SA mulls putting in bid for 2020 Olympics

July 27, 2009 Edition 1

Political Bureau

WITH multibillion rand stadiums across the country nearing completion, South Africa is considering putting in another bid to host the Olympic Games.

Sports and Recreation Minister Makhenkesi Stofile revealed this at a meeting in Soweto on preparations for the 2010 World Cup.

He said that the progress meant the country had more confidence in resubmitting a bid for the most prestigious international sports event.

In 1997 SA lost the final round of the bid to host the 2004 Olympics in Cape Town. Athens (in Greece) won the bid.

The Olympics have never been awarded to an African city. Durban recently indicated that it had its eye on the 2020 Olympics.

The city made its intention known by saying that the Moses Mabhida Stadium it was building for the World Cup was being constructed in a way that made expansion possible to accommodate 85 000 spectators for the 2020 event if needed.

Stofile's spokeswoman, Lerato Mogorosi, however, said yesterday that there had not been a decision on whether the country would put its name forward.

"The bid only opens at the 2012 Olympics in London," she said.

"It is not confirmed, but it is being seriously discussed by the South African Sport Confederation and Olympic Committee."

Mogorosi said the issue had not yet been put before the cabinet.

eThekwini's 2010 head, Julie-May Ellingson, said in April that Durban wanted to "be ready" for an Olympic bid even though it would be a national decision.

At least 40 percent of a host city's facilities must be in place before bidding.

South Africa Considers Bid to Host Olympics, Business Day Says

By Vernon Wessels

July 27 (Bloomberg) -- South Africa may bid to host the Olympics after spending billions of rand building new sport stadiums for the 2010 soccer World Cup, The Star said, citing Sport and Recreation Minister Makhenkesi Stofile.

The government and the South African Sport Confederation and Olympic committee are discussing a bid, the Johannesburg- based newspaper cited Stofile’s spokeswoman, Lerato Mogorosi, as saying. Durban, on South Africa’s east coast, may be the host city, it added.

To contact the reporter on this story: Vernon Wessels in Johannesburg at vwessels@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: July 27, 2009 01:39 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aw6lhgcPVvY0

South Africa Considers Bid to Host Olympics, Business Day Says

By Vernon Wessels

July 27 (Bloomberg) -- South Africa may bid to host the Olympics after spending billions of rand building new sport stadiums for the 2010 soccer World Cup, The Star said, citing Sport and Recreation Minister Makhenkesi Stofile.

The government and the South African Sport Confederation and Olympic committee are discussing a bid, the Johannesburg- based newspaper cited Stofile’s spokeswoman, Lerato Mogorosi, as saying. Durban, on South Africa’s east coast, may be the host city, it added.

To contact the reporter on this story: Vernon Wessels in Johannesburg at vwessels@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: July 27, 2009 01:39 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aw6lhgcPVvY0

What are they doing about Durban's CBD? My mom just got back from there and was horrified at the city's centre and surrounds; dilapidated, dirty, scared and very disappointed were her words. However, she said the stadium looks absolutely amazing, Umhlanga is absolutely gorgeous and the weather, an absolute pleasure.

I think before Sutcliffe gets fired and something happens to the Durban city administration and management, Durban's core is not yet ready to host an Olympics. I will get shot down, but something in Durbs needs to change; And I think the administration is the problem! Isn't there something we can do to fix this city's CBD with tons of potential? :ohno:

There's nothing wrong with the setting, nothing wrong with the weather, nothing wrong with the stadium and nothing wrong with outlying areas.

if south africa bids it will win fo sho....if the world cup goes well without any problems....SA is capable of hosting the olympics...cape town or durban which ever.

Greenpoint should have been built with the olympics in mind just like MMS was built with the olympics in mind.

Greenpoint should have been built with the olympics in mind just like MMS was built with the olympics in mind.

80,000 seat athletics stadia are not the way to go.

If CT bids it would simply replace the old green point stadium at the same location or somewhere else with a capacity 20,000 seats.

Will be interesting to see what happens, yes Sutcliff needs to go, but after watching Carte Blanche last night, Im glad we dont have that doos thats the city manager for Jhb!

80,000 seat athletics stadia are not the way to go.

If CT bids it would simply replace the old green point stadium at the same location or somewhere else with a capacity 20,000 seats.

I dont get 20,000 seats stadium. Anyways so if cape town bids you guys will have to build another stadium just like london is doing after building wembley stadium?

80,000 seat athletics stadia are not the way to go.

If CT bids it would simply replace the old green point stadium at the same location or somewhere else with a capacity 20,000 seats.

I don't think the word "simply" is apt here. The government and taxpayers will balk at spending another few hundred million to a few billion building or upgrading another stadium RIGHT NEXT TO the most expensive and overpriced stadium in the country (GP), or building the necessary supporting infrastructure (which is being put in place around GP for the WC) at another location. Even a "temp stadium" costing a few hundred million dollars will be decried given that another existing multi-purpose stadium (MM) would be easily capable of hosting such an event. Moreover, can you imagine the outcry of another major costly stadium being built in CT when GP would stand idle right next to it (if built at the old GP site)? Talk about redundancy (same arguments that apply to MM and ABSA Stadium in Durbs would apply here. The major difference is that ABSA is debt-free). Methinks even the die-hard CT supporters will find it difficult to justify such expenditure when a brand new purpose-built world-class stadium already exists elsewhere in the country (MM).

I don't think the word "simply" is apt here. The government and taxpayers will balk at spending another few hundred million to a few billion building or upgrading another stadium RIGHT NEXT TO the most expensive and overpriced stadium in the country (GP), or building the necessary supporting infrastructure (which is being put in place around GP for the WC) at another location. Even a "temp stadium" costing a few hundred million dollars will be decried given that another existing multi-purpose stadium (MM) would be easily capable of hosting such an event. Moreover, can you imagine the outcry of another major costly stadium being built in CT when GP would stand idle right next to it (if built at the old GP site)? Talk about redundancy (same arguments that apply to MM and ABSA Stadium in Durbs would apply here. The major difference is that ABSA is debt-free). Methinks even the die-hard CT supporters will find it difficult to justify such expenditure when a brand new purpose-built world-class stadium already exists elsewhere in the country (MM).

We've been through this. I've done my research. Go well.

We've been through this. I've done my research. Go well.

Yes. Let's see what government decides. Our views are largely irrelevent, really. I will support CT 100% if it gets the bid, regardless of how disappointed I will be about Durban not getting it.

I dont get 20,000 seats stadium. Anyways so if cape town bids you guys will have to build another stadium just like london is doing after building wembley stadium?

Yes, like London, like Chicago's proposal. Nobody needs an 80,000 seat athletics stadium.

Whether its built in Green Point, Wingfield, elsewhere, we need at most 25,000 seats for athletics. Any temporary seating to take capacity to 80,000 is covered by the OCOG not public money as part of temporary overlay.

This proposal would receive backing from WP athletics and support the DA's sports academy concept. Its something the city should be building with or without bidding for the Olympic Games. There is no suitably sized athletics venue in Cape Town for larger events or that supports athletes during training season.

The organization of the Games alone will cost R30 billion.
Infrastructure spend will likely need to top the R50 billion mark.
Venues in CT would cost the public R4.06 million (2009).

I would love to see Durbs hosting Olympics as it will help the metro interms of infrastructure development which it desparately needs.

Sorry guys, I'm not a big fan of the Olympics coming here - most of them have been a big waste of money. I also feel a little saddened by the fact that we can only get our act together and improve cities with the help of big sports tournaments ...lopsided thinking!

