Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: London

Olympic Medal...olympics_000019262071XSmall

Competing against Paris, Madrid, Moscow and London for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games, NYC made it to the second round and then joined Moscow when it was cut. Next, Madrid was eliminated, then Paris, and London remained.

Was winning worth it?

It depends.

Barcelona (1992) and Atlanta (1996) fared well. Preparing for its games, Barcelona replaced a commercial waterfront with 2 miles of sand, sea and marinas. The beaches led to restaurants, a new port, hotels, a rejuvenation. Atlanta also figured out the formula to make it work. Home of Coca-Cola, they had a deep-pocketed sponsor that made the finances viable. They built stadiums that were used afterwards—by the Atlanta Braves, for example– and Georgia Tech uses the former Olympic Village to house students.

Athens (2004) and Sydney (2000) are a different story. After their Olympiad, the Greek venues deteriorated with 21 of 22 abandoned. Tourism was not fueled. Urban renewal failed to materialize. Spending was massive and debt remains. Even the Sydney Olympics about which Bill Bryson said, “I don’t wish in my giddiness to overstate matters, but I invite you to suggest a more successful event anywhere in the peacetime history of mankind, ” has had little long-term benefit. Its re-development projects did not materialize and the taxpayer cost was considerable.

What happened?

Sports economist Andrew Zimbalist says the big problem is realistic planning. Starting with a bidding process that cost a losing city like Chicago close to $100 million, private interests that will bear none of the expense propose a lavish design. During the construction phase, with little cost/benefit analysis and the siren song of overbuilding, short-term excitement can override all fiscal responsibility and planning discipline. Some say that only after the 17-day extravaganza ends does sobriety return when the new infrastructure is all that remains. Others remind us that morale cannot be quantified as a benefit.

Dating back to 2008, this article from the Independent provides detailed stories of why Olympic cities have won and lost. For even more of the Barcelona story, you will enjoy this BusinessInsider article. Meanwhile, this sports economics Atlantic article and this NPR interview are excellent as is this 3 minute animated history of the Olympics.

Econlife Olympics:

  • Olympic Medal Predictions: here and here
  • A Euro Zone Olympic Team: here
  • Sports Events Boosts: here

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Three awards

Sharing a larger and more varied pool of European talent was supposed to create an economic synergy. Starting with the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, the first step was free trade. Nations were added, trade barriers disappeared, and by 2002, they had their monetary union.

What next? Does an Olympic union make sense?

In a report on the economics of the Olympics, Goldman Sachs asks if a euro zone team would win more medals than the 17 member nations took home separately.

For the “yes” side, they point out that the pool of talent would multiply, athletes might train harder because of fewer spots, and more resources would be supporting a single goal. In addition, because athletes would have to choose events more selectively, they would only compete in their best sport.

On the other hand, when East and West Germany combined their talent, the results were mixed and tough to evaluate because other variables changed (like China’s increased competitiveness).  As a specific example, the report points out that a unified Germany fared worse in football but better with hockey. Also, national pride and cheering home crowds might make a big difference. Finally, small countries tend to target one event with huge resources.

Their conclusion? The key to capturing the benefits of a euro team relates their current problems. Whether looking at the Olympics or monetary union, euro zone nations need more success optimizing the benefits of their union and minimizing its negatives.

Using Goldman’s medal chart from the 2008 Olympics, here is how euro zone nations compared with the US and China:

2008 Beijing Olympic Medal Winners (Euro Zone, US and People’s Republic of China)

Gold Silver Bronze Total
Germany 16 10 15 41
Italy 8 9 10 27
France 7 16 18 41
Netherlands 7 5 4 16
Spain 5 10 3 18
Slovakia 3 2 1 6
Slovenia 1 2 2 5
Finland 1 1 2 4
Belgium 1 1 0 2
Estonia 1 1 0 2
Portugal 1 1 0 2
Greece 0 2 2 4
Austria 0 1 2 3
Ireland 0 1 2 3
Luxembourg NA
Malta NA
Cyprus NA
Euro Zone Total 174
USA 36 38 36 110
People’s Republic of China 51 21 28 100

 

The Goldman report, “The Olympics and Economics 2012,” is interesting. But here, the Telegraph disagrees with its conclusions. And here is a concise timeline history of the euro zone.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment