[sandworm101]

>> make it seem like organising events like this not something I would feel comfortable with hosting in my own country.

Vancouver Olympics 2010. No, it did not make a profit, and there was a fiasco involving how the athletes village was converted into condos, but the city did not go crazy over preparations. Most of the venues were already there. Whistler was already a winter sports mecca. Vancouver didn't need to build new airports or erect new mountains. Things like highway improvements and sports facilities were not left to rot after the event. They are all still there being used today. And it was canada. Canada knows how to do winter stuff. I think it was the first olymics where the ice doctors didn't hide the fact that every winter olymics has a Canadian coin buried under center ice.

The olympics isn't something that a city does to turn a profit, but that doesn't mean it has to bankrupt itself either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Winter_Olympics

[dleslie]

We badly needed the highway and transit improvements, too. Almost none of the new construction went to waste.

There is/was a movement to make the winter olympics permanently fixed in a few northern cities, Vancouver being one of them, in order to prevent the wasteful fiascos that are witnessed from time to time.

Obviously that was a non-starter. The enormous expenditure (and wealth transfer) of public funds is sort of the point. ;)

[sandworm101]

>> We badly needed the highway and transit improvements, too

There is much debate about this, particularly in regards to the Sea to Sky highway improvements. The old highway wasn't great, it was rough in spots, but the improvements have had unwanted effects. Making the highway easier means more people are doing day trip to whistler from Vancouver. Rather than stay in whistler people are staying at cheaper hotels in Vancouver. That means less local revenue and increased highway traffic. And no effort was made to improve non-car traffic along the route. No rail improvements. No bus lanes. Nothing much other than making the existing 2/4-lane road straighter and faster.

[dleslie]

I, for one, am glad that Whistler is more accessible to those who could not afford the high prices of Whistler hotels.

For most of my life skiing at Whistler was totally out of reach. The one or two of my peers who went yearly were among the wealthiest.

Glad it's no longer an exclusive playground for Vancouver's wealthy.

[vl]

Skiing by itself is very expensive (equipment and lift tickets). For Whistler there are cheaper options if you are staying not in the main village, basically price-wise it’s comparable to staying somewhere else and driving (and hotels in Vancouver are not that cheap in the first place).

[sandworm101]

It has become out of reach. In the 90s a seasons pass was expensive but reasonable. I had a "dual mountain" pass from back when it was two different mountains, back when harmony bowl was considered backcountry/out-of-bounds skiing. We were not wealthy and the mountain was a mix of different people. Now it is all uber-wealthy clients. The mountains seem to have more staff than customers. People who just want to ski on their own are being pushes aside for "mountain experience" clients who want guides and expensive food services. We used to bring a bagged lunch, sometimes eating out on the slopes in one of the secret spots. Good lunch doing that these days. There are no secret spots anymore.

[dleslie]

The bag lunch, secret smoke spot crowds are all at cypress. ;)

[vl]

I’m sure Whistler overall saw increase in business. And improvements to the road were long overdue. This “highway” was in disrepair with constant traffic jams.

[dleslie]

And deaths.

[gamblor956]

Every LA Olympics so far has been profitable.

This is because LA generally reuses existing venues when possible, and almost all facilities built for the Olympics are designed with plans for post-Olympic usage.

For example, the LA Memorial Coliseum was built in 1921 as WWI memorial and was expanded for the 1932 Olympics a decade later. The Coliseum was not upgraded for the 1984 Olympics (though the track and field were upgraded), and the only two venue custom-built for the 1984 Olympics were the velodrome and swimming stadium.

The 1984 Olympics was one of the most cost-conscious Olympics ever held, and is still the most profitable Olympics. Like today, few cities wanted to host the Olympics due to cost concerns. Indeed, LA was the only remaining bidder by the time the decision reached the IOC (similarly, for the 2024 Olympics, Paris and LA were the only two bidders remaining, and LA was the only city willing to bid for 2028). The 1984 Olympics were almost entirely privately funded (thanks to Hollywood and other corporate backers). LA made significant use of existing structures, low-cost decorations, and was the first Olympics to truly take advantage of corporate sponsorships and television contracts. For example, the velodrome was funded by 7-11, and the swimming stadium was funded by McDonalds.

The forthcoming 2028 Olympics follows the blueprint set by the 1984 Olympics: reusing existing venues and infrastructure, to the extent that the only venues that will be created solely for the Olympics are the viewer stands for some of the outdoor events like bmx and canoeing. Extensive use of corporate and private sponsorship. Pretty much the only thing that requires government funding is the security, and the US federal government will be providing the bulk of that.

[coliveira]

The Winter Olympics is a different beast because, as you say, mountains are already there. But for a summer olympics you have to build a lot of facilities that will never be used again.