I also feel a little saddened by the fact that we can only get our act together and improve cities with the help of big sports tournaments ...lopsided thinking!

I think its important to create deadlines and a sense of urgency.

London 2012 Costs (excludes R20 billion organizing costs)

http://www.picamatic.com/show/2009/07/27/10/09/4608755_1107x1632.JPG

Yes, like London, like Chicago's proposal. Nobody needs an 80,000 seat athletics stadium.

Whether its built in Green Point, Wingfield, elsewhere, we need at most 25,000 seats for athletics. Any temporary seating to take capacity to 80,000 is covered by the OCOG not public money as part of temporary overlay.

This proposal would receive backing from WP athletics and support the DA's sports academy concept. Its something the city should be building with or without bidding for the Olympic Games. There is no suitably sized athletics venue in Cape Town for larger events or that supports athletes during training season.

The organization of the Games alone will cost R30 billion.
Infrastructure spend will likely need to top the R50 billion mark.
Venues in CT would cost the public R4.06 million (2009).

i dont think IOC will allow 25,000 seat just for the athletics....they would want it to be in the main bowl like it has been done for decades.
If south africa wanna host the tournament they should back durban because it has a ready built olympic stadium...it will also put durban on the map

That's so cool. Go South Africa :okay:

I dont think SA will host the 2020 Olympics, maybe the one after.
We will prob host the IRB Rugby WC before the Olympics.

i dont think IOC will allow 25,000 seat just for the athletics....they would want it to be in the main bowl like it has been done for decades.
If south africa wanna host the tournament they should back durban because it has a ready built olympic stadium...it will also put durban on the map

I think you've missed the point.
25,000 seats permanent, the remainder temporary. see London Olympic stadium, see Chicago 2016 proposed olympic stadium.

CT doesn't need an 80,000 seat athletics stadium and neither does any other city in the world. CT does need a 20-25k athletics stadium whether or not we ever think about the olympic games.

Sorry guys, I'm not a big fan of the Olympics coming here - most of them have been a big waste of money. I also feel a little saddened by the fact that we can only get our act together and improve cities with the help of big sports tournaments ...lopsided thinking!

I agree. Whichever city does host will end up paying the debt off for decades to come.

... I also feel a little saddened by the fact that we can only get our act together and improve cities with the help of big sports tournaments ...lopsided thinking!

Unfortunately, that's how things get to happen in ths country of ours :ohno:

I'm super cautious about the olympics. Like AB has said, very, very few cities have profited from hosting the olympic games - its just so freakin' expensive and host cities always end up going way over the top.

But like Mo has said it can be done if it is done super smart - and I'm talking far, far smarter than anyone has ever even thought of doing it before: temporary venues, smart, sustainable development with a focus on infrastructure not sport facilities, etc.

If we can keep the bill under R15billion (and much of that spent on transport infrastructure etc.) then i think we can benefit from it long term in terms of increased profile, tourism etc.

SA keeps on mentioning olympic games but why not bid for the commonwealth games, surely it would be cheaper and would still benefit our country publicity wise... the commonwealth games is a big sporting event...not on the scale of the olympics but still good enough to get people excited

You can't host the Games wanting to make a profit. The OCOG can make a profit but thats accounting profit that even Athens made.

You can't see things like new train stations, transport infrastructure, sports venues etc. as costs.

Then there's the different budgets which people still don't get.

To organize will cost R30 billion, thats for the LOC/OCOG.
To rest is on infrastructure and much of that might have been planned already e.g. IRT system, airport rail link, new train stations etc.

Then theres the question of whether you see a 15,000 person media village and 16,000 person athletes village housing as a cost or investment in trying to meet our housing shortage for all incomes.

I also believe that before we go for the Olympics we need to get one other smaller event at a one city host. Ie: Commonwealth Games, World Athletics Championships or World Games (the one that was just hosted in Taiwan now).

I don't think we need cred like that to hosts Olympics, nothing can prepare for the real deal. Yes building a new stadium from scratch will be excessive seeing there is one already in place, I know it will seat 80 000 for the duration of the games and there after reduced to a smaller capacity, but surely we wont want to spend so much just for a month? rather use a percentage of that money to add the extra 20 000 temp seats MM needs to qualify to be an Olympic stadium, the rest of the money can go into the village and other sporting facilities required to host the Olympics.

I don't think we need cred like that to hosts Olympics, nothing can prepare for the real deal. Yes building a new stadium from scratch will be excessive seeing there is one already in place, I know it will seat 80 000 for the duration of the games and there after reduced to a smaller capacity, but surely we wont want to spend so much just for a month? rather use a percentage of that money to add the extra 20 000 temp seats MM needs to qualify to be an Olympic stadium, the rest of the money can go into the village and other sporting facilities required to host the Olympics.

When you're dealing with a R120 billion Games cost, we should be more worried about sponsorship revenues, ticket sales, organizational strength etc.

I've said it before, a cost argument based on 1 or 2 billion of R120 billion is a failed one.

The Olympics really is just an overpriced ego event which SA can't afford. The Commonwealth Games makes more sense and events that are spread across the country are even better

^^ you speak the truth my man.

SA keeps on mentioning olympic games but why not bid for the commonwealth games, surely it would be cheaper and would still benefit our country publicity wise... the commonwealth games is a big sporting event...not on the scale of the olympics but still good enough to get people excited

If I'm not mistaken South Africa pulled out of bidding for Common Wealth games to give a chance to Abuja in Nigeria.

Dear Pule, I feel just like you about our decaying inner city buildings. Lorna Court next to Joubert Park, destroyed by fire, what a waste. And now our Rissik St post office. I would love to meet for a chat over coffee. I am an environmental journalist and I look at urban habitat issues.
If I'm not mistaken South Africa pulled out of bidding for Common Wealth games to give a chance to Abuja in Nigeria.

If I'm not mistaken South Africa pulled out of bidding for Common Wealth games to give a chance to Abuja in Nigeria.
HAHA Pule, I dig you man! Is that the Alberton Athletics Tournament?! :lol:

If I'm not mistaken South Africa pulled out of bidding for Common Wealth games to give a chance to Abuja in Nigeria.

You are correct. SA won't bid for 2018 Commonwealth because Nigeria (Abuja) is bidding. A rival bid by SA would split the African votes, and because of Abuja's last failed bid against Glasgow, Scotland for the 2014 games (it lost the secret ballot 47-24), it is likely to get sympathy votes for the 2018 games. If SA wants to bid for the 2018 Commonwealth Games, it will have to submit a bid by 2012, around the same time it will have to submit an Olympic bid for the 2020 Games. However, given the Abuja issue, SA ironically stands a better chance of hosting the 2020 Olympic Games than the 2018 Commonwealth Games. Thus, government would be wise to dedicate its time and resources towards an Olympics and/or World Games bid vs. Commonwealth Games as the former are bigger prizes (re: prestige) and likelihood of success.

If SA wants to bid for the Commonwealth Games, it will have to be for the 2022 games. The bidding process for the 2022 Commonwealth Games will commence in 2014. However, I am not sure whether the games will go to Africa two consecutive times (Abuja 2018; SA 2022), notwithstanding that Africa has never hosted the Commonwealth games before. If this is true, SA will only be able to make a bid for the 2026 games. Bids for that games will only commence in 2020.

As such, if SA wants to put its sport infrastructure to use before 2026 for a major games, it will have to make a bid(s) for the Olympic Games or World Games in the next 5 years. That means initiating the planning process soonest (hence the recent meeting between the government and SA Olympic Committee).

