Losing Olympic Bid a Blessing in Disguise?

By: Amy Guttman
Topics: World Watch

This report was filed by CBS News producer Amy Guttman in London.

(AP Photo/Tom Hevezi)

Many of those who backed Chicago's bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics saw hosting the games as a potential a financial jackpot full of tourism dollars and new development.

But those economic rewards would have been hard-won in light of the worldwide recession.

Great Britain's capital will host the 2012 Games and, even with three years to go, the budgetary hurdles are proving too high.

At left: A view of the London 2012 Olympic athletics stadium, London, Sept. 29, 2009.

London last hosted the Olympics in 1948, when times were tight after World War II. Those games were nicknamed the "Austerity Olympics."

Now, more than 60 years later, the label fits all over again.

With marketing budgets flat, or down, several big-name brands have failed to renew their corporate sponsorship deals. Bank of America, General Motors and Home Depot are just a few of the Fortune 100 companies already dropping out as big American backers of the games.

Many wonder whether hosting the Olympics will actually do more harm than good for London's local economy and British athletes competing.

Sports budget cuts have been as deep as 75 percent, with the eight British Olympic teams least likely to win medals taking the biggest hits. The decision to cut funding may well have damaging effects on Britain's performance at the 2012 Games, and beyond.

Amy Guttman has the full story from Britain's National Aquatic Center, in Manchester:

13 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment See all 13 Comments


by erasmus111 October 5, 2009 7:33 PM EDT: by inketolstoy October 5, 2009 4:37 PM EDT
Having the Olympics isn't about making money for the host country (for local politicians, maybe), it is about being in the spotlight.

Well went it means destroying the environment, and going into more debt, I think I would rather pass.; Reply to this comment


by inketolstoy October 5, 2009 4:37 PM EDT: Having the Olympics isn't about making money for the host country (for local politicians, maybe), it is about being in the spotlight. Rio won, enjoy your time in the sun (you are used to it). Chicago, better luck next time, you still got Obama, Oprah, Blago, the Bears and the Cubs.; Reply to this comment


by Hosheen October 5, 2009 3:10 PM EDT: I suspect that, before it is all over, Rio will wish that Tokyo had won. I have a complete commentary on that on my blog at:

http://brazilbrat.blogspot.com/

Brazil is contemplating spending far more than they can hope for in return.; Reply to this comment


by erasmus111 October 5, 2009 2:10 PM EDT: by hungry1968-16 October 5, 2009 11:36 AM EDT
Chicago was INCREDIBLY LUCKY to miss out on these games.

It's ALWAYS a money losing proposition, and the host cities always end up getting stuck with a bunch of stadiums and arenas that they don't use, but will be forced to take care of and maintain.

Athens is STILL digging out of the hole they were put into.

That is very true. When the Olympics were held in Utah, Salt Lake City, I think, I remember them saying that it hadn't been worth it. It cost millions of dollars to prepare for it and then they had to spend millions to clean up the devastation that was left behind.

We are having the winter Olympics here, in Vancouver/Whistler, and millions of dollars are going into building accomodations, rebuilding roads etc. I believe that we are going to find that it wasn't worth it also.; Reply to this comment

by ktorrent October 5, 2009 12:16 PM EDT

You know, it's amazing to me that Bush is out of office, and now Obama is taking heat for bad decisions and it is all Bush's fault. Obama should have sent a trusted advisor and move on. He was out of touch. Bush was held accountable for his mistakes, now lets be real about Obama.

I agree that it is best that it didn't go to Chicago. I am also grateful that there was a correction in the Obama icon status in terms of where he fits in the world--countries do things in the world out of their own interest. They don't care about Obama's personality. He rushed out to handle political paybacks in his own town--that the rest of us have to assume that was "representing the US" is bogus. I think the fact that he did so may not be so warmly welcomed by all Chicago residents--instead of Chicago being portrayed in its best light, Obama's political contacts were brought into question. The argument that he would have supported another city is questionable--he DIDN'T support Houston or Tulsa or anywhere else. He supported his home town with a fury at the expense of $1.2 million.

