the biggest TV event in the entire world (possibly - might be the second 🙂
massive numbers I would think
All owned and controlled by the IOC, so what's your point?
Look on the positive side. The golden legacy! West Ham will get a nice new stadium, and..... erm..... erm......
They'll pull their fingers out and get the Jubilee line running smoothly...?
I think it's great that the Olympics are being held in Britain, you should be proud. I'm not a true Briton but I'm proud.
As for who will benefit and what legacy the Games will leave, well I'm not so positive about that. A few companies will make millions of pounds, that's guaranteed.
I'm reminded of 2010 when the Celtic Manor in Newport hosted the Ryder Cup. This event was heralded as a rebirth of the town, with millions of pounds being pumped into the local economy. What actually happened was the organisers shipped in their own staff, their own catering, their own transport (they didn't even use local bus companies) and created a walled garden for the event. A few multimillionaires made more money, the rest of the people were excluded.
So.. what is all this whining going to achieve except bring down all the people who might actually be looking forward to the sport?
If you don't like it then fine, but it's done now. Can we maybe leave the complaining alone for a bit?
I think its important that the truth is told and widely spread.
Its an expensive white elephant that has absorbed huge sums of money, will leave no meaningful legacy and has come at huge cost to grassroots sport.
We should never loose sight of this
The net effect is likely to be negative. Two examples: Tourists who might otherwise have come to London are likely to be frightened away due to the expectation of higher hotel charges and lack of availability due to the 'lympics. And the West End theatres are likely to suffer a 'bloodbath' according to Andrew Lloyd Webber for the same reason. The inevitable disruption of normal life and economic activity in the 'special areas' needs to be considered, but I doubt if you'll hear about that when the BBC really get orgasmic about this pointless act of national masturbation.
Can we maybe leave the complaining alone for a bit?
Have you forgotten where you are Molly?
An example of the 'lympic ****-up
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-16703448
Who do you think will end up paying for the poor delicate 'lympic sponsior's name to be protected? Us of course!
I agree with TJ, it is important that the truth is known. The Olympic bid stated a budget, which was far exceeded very soon afterwards. How could they have got that so wrong? Or were they lying in the first place?
As for the benefits, the bid sounded very positive, lots of affordable housing and community projects. These things are not going to happen, instead private businesses are buying in and will make a huge profit. Profits are fine, that's what businesses are all about, no problem with that BUT this was sold to us, the IOC and everyone else as a project which would regenerate the area for the benefit of the local community.
Pish.
Have any of you travelled in rush hour in London? I do, four days a week, by train for the first part and by bicycle for the in-town part. The roads are already badly congested. In some places it's hard to get through the jams even on a push bike. The tubes are already packed to capacity, horrible, hot, crowded, stinking things. It's going to be a nightmare getting to work.
Oh, by the way, the marvellous velodrome, according to what I've heard, is going to be accessible only to clubs, and only with a proper track bike with special tyres. Hardly a turn-up-and-try is it?
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16721838 ]Morality before finances[/url]
And don't forget the exclusion of the local communities from 'their' games. As happened in Weymouth where at the announcement of the games the yokels were all excited about being able to view the sailing events. Ahem... the public parks are to be sealed off and used for ticket only spectators.
Oh, by the way, the marvellous velodrome, according to what I've heard, is going to be accessible only to clubs, and only with a proper track bike with special tyres. Hardly a turn-up-and-try is it?
You expect to be able to turn up and take your normal bike on? 😯 Name me a velodrome where you are allowed on without a track bike with special tyres. I presume the accessibility will be much like Manchester and Newport.
I do agree with your other points though.
we spend on wars and activities that destroy the environment, so why not on something that brings nations together in a positive environment?
IMHO it will promote UK sport and encourage young people to be active. As in many cases across the country, my daughter's primary school is planning lots of Olympic themed events, stimulating an interest in sport for both boys and girls at an early age, which I believe is a very good thing.
And there's the other big fallacy, that somehow the olympics is going to get the obese out and puffing away. Well it may for a couple of days, after which they will say a collective "sod this" and go back to the beer and burgers.
it might happen,
but it's never happened before.
(a professor at sheffield hallam was on that Radio4 the other day - saying he'd looked at past games to see if there was any related increase in sports-participation, there wasn't. which is a surprising thing for him to say, because they're getting a little funding to be all upbeat and positive about the games)