Thus, the government's decision to bid for the 2020 Olympic Games must be seen in the above light.

You are correct. SA won't bid for 2018 Commonwealth because Nigeria (Abuja) is bidding. A rival bid by SA would split the African votes, and because of Abuja's last failed bid against Glasgow, Scotland for the 2014 games (it lost the secret ballot 47-24), it is likely to get sympathy votes for the 2018 games. If SA wants to bid for the 2018 Commonwealth Games, it will have to submit a bid by 2012, around the same time it will have to submit an Olympic bid for the 2020 Games. However, given the Abuja issue, SA ironically stands a better chance of hosting the 2020 Olympic Games than the 2018 Commonwealth Games. Thus, government would be wise to dedicate its time and resources towards an Olympics and/or World Games bid vs. Commonwealth Games as the former are bigger prizes (re: prestige) and likelihood of success.

If SA wants to bid for the Commonwealth Games, it will have to be for the 2022 games. The bidding process for the 2022 Commonwealth Games will commence in 2014. However, I am not sure whether the games will go to Africa two consecutive times (Abuja 2018; SA 2022), notwithstanding that Africa has never hosted the Commonwealth games before. If this is true, SA will only be able to make a bid for the 2026 games. Bids for that games will only commence in 2020.

As such, if SA wants to put its sport infrastructure to use before 2026 for a major games, it will have to make a bid(s) for the Olympic Games or World Games in the next 5 years. That means initiating the planning process soonest (hence the recent meeting between the government and SA Olympic Committee).

Thus, the government's decision to bid for the 2020 Olympic Games must be seen in the above light.




2 September 2009: IOC announces host city of the 2016 Summer Olympic Games in Copenhagen
11 July 2010: Completion of the 2010 FIFA World Cup
July 2010 - Mid 2011: National host city competition process
June - August 2011: Announcement of South African bid city
September/October 2011: IOC closing date for applications to bid
January 2012: Applicant city applicant file due
June/July 2012: IOC releases working group report and announces candidate cities.
27 July 2012: London 2012 hosts the Summer Olympic Games
Q1 2013: Candidate city candidature files due in Lausanne
Q2 2013: IOC releases evaluation commission report
Q3 2013: IOC announces host of the 2020 Summer Games.

2 September 2009: IOC announces host city of the 2016 Summer Olympic Games in Copenhagen
11 July 2010: Completion of the 2010 FIFA World Cup
July 2010 - Mid 2011: National host city competition process
June - August 2011: Announcement of South African bid city
September/October 2011: IOC closing date for applications to bid
January 2012: Applicant city applicant file due
June/July 2012: IOC releases working group report and announces candidate cities.
27 July 2012: London 2012 hosts the Summer Olympic Games
Q1 2013: Candidate city candidature files due in Lausanne
Q2 2013: IOC releases evaluation commission report
Q3 2013: IOC announces host of the 2020 Summer Games.



Thanks for the timeline. Unless government announces its preferred bid city (which will eliminate points 3-4 above), the SA bidding cities will have to start getting their 'CV's' together ASAP. I personally think that an internal competitive bidding process will enhance the quality of the national bid. However, some may say that it will also needlessly consume local government resources at a time when service delivery protests are at their peak.

Thanks for the timeline. Unless government announces its preferred bid city (which will eliminate points 3-4 above), the SA bidding cities will have to start getting their 'CV's' together ASAP. I personally think that an internal competitive bidding process will enhance the quality of the national bid. However, some may say that it will also needlessly consume local government resources at a time when service delivery protests are at their peak.

This is when private backing becomes even more important, although the current economic environment could make that tricky.

Zille in support of a bid would be monstrous.

just a question...so lets say we bid for the olympics... and we host the most outstanding fifa world cup ever, with the visitors raving about our nation... would that help towards our bid or is the selection based on other aspects

just a question...so lets say we bid for the olympics... and we host the most outstanding fifa world cup ever, with the visitors raving about our nation... would that help towards our bid or is the selection based on other aspects

it helps with the technical evaluation and the final voting process.

South Africa considering bidding for 2020 Olympics

July 28 - South Africa is considering following up staging the 2010 World Cup by launching a bid to host the 2020 Olympics, with Durban the favourite to be put forward.

The country's Sports and Recreation Minister Makhenkesi Stofile revealed that they are considering the bid at a meeting in Soweto on preparations for the 2010 World Cup.

In 1997 Cape Town was beaten by Athens to host the 2004 Olympics.

The Olympics have never been awarded to an African city.

Durban recently said that it hoped to bid for the 2020 Games, although it is also considering bidding for the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

The city claimed that the Moses Mabhida Stadium it was building for the World Cup was being constructed in a way that made expansion possible to accommodate 85,000 spectators if it was awarded the Olympics.

Stofile's spokeswoman Lerato Mogorosi said there had not been a decision on whether the country would put its name forward.

She said: "The bid only opens at the 2012 Olympics in London.

"It is not confirmed but it is being seriously discussed by the South African Sport Confederation and Olympic Committee."

Mogorosi said the issue had not yet been put before the South African cabinet.

In April eThekwini, the Metropolitan Municipality that includes the city of Durban and surrounding towns, said that Durban wanted to "be ready" for an Olympic bid even though it would be a national decision.

The city is the third biggest in South Africa with a population of 3.5 million.

Durban, whose modern founding dates back to dates to 1824 when a party of 25 men under British Lieutenant F. G. Farewell arrived from the Cape Colony and established a settlement on the northern shore of the Bay of Natal, is located on the Indian Ocean.

The city is due to host the Session of the International Olympic Committee in 2011, when the host city for the 2018 Winter Olympics will be chosen.

Other candidate cities expected to put themselves forward for the 2020 Olympics are Dubai and New Delhi.

http://insidethegames.com/show-news.php?id=6285

Dear Pule, I feel just like you about our decaying inner city buildings. Lorna Court next to Joubert Park, destroyed by fire, what a waste. And now our Rissik St post office. I would love to meet for a chat over coffee. I am an environmental journalist and I look at urban habitat issues.

Hi Vula,

Welcome to SSC. I'm sure we can arrange that and I think the best thing would be to meet other guys from here who share the same sentiments as I do. Lorna Court is also sad news and what a beautiful building it is.

Guys, Lorna Court is that whiteish building at corner Wolmarans and Twist Street. To those who were with me on the last Joburg City Tour with Neil, the building we talking about is the one on the right hand corner just after you passed Joubert Park Rea Vaya Station on your right hand-side and Neil said he knows the owner and the owner is one of those which are not interested in upgrading their slums.


Guys, sorry for hijacking this thread. Vula we can continue this conversation in Johannesburg Discussion thread http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=818560&page=29

I have to say i am not an olympic fan and personally do not see them lasting much longer in their current form. They show sports no one gives a dam about overall except for a select few. All sports codes also have their own championships which are played at a higher standard to the olympics. I say we go for the fina world cup, the iaaf, and possibly the commonwealth games, even though i see that dying out too. Olympics is a very ego centred event. and lets be honest, how many of us watch many events outside of the track, swimming or field? bet the ping pong table tennis was your highlight, or the softball. All i am saying is while i think it is super the country wants to throw itself forward again, and even better that its durban being touted, but frankly i would rather our country stayed away from it

^^ i disagree....the olympics is a showcase of sports that are none mainstream but it gives ordinary people a chance to live their dreams...yes track, swimming, soccer and basketball always dominate the headlines but it give that kid next door to say i am going to the olympics...so its a huge event...it also showcase every countries in this world at one place at a time...its a unifying event...just like when south africa came out of apartheid and see south africa coming in united...thats what the olympics is all about...one day we can see south and north korea coming in as one korea hand in hand....hopefully ioc will add rugby, golf and event cricket to the olympics and take out some wack out sports like badmington or fencing.