You know, it's really just time to admit the mistakes here and move on.

Reply to this comment


by Hosheen October 5, 2009 3:12 PM EDT: "You know, it's really just time to admit the mistakes here and move on." When are the neo-cons going to do that? If they helped to indict Bush and Cheney and send them to prison, I'd believe it. But no one is holding their breath waiting for a neo-con to admit mistakes.


by jwesel1 October 7, 2009 12:19 PM EDT: Bush was held accountable for his mistakes,
==============================================
Not true, he was re-elected.


by ici2i October 5, 2009 11:37 AM EDT: Obama had little or nothing to do with this issue. Chicago didn't lose the bid as much as Rio won it. It was absolutley the right choice for the WORLD. The US has hosted more than it's share of olympics venues while So America has hosted none except for Mexico. The way I viewed it, Obama represented the USA above anything else, not necessarily the city of Chicago. If it had been Houston, Miami or any other city, I believe he would have given that city his support. Obama bashers are as bad as the Bush bashers are / were but just have less to choose from so they must reach a little whenever they get an opportunity. The fact is, the Olympics takes a huge investment and a risky one these days.; Reply to this comment


by hungry1968-16 October 5, 2009 11:36 AM EDT: Chicago was INCREDIBLY LUCKY to miss out on these games.

It's ALWAYS a money losing proposition, and the host cities always end up getting stuck with a bunch of stadiums and arenas that they don't use, but will be forced to take care of and maintain.

Athens is STILL digging out of the hole they were put into.; Reply to this comment


by vittoria1 October 5, 2009 11:00 AM EDT: The media don't need to "spin" this. Having been following London's problems closely, I didn't want the Olympics in my city, and a great many other Chicagoans agreed with me.

As for Chicago being a "mess," it is facing no greater problems than other large American cities right now, and it is far better off than many cities abroad, including Rio, the crime and corruption of which are quite serious. It is also a terrific place to live, with world-class cultural institutions, a knockout location, and a strong sports culture. I've lived in cities all over the country and in Europe. Chicago has become my favorite place of residence.

Fiasco? Even IOC members have admitted that Chicago wasn't supposed to be voted out in the first round. Rio's win was a foregone conclusion from the get-go, since it was the romantic favorite for several reasons (and despite the fact that IOC members admitted that it was the most violent of the bid cities), but IOC was anticipating that a Chicago-Rio final vote would look better -- more exciting. The bloc voting torpedoed that idea, leaving some members embarrassed, as comments from those from Australia, Switzerland, and Norway have made clear since Friday.

But I do think Chicago got lucky. Despite the fact that the last two American Summer Olympics both made a profit, I doubt that we would have been so fortunate this time around, as the Londoners' experience is suggesting. Good luck to Rio. The residents will need it.; Reply to this comment


by Harden_Tar October 5, 2009 9:26 AM EDT: Leave it to the state run media to spin the loss as a good thing. The Obamas and Oprah, and the crowd that runs with them needs to realize that the rest of us are not into them as much as they are into themselves. Anyone with a brain knows that Illinois politics in general and Chicago politics specifically is a crooked as a dogs hind leg. Chicago is a mess and the only people that would have benefitted from the Olympics would have been the insiders. Apparently the Olympic commitee, who I have had doubts about for years, have managed to not be blinded by the faux light that shines from the Obamas.; Reply to this comment

by solidoak October 5, 2009 8:05 AM EDT

Two incidents have made Obama look really out of touch. The "stupidly" remark about the Cambridge cop and the Olympics fiasco. This President has proven he is just a lightweight in the affairs of state, and an inexperienced politician who should never have been elected.

Reply to this comment


by Hosheen October 5, 2009 3:08 PM EDT: Your comment has revealed what an idiot you are by turning a completely unrelated story into Obama-bashing. With all of the actually serious issues facing the country today, you knuckle-headed neo-cons waste your resources and credibility with non-issues. No wonder you repugnicans are out on your backsides.