They considered golf and rugby sevens when they were voting to replace softball and baseball for London 2012, but they didn't get enough votes. Squash and karate got more votes, but not enough to put them in the Games, so they'll be two sports short next time.

And I like badminton and fencing, thank you very much! Wouldn't miss the gymnastic event with the ribbon-twirling, I'll say that...

Its all relative. Sports is powerful. In 1994 there were no real softball players or anybody who cared. Today CT has a softball stadium and thousands of young people playing leagues. We're talking about kids from all walks of life from across Cape Town.

The same applies to baseball. We have a whole bunch of leagues and a recent junior national tournament which attracted thousands of players below the age of 18.

...yes track, swimming, soccer and basketball always dominate the headlines.

lol, love how you snuck in that one. I rather watch the ladies Pole Vault than basket ball :lol:

lol, love how you snuck in that one. I rather watch the ladies Pole Vault than basket ball :lol:
anybody for beach volleyball? the highest ratings for the broadcasters.

dude beach volley ball is a must, I put it on auto tune for Beijing, lol

I'm also not too keen on SA hosting the Olympics....Although it wont be for a long time till it is hosted here....
Currently, Durban as a great good chance of hosting, and I think they could actually beat Cape Town to it; Then again Olympics in SA is at least 10 years + away.

Durban can have it thanks, if it reckons it can fund one. CT is already too expensive for the common folk. Don't want to see my rates spiked again to build another special event stadium. SA just cannot afford an egoistic event like the Olympics. It's a total waste of money. The Soccer World Cup is the best we could have asked for.

I'm also not too keen on SA hosting the Olympics....Although it wont be for a long time till it is hosted here....
Currently, Durban as a great good chance of hosting, and I think they could actually beat Cape Town to it; Then again Olympics in SA is at least 10 years + away.

Perhaps locally they would opt for Durban, but on an international stage, Cape Town is a clear favourite.

IMO Cape Town remains the clear favourite over Durban in terms of technical requirements and the fuzzy international glamour stuff. That has not changed and therefore my choice will not change.

lol, love how you snuck in that one. I rather watch the ladies Pole Vault than basket ball :lol:

U know basketball is the 2nd most played sports in the world after soccer....just cuz u are not expose to basketball shouldnt make u a hater....basketball is more exciting than that rugby or cricket u guys play in SA.

Durban can have it thanks, if it reckons it can fund one. CT is already too expensive for the common folk. Don't want to see my rates spiked again to build another special event stadium. SA just cannot afford an egoistic event like the Olympics. It's a total waste of money. The Soccer World Cup is the best we could have asked for.

80% if not more of "olympic" funds are likely to be spent on infrastructure.

U know basketball is the 2nd most played sports in the world after soccer....just cuz u are not expose to basketball shouldnt make u a hater....basketball is more exciting than that rugby or cricket u guys play in SA.

I know this isnt player numbers but its a better measure of the sports draw and is the most commonly quoted list of sports popularity. I cant find any consistant lists for no. players.

1) Football. 3.3-3.5 Billion Fans. (Europe, Africa, Asia, Americas,etc)
2) Cricket 2-3. Billion Fans. (India,U.K,Pakistan,Asia,Australia,etc)
3) Field Hockey. 2-2.2 Bilion Fans. (Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia)
4) Tennis. Around 1 Billion Fans. (Europe, Americas, Asia)
5) Volleyball Around 900 Million Fans. (Asia, Erope, Americas, Australia)
6) Table Tennis Around 900 Million Fans. (Asia, Europe, Africa, Americas)
7) Baseball Around 500 Million Fans. (U.S, Japan, Cuba, Dom rep)
8) Golf Around 400 Million Fans. (U.S, Canada, Europe)
9) Gridiron (american football) 390-410 Million Fans. (U.S mainly)
10) Basketball Not more than 400M Fans. (U.S, Canada mainly)

^^ nice find ;)

I know this isnt player numbers but its a better measure of the sports draw and is the most commonly quoted list of sports popularity. I cant find any consistant lists for no. players.

1) Football. 3.3-3.5 Billion Fans. (Europe, Africa, Asia, Americas,etc)
2) Cricket 2-3. Billion Fans. (India,U.K,Pakistan,Asia,Australia,etc)
3) Field Hockey. 2-2.2 Bilion Fans. (Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia)
4) Tennis. Around 1 Billion Fans. (Europe, Americas, Asia)
5) Volleyball Around 900 Million Fans. (Asia, Erope, Americas, Australia)
6) Table Tennis Around 900 Million Fans. (Asia, Europe, Africa, Americas)
7) Baseball Around 500 Million Fans. (U.S, Japan, Cuba, Dom rep)
8) Golf Around 400 Million Fans. (U.S, Canada, Europe)
9) Gridiron (american football) 390-410 Million Fans. (U.S mainly)
10) Basketball Not more than 400M Fans. (U.S, Canada mainly)

i said basketball is the 2nd most played sports in the world not watched....if u count 1 billion chinese fans that love watching the NBA cuz of yao ming...then basketball will be up there.

did u know 300 million chinese play basketball...thats more than the u.s population as a whole.

I agree that basketball must be 2nd and I would have thought rugby would be somewhere in there.

^^ Its more that there is no accurate way to measure any of the sports players or fans (well fans could be estimated more accurately from tv viewers and sports followings) so asserting certain sports are the most played/ watched is not very useful and on top of that depending on the deffinition of sport there is huge scope for activities not readily considered sports to be in the list

Dennis: thats why I said I cant find a consistant list of players

Also its unlikely that 1billion chinese watch baskeball the number might be high but not basically the entire population

why is 'Athletics' not on that list? That is the main draw at any Olympic Games. You can't beat them boys running in those thights. Kinda hard to concentrate on the winner's face! ;)
http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/images/2008/06/30/20080630olympicpadgett.jpg

so briker u are gay like lydon?

so briker u are gay like lydon?

^^:lol:
man never knew we had alot of backpass lovers on this forum.

Perhaps locally they would opt for Durban, but on an international stage, Cape Town is a clear favourite.

IMO Cape Town remains the clear favourite over Durban in terms of technical requirements and the fuzzy international glamour stuff. That has not changed and therefore my choice will not change.

That's your subjective opinion. Others, including myself (and government itself) believe that Durbs has advantages over CT. Yes, CT is definitely more famous on the international stage. However, beauty and fame alone don't win Olympic Games. If that was the case, Rio would have beaten all its rivals these past few bids.

Just to name a few areas where Durbs has the edge over CT:

1. Durbs has ideal weather conditions during the traditional Olympic hosting period (CT cannot claim that by any stretch of the imagination);

2. Durbs has an already existing Olympic precinct with sufficient land for most Olympic codes (within walking distance to thousands of hotel rooms. This translates to to less spending on transport infrastructure from accomodation nodes to venues than a CT bid would, given its sports venues are more spaced out);

3. Durbs has a brand new, state of the art existing Olympics-capable stadium (vs CT, which doesn't have one);

4. Durbs has Africa's best swimming arena within its Olympic precinct (which has hosted many, many FINA events, vs. CT, which has no such existing facility, and none / no plans to build one within its Greenpoint precinct [the most convenient place to build one], nor any meaningful experience in hosting major swimming meets); and

5. Durbs has a world-class brand new airport capable of hosting A380s, and with lots of room to expand (both of which CT cannot claim). The new airport is also close to existing railway lines that run into the city (the airport has a servitude to build a connecting line from the airport to the existing line).

CT building the necessary infrastructure for (3) and (4) alone (the two biggest components of an Olympic Games) alone puts CT at a disadvantage vs. Durban.

The above are objectively verifiable, not based on subjective opinion.

The above are also some of the "technical requirements" that are taken into account in Olympic decisions, and in all of the above, Durban has the edge over CT. It's therefore a bit of an exaggeration to say that "CT remains the clear favourite over Durban in terms of technical requirements".

Mo, you can pull the wool over the eyes of those who don't know better, but not over those who do.

Anyway, as I said before, let's see what government decides. Our opinions count for nothing in the end. If CT gets the nod, good for the city.

As I've said before, we've been through this. I've done my research and I remain very comfortable with my statements that Cape Town is both technically and on a global scale, the city in RSA, significantly more capable than Durban, to bid for the Olympic Games, actually win it, and host it successfully. Go well.

If you feel you know better, and that makes you happy, then thats great.

For those of you not familiar with Durban, here's an overview of its sports precinct showing its compactness and vacinity to the beachfront and Morningside (both of which are major entertainment nodes and have thousands of hotel beds within walking distance of the venues). Morningside is the area above 5, 7, and all the way to 16. The beachfront hotels start from Suncoast, immediately to the right of 19.

http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc160/ja65sin/IMG_9655.jpg

That's a fantastic proposal of which I have a few versions at home dating back from 1994. Please don't interpret my statement as suggesting that Durban does not have a high quality proposal or that the above concept is not excellent.

Mo u are a bit of a homer .......Durban right now has the best facilities right including the MM stadium with athletics track which greenpoint stadia dont have....so i say we all support Durban....if the ioc decides to give the olympics to africa.

yes thats why all the athletes want to train in CT because of all the great facilities in Durban. dennis you're the last person id be debating anything with. if you'd like to see cape town facilities visit the revelant cape town sports infrastructure thread.

big Mo i aint debating....i know cape town is the most beautiful city in south africa....and yes thats where everybody wants to go.....but u dont have to host major event in the most popular tourist destination in africa...why not give a city like durban the exposure for tourism after the olympics...the most important city in america...new york has never hosted any olympics u know..

why not give a city like durban the exposure for tourism after the olympics...
agreed but that doesn't change my statement below.

yes thats why all the athletes want to train in CT because of all the great facilities in Durban.

Please provide us with verifiable proof of this outrageous statement. Who are "all the athletes" when swimmers rave about Durban (Durban swimmers are amongst the most prominent SA has produced; never mind that records tumble in Durban). Runners rave about Durban conditions (posted a quote recently in the Durban thread, never mind the recent Comrades Marathon and Dusi glowing reviews). Rugby players love playing in Durbs (rugby players and spectators rate Durbs as having the best atmosphere in the country). In fact, overseas rugby clubs and national teams frequently base themselves in Durban until their matches elsewhere. Likewise, football and cricket teams that play in Durban teams rave about the conditions. Thus, please explain to us who constitutes "all athletes".

Make outrageous statements and you will be called on them.

There is large base of international athletes who use training facilities in Cape Town. From the sports science institute for swimming to green point for triathlon training, to stellenbosch for athletics.

That's your proof? :ohno: Going to have to better than that to purport to speak for "all athletes".

Should have said a large amount from abroad preferred Cape Town as a training base.


Outrageous. 99%

Should have said a large amount from abroad preferred Cape Town as a training base.

You still need objectively verifiable data to make a claim like that. More accurate, perhaps: "some" or "many"... "...athletes from abroad use CT as a training base". Alleged preference necessitates objective enquiry as it constitutes a subjective claim eminating from a 3rd party not authorised to make such representations.

Outrageous. 99%

Outrageous: "all the athletes". ALL=100%.

Mo u cannot win this arguement with Roman....he is making good points.

so briker u are gay like lydon?
So does the offer still stand of you coming over to Cape Town to whip my ass?
http://dream.homestead.com/Cow_Kiss.jpg

So does the offer still stand of you coming over to Cape Town to whip my ass?
http://dream.homestead.com/Cow_Kiss.jpg

Haha brilliant

argument?

my statement is not going to change. i think roman wants a "my city is better than your city". welldone ..go durban?

For all the useful you do provide mo, you do also speak a load of twoddel. The biggest athletics training centres for foreign athletes in sa are in potch. As high altitude training is wat most prefer. Roman is not attacking you but pointing out very valid points which seemingly you cant refute. I can also make wild claims that durban is the centre of the universe and that the wind blows in the perfect direction to assist in body recooling or wat not other crap. Fact is both cities have a many very strong positives and huge negatives. I could go through the net and put all the international sports organisations which have raved about the kings park sports precinct, which you merely claim is a concept so sarcastically. Yes there are many elements of the precinct which are not complete, however it is far further along than anything else his country can offer. The new indoor arena and our own sports science institute are in the advanced stages of planning with work aimed to start in 2011. The plans the city have already are far more integrated and comprehensive than anything we have seen coming out of other cities. Give credit where it is due. Not once did roman down trod cape town. It just seems that if anyone disagrees with cape towns devine right to the olympics you go on attack. Heck i dont even want our country to get them

O and mo and roman do u guys never sleep? those messages were at hours where either you should out getting pissed, having happy time, or sleeping!

you go on attack. Heck i dont even want our country to get them

have i not being stating all the time that i am comfortable with my statement and will agree to disagree before it becomes a my city is better than your city?

im off to the rugby today. on friday nights i prefer to stay at home and do nothing, especially after three weeks of work.

Hey this is interesting, the norm has always been JHB vs CPT. Now its DBN vs CPT Glad to see Durban in the mix, well done guys!

O and mo and roman do u guys never sleep? those messages were at hours where either you should out getting pissed, having happy time, or sleeping!

Heh heh. I have a good excuse. I just returned to SA late last night and couldn't sleep. What better way to pass the time than to refute blatently incorrect information?

my statement is not going to change. i think roman wants a "my city is better than your city". welldone ..go durban?

No, Roman wants the CT propaganda to stop. Post FACTS and I'll have no problem. Post blatently incorrect CT propaganda slyly passed off as "fact" and you will be called on it.

As I've said before, and I'll say again, I have no problems with CT being awarded SA's bidding rights for an Olympics. I will be disappointed for Durban but happy for CT. This is not about "my city is better than your city", as you allege. CT is way ahead of Durbs and JHB on many, many counts. However, on other counts (such as ability to host major events like the Olympic Games), JHB and Durbs rival and exceed CT. If you continue to allege that CT is so far ahead of any other SA or African city to host something as big as the Olympic Games -- which is just disrespectful of other cities capable of doing so and also incorrect -- I will call you on it and post facts to refute you.

The difference, Mo, is that you have invested so much time and energy promoting CT for the Olympics these past few years (on this website and others; I mean, seriously, how many hours have you dedicated to this end over the years??? Geez!!!), you seemingly cannot accept that all that effort may have been been for nothing, and that the government may actually (shock and horror!) endorse another city ahead of CT. Unfortunately, given your blatently fanatical pro-CT views (and anti-other cities sentiments), you're going to have to lose face and eat humble pie if they do. Nothing you post here, and no amount of time and effort you dedicate here and elsewhere to promoting CT and running down Durbs and JHB, will matter at the end if CT doesn't get the bid. Let's just hope you will be humble in accepting such an outcome should that eventually occur.

Hey this is interesting, the norm has always been JHB vs CPT. Now its DBN vs CPT Glad to see Durban in the mix, well done guys!

In the case of some forumers, it's CT vs. the world.

For all the useful you do provide mo, you do also speak a load of twoddel. The biggest athletics training centres for foreign athletes in sa are in potch. As high altitude training is wat most prefer. Roman is not attacking you but pointing out very valid points which seemingly you cant refute. I can also make wild claims that durban is the centre of the universe and that the wind blows in the perfect direction to assist in body recooling or wat not other crap. Fact is both cities have a many very strong positives and huge negatives. I could go through the net and put all the international sports organisations which have raved about the kings park sports precinct, which you merely claim is a concept so sarcastically. Yes there are many elements of the precinct which are not complete, however it is far further along than anything else his country can offer. The new indoor arena and our own sports science institute are in the advanced stages of planning with work aimed to start in 2011. The plans the city have already are far more integrated and comprehensive than anything we have seen coming out of other cities. Give credit where it is due. Not once did roman down trod cape town. It just seems that if anyone disagrees with cape towns devine right to the olympics you go on attack. Heck i dont even want our country to get them

I agree 100% with virtually everything you have said.

In the case of some forumers, it's CT vs. the world.

it does seem that way at times, they want their own country too

it does seem that way at times, they want their own country too
Im from the Cape, and i don't want our own country! Proudly Captonian, Proudly South African! Those who do want it is full of Sh*t.
CT vs the world is pushing it, and its not our fault that the Cape is truly a world class, world renowned city. It gives SA some good press so lets just chill and be happy.
I don't want SA to host the Olympics, if we do host, Durban has my vote; you guys stand a very good chance of hosting

My vote for a SA Olympics go to Durban! See, not all capetonians are like that. But I still want my own country ;)

My vote is for Cape Town. I agree with Mo on this one. Cape Town might not have an athletics stadium, but it has many things Durban doesn't have (public transport system, world class tourism and hospitality, and infrastructure). Besides ask the average foreign tourist where they would like the games to be (since they will be the ones paying the revenue). According to the recent article, most tourists opted for Cape Town to be there base city for 2010. I would rather have an efficient public transport system and infrastructure in place than an athletics stadium and an aquatics center (which as Mo has shown can be cost efficient and sustainable if one follows the likes of London) when selecting a host city.

Until someone doesn't make a cost and venue chart for Durban like how Mo did for Cape Town, there is no argument, since this is clearly the issue at hand.

hey lets first just get the 2010 WC over with first, and see how things go in the various cities.

Yes Andrew, you're very much right. 10 years is a very long. In that time Cape Town can go to the drain or vice versa, same with Durban. So lets first see how the cities perform under the pressure of 2010. Who knows... maybe it will be neither Cape Town or Durban who deserve the nomination....

According to the recent article, most tourists opted for Cape Town to be there base city for 2010.

Thats an article of little to no substance to justify its claims.

Maybe so, thus we'll see when the World Cup arrives to see how the world reacts to the two cities.

But regardless of 2010, CT does have a serious upper hand when it comes to international tourists and flights. I don't know why since Durban also has its beauty and charm, but there must be a reason why after so many years CT international rep has boosted incredibly while Durban's only slightly.

Btw nice updates dysan1 :)

The good thing about having the Olympics in Durban is that it will pump much needed investment and also build Durban's world rep.

Another good thing is that if the games are held in Durban, tourists will still most probably come to Cape Town (as was the case during the confed cup). However if the games are held in Cape Town, I doubt tourist will venture to Durban.

If it is held in Cape Town, it will have a major economic boost and secure CT's position as a world class city. Such as Barcelona in the 92.

My vote is for Cape Town. I agree with Mo on this one. Cape Town might not have an athletics stadium, but it has many things Durban doesn't have (public transport system, world class tourism and hospitality, and infrastructure). Besides ask the average foreign tourist where they would like the games to be (since they will be the ones paying the revenue). According to the recent article, most tourists opted for Cape Town to be there base city for 2010. I would rather have an efficient public transport system and infrastructure in place than an athletics stadium and an aquatics center (which as Mo has shown can be cost efficient and sustainable if one follows the likes of London) when selecting a host city.

Until someone doesn't make a cost and venue chart for Durban like how Mo did for Cape Town, there is no argument, since this is clearly the issue at hand.

Eduard, with or without the olympics CT needs an athletics stadium of 20-25,000 capacity. Aquatic Centre is on its way and there are several other venues already in place which will have hosted events and will host events in the coming years.

The IOC session in Durban will be very interesting.

My vote is for Cape Town. I agree with Mo on this one. Cape Town might not have an athletics stadium, but it has many things Durban doesn't have (public transport system, world class tourism and hospitality, and infrastructure). Besides ask the average foreign tourist where they would like the games to be (since they will be the ones paying the revenue). According to the recent article, most tourists opted for Cape Town to be there base city for 2010. I would rather have an efficient public transport system and infrastructure in place than an athletics stadium and an aquatics center (which as Mo has shown can be cost efficient and sustainable if one follows the likes of London) when selecting a host city.

Until someone doesn't make a cost and venue chart for Durban like how Mo did for Cape Town, there is no argument, since this is clearly the issue at hand.


1. All the things you list "Durban doesn't have" are arguable, and, moreover, achievable. You act as if no other city except CT can put together these vital elements. Again, your sentiments are based on opinion and factually incorrect.

2. I don't know what "recent article" you are referring to but it worries and amuses me that people place high stock in the opinion of a journalist.

3. That some foreign tourists allegedly "prefer CT" [over other SA cities] is no reflection that the other cities are inferior in any way. Many foreign tourist simply don't know about, or enough about, Durban to make an informed opinion about the city. As awareness of, and foreign tourism grows in, Durban, people's opinions will change. Besides, since when does lack of awareness translate to an inadequate bid? Awareness of Atlanta by the international community was virtually zero before it was chosen to represent the US to host the 1996 Olympic Games. San Francisco was prettier, Chicago, New York, and LA, more famous. Yet it was Atlanta that was chosen by the US government to bid for the Games, and which eventually won the 1996 Games. Thus, your argument of alleged CT fame being an important criteria holds no currency with me.

4. As for your statement - "I would rather have an efficient public transport system and infrastructure in place than an athletics stadium and an aquatics center (which as Mo has shown can be cost efficient and sustainable if one follows the likes of London) when selecting a host city." -

4.1. You act as if Durban has no infrastructure at all, which is obviously wrong. You act as if Durban has no transport system in place at at all. Granted, the city has been without an efficient transport system for the few weeks because of contractual and labour disputes. However, these are not permanent states of affairs, nor incapable of remediation. The point is that the infrastructure which you mistakenly believe does not even exist, is already in place and can be improved upon.
4.2. The two things that you list behind a transport system and infrastructure (ie. stadium and swimming arena), are at the very core of any serious Olympic proposal. If you think government (well, actually, SA taxpayers) are going to plough another few billions into building yet another major stadium in CT (temporary or permanent) when Greenpoint already exists and is already the most costly stadium in the country (and likely to remain unfeasible unless WP moves in), you are sadly mistaken.

5. Re: your statement: "Until someone doesn't make a cost and venue chart for Durban like how Mo did for Cape Town, there is no argument, since this is clearly the issue at hand." -

You fail to appreciate that Mo's figures are his subjective opinions and do not constitute an objective and professional assessment of true costs for a CT bid. I admire his love and passion for a CT bid but I will certainly not be foolish to rely on the cost estimates based on his subjective and biased "research". The actual costs of a CT (and Jhb or Durban) bid are likely to be far higher. Instead, let such an assessment be done by actual unbiased professionals, commissioned and qualified to make such assessments. For the same reason, it's not a wise idea for those based in Durbs or JHB to take up your challenge and make their own assessments about the costs of games in their cities for the sole purpose of convincing you or others. Let qualified, unbiased, commissioned experts do those calculations, not laypeople. Until then, our lay assessments, while interesting, remain flawed fantasies.

Anyway, let's see what government ultimately decides. Our subjective calculations and opinions count for naught in the end.

Just a reminder; ALOT can happen in 10 years...

Eduard, with or without the olympics CT needs an athletics stadium of 20-25,000 capacity. Aquatic Centre is on its way and there are several other venues already in place which will have hosted events and will host events in the coming years.

The IOC session in Durban will be very interesting.

MO, with regard to the proposed CT aquatics centre, did you yourself not say the following:

its really just the wrong place and from the pics ive posted its just all wrong.

there is a river blocking it from one end, a road on the other sides and lots of trees they cant remove. where as at green point there is lots of space. they basically just need one of those 12 fields to build a venue that can expand up to 18,000!!

the business plan itself has errors!! e.g. in their "review" of other aquatic centres they state that the Athens diving venue not having a roof was an issue/something about nice views, BUT the athens 2004 diving competition took place in an indoor venue!

I mean really.


Moreover, unless I am mistaken, the fields surrounding GP stadium had to rezoned to allow for the creation of the park. It is now a public space. I don't think residents will be giving up any more of that land for more sports facilities. The public objections alone that the building of more sports facilities in that area will bring about, will likely precipitate court challenges, as the building of GP did. It thus seems as if Newlands will have to be where any new swimming facilities will have to be located, and as you point out, that location has major challenges.

Just a reminder; ALOT can happen in 10 years...

100% agree. An efficient transport system and other supporting infrastructure can be put in place in any city during that period, if required.

Hey this is interesting, the norm has always been JHB vs CPT. Now its DBN vs CPT Glad to see Durban in the mix, well done guys!

Nope its always a CT vs DBN, its just that it hasnt happened in a while

100% agree. An efficient transport system and other supporting infrastructure can be put in place in any city during that period, if required.
Exactly and so much more. Still two sets of national elections to come.

^^ I hate that this thread has turned into "one of those arguments" again. Although in all honesty, I do not think national government will choose Cape Town, after all, the national structures didn't even choose CT for the IBC for the World Cup, even though many international broadcasters may have favoured it. CT has a serious stigma with National Government right now.

The Western Cape another country in many respects already... I will be dead honest... I occasionally feel a little uneasy in some other South African cities (but for many from upcountry, it may come across as "min gewoond" perhaps). There definitely is a psychological, political and demographic divide between the Western Cape and the rest of SA (and it seems to be getting worse, not better :ohno:), it's just sad when it manifests itself in an ugly fashion on these forums.

^^ I hate that this thread has turned into "one of those arguments" again. Although in all honesty, I do not think national government will choose Cape Town, after all, the national structures didn't even choose CT for the IBC for the World Cup, even though many international broadcasters may have favoured it. CT has a serious stigma with National Government right now.
I disagree.
Funding has been flowing freely to CT from national government. :)

R3.5 billion( up from R2 billion) for the stadium
Well over R1 billion(up from R900 million for the IRT and more as its a government backed project.
Nice increases in funds for other transport projects. Up to well over R1 billion from just under R1 billion.

We're not JHB but we are getting good government support.


The IBC issue is an LOC issue.

^^ Okay... was just running off of my "gut feeling" I suppose. :)

With the Western Cape now being DA territory do you really think an ANC government will really want Cape Town as its bid location...just a thought...use it, dont use it

^^ That thought has crossed my mind many times. And Zuma is from KZN as well...

So let's hope the decision is based on merits and not on political influences.

Absolutely. Do remember though that relations between the WC, City of CT and National Government are at the strongest they have been for the last decade.

Mr Mo... But do you now forget what you have always said when it comes to global sports events? That they are a completely political game, merit and all that while important are sidelines to the political issues at hand.

While we both differ in opinion on which city is better. And while we could draw up "city readiness" thingys (which need to be done be professionals anyway). The clear thing is that politics talks. And currently the DA puppy is barking in the Western Cape and of course government needs things to be close and dandy with 2010 nearly here. But dont think for a second that those in power will not think of their roots first before a opposition party stronghold in the future. To think otherwise is naive. It has happened all over the world on many occassions. Be it for sports events, be it for high profile gatherings, be it for a number of things.

And on i side issue while i am on it. I really feel it is time to raise this as it is something that has been bothering me on here for the past few months. It is often mentioned that Cape Town is tourism capital, the cultural capital, the class/style capital, the adventure capital, the beach capital, the cruise ship capital and now of course the sport capital.

It just seems to me that some people on here (this is not aimed at everyone or Capetonians in general) seem to think that Cape Town should be the capital of everything. I mean the moment another city aims to be the best in something it comes across from some quarters that they cannot as it is Cape Town's right - the "i saw it first attitude".

I think a time needs to come when we realise that our cities cannot be everything. They physically cant be. There are things each city is suited to and things they are not. I am just tired of reading the same things over and over that Cape town will do this and that better than both Durban and Johannesburg. Of course in some areas yes, but in many no. I can tell you right now if the Durban and Joburg forumers jumped about like some others do on here i'd have a PM from Cape Town every hour.

All i am saying is accept differences in opinion, but also accept what doesnt work and move on.

And before some people bring the city clashes into this, this is anything but that. This is merely an observation that countless people have messaged me about and it is time to move beyond this hurdle with some maturity

Politics always plays a role.


Perhaps we all need to balance our aspirations for our cities with the aspirations for a country as whole, so as not to seem that only CT can do right or do something well.

When Durban bid for the 2011 fina champs,most, if not all us got behind the bid, even if getting basic information was impossible..and still is. It has better buses, MUCH better weather, delivers more houses, MM is ahead of GPS and areas like the Point have more development potential than the V&A...

Theres the Gaurtain, a landmark project, not in CT, on which the pride of 2010 rests even though its not a 2010 project. Its BRT project is underway while CT struggles with its budget. Its stadia are both ahead of GPS. Its the economic heartbeat of the entire continent, where business matters and people make real money. Its our media hub and so much more...

If there are specific areas or posts people have an issue with, point them out immediately, because they have clearly been eating away at some people.
Also feel free to PM me or forward me their PM's if there are too many articles posted the next time CT is rated a top tourist destination or wins an award or bags another conference or just if we are "jumping around" too much.

Perhaps we could get less excited about certain achievements or the fact that the city and province are being run by reasonably competent people for the first time in a long long long time. Do remember that the Mfeketo era as just 3 years ago.

Mr Mo... But do you now forget what you have always said when it comes to global sports events? That they are a completely political game, merit and all that while important are sidelines to the political issues at hand.

While we both differ in opinion on which city is better. And while we could draw up "city readiness" thingys (which need to be done be professionals anyway). The clear thing is that politics talks. And currently the DA puppy is barking in the Western Cape and of course government needs things to be close and dandy with 2010 nearly here. But dont think for a second that those in power will not think of their roots first before a opposition party stronghold in the future. To think otherwise is naive. It has happened all over the world on many occassions. Be it for sports events, be it for high profile gatherings, be it for a number of things.

And on i side issue while i am on it. I really feel it is time to raise this as it is something that has been bothering me on here for the past few months. It is often mentioned that Cape Town is tourism capital, the cultural capital, the class/style capital, the adventure capital, the beach capital, the cruise ship capital and now of course the sport capital.

It just seems to me that some people on here (this is not aimed at everyone or Capetonians in general) seem to think that Cape Town should be the capital of everything. I mean the moment another city aims to be the best in something it comes across from some quarters that they cannot as it is Cape Town's right - the "i saw it first attitude".

I think a time needs to come when we realise that our cities cannot be everything. They physically cant be. There are things each city is suited to and things they are not. I am just tired of reading the same things over and over that Cape town will do this and that better than both Durban and Johannesburg. Of course in some areas yes, but in many no. I can tell you right now if the Durban and Joburg forumers jumped about like some others do on here i'd have a PM from Cape Town every hour.

All i am saying is accept differences in opinion, but also accept what doesnt work and move on.

And before some people bring the city clashes into this, this is anything but that. This is merely an observation that countless people have messaged me about and it is time to move beyond this hurdle with some maturity

AMEN!!! Thank You, Thank you, THANK YOU!!!

Mr Mo... But do you now forget what you have always said when it comes to global sports events? That they are a completely political game, merit and all that while important are sidelines to the political issues at hand.

While we both differ in opinion on which city is better. And while we could draw up "city readiness" thingys (which need to be done be professionals anyway). The clear thing is that politics talks. And currently the DA puppy is barking in the Western Cape and of course government needs things to be close and dandy with 2010 nearly here. But dont think for a second that those in power will not think of their roots first before a opposition party stronghold in the future. To think otherwise is naive. It has happened all over the world on many occassions. Be it for sports events, be it for high profile gatherings, be it for a number of things.

And on i side issue while i am on it. I really feel it is time to raise this as it is something that has been bothering me on here for the past few months. It is often mentioned that Cape Town is tourism capital, the cultural capital, the class/style capital, the adventure capital, the beach capital, the cruise ship capital and now of course the sport capital.

It just seems to me that some people on here (this is not aimed at everyone or Capetonians in general) seem to think that Cape Town should be the capital of everything. I mean the moment another city aims to be the best in something it comes across from some quarters that they cannot as it is Cape Town's right - the "i saw it first attitude".

I think a time needs to come when we realise that our cities cannot be everything. They physically cant be. There are things each city is suited to and things they are not. I am just tired of reading the same things over and over that Cape town will do this and that better than both Durban and Johannesburg. Of course in some areas yes, but in many no. I can tell you right now if the Durban and Joburg forumers jumped about like some others do on here i'd have a PM from Cape Town every hour.

All i am saying is accept differences in opinion, but also accept what doesnt work and move on.

And before some people bring the city clashes into this, this is anything but that. This is merely an observation that countless people have messaged me about and it is time to move beyond this hurdle with some maturity

To be quite honest, I don't think this is a suitable method of dealing with the apparent problem. It's asking for trouble. Acknowledging that some forumers feel the way that they do isn't going to change how they feel. Couple that with the fact that they are allowed to harbour such opinions, as well as voice them, and there really is nothing much to do other than accept it and hope it stops.

Therefore the mature path wouldn't be to complain about it and raise it for public debate, but rather to ignore it and move on. If people don't take notice of it, it will eventually go away. If it doesn't, then that's unfortunate, but a post in the thread regarding SA's possible 2020 Olympic bid isn't going to do much towards achieving that goal.

And on a side and more opinionated note - I don't get what the big deal is anyway. So what if some Cape Town people feel that way? Unless residents of other cities feel insecure about their own cities, it really shouldn't be such a problem at all. I find the fact that "countless" people have messaged you regarding this rather sad. We all want what's best for our cities and in this case it seems Capetonians are voicing that fact more. As I said...simply ignore it as regardless of what is said here or in PM's, people are still going to feel the same way. This is the internet and it's natural for opinions to clash.

If we all started complaining about things we don't like about other forumers this would be a very unpleasant place to visit.

^^ Oh Dear! Just something I posted in another forum, and T.U.G.Z. from Jozi agrees with me: "It comes from both sides, and it's evident in this forum... Capetonians arrogant in a sense that they feel they're the African centre of beauty, elegance and sophistication; Joburgers arrogant in a sense that they feel they're the African centre of money, prowess and financial-hegemony."

We all get in heated debate, we rebuff points back and forth, topics get hot, like a Phoenix Curry! But, for people to be constantly PMing Mike seems extreme, like people are feeling insecure...

Look at the positive side. Joburg, for all its economic pride, turns that pride into projects on monumental scale: Gautrain, Soccer City, Superhighways Project, ReyaVaya, Sandton City overhaul, ORTIA multi-billion upgrade etc. Their pride shines through in action on the ground... competition between cities builds a sense of "We have to keep up with them, do things better," and it is showing in the progressiveness of our cities'.

Cape Town for all its pride of beauty and sophistication, turns that pride into projects on a glorious-gorgeous scale: Green Point Urban Park, GPS, Cape Town Int'l's golden-age-of-flight design, V&A projects, Roggebaai Canal, IRT amongst others...

Cape Town is better for the "We have to keep up with Jo'burg!" Makes us do things better too. Competition is healthy, as long as it doesn't become a personal attack or utterly nasty. We can all tone it down a bit at times, I agree. But guys, keep fighting for the betterment of you city, debate, post and be proud of your city... it only makes your city better to have others to compete with. I'd rather have this, than inter-city apathy! :)

Exactly. I mean really, I'm sure people have better things to do.

:doh: this shit still going on.

TI find the fact that "countless" people have messaged you regarding this rather sad.

Two guesses who one of them would be. Ok just one guess.

:doh: this shit still going on.

Yup... the kak-fest continues... at least one thing can be said for the Durbanites, they're usually as chilled as a penguin in Antarctica! :)

u guys should be glad even if south africa gets it...its historic....durban or capetown...u guys should be united for one city...at the end its gonna be south africa hosting it not individual cities....we are choosing unity over division isnt that case south africa?.....get it together!

Since when Dennis turned into Obama? :sly:

^^ just say yes we can host 2020 olympics durby lol

yes we can

Yes, we can.

Isn't it interesting that India is sending their elite athletes to train in Durban for the 2010 Commonwealth Games and 2012 Olympics? Says much about how the city is perceived internationally re: conditions and facilities for elite training.

------------

10 Indian athletes training in Durban for 2010 CWG

Posted: Thursday , Aug 20, 2009 at 1246 hrs

Long distance runner Preeja Sridharan and Olympian wrestler Yogeshwar Dutt are among 10 Indians who are undergoing a special training programme in Durban as part of their preparation for the 2010 Commonwealth Games.

Kerala's 800m runner Sinimole Paulose and statemates E M Indulekha, Anu Mariam Jose, Chinchu Jose, Srabani Nanda of Orissa, Harthi Gujala of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka's M R Poovama are the other Indians attending the special camp.

Delhi will host the Commonwealth Games from October 3-14. The athletes are undergoing training programme under the auspices of Elite Athlete Performance (EAP), while Mittal Champions Trust sponsoring their trip to the rainbow nation.

Paulose, who is an 800m and 1500m experts, was hopeful that the training schedule will help them improve their performance before the quadrennial event in Delhi.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/10-Indian-athletes-training-in-Durban-for-2010-CWG/504420

-----------------------

Top Indian athletes train in South Africa
August 20th, 2009

SindhToday

Durban, Aug 20 (IANS) Ten top Indian athletes are undergoing an intensive four-month training in preparation for the 2010 Delhi Commonwealth Games.

The athletes, all gold medallists at various international events in the past two years, are also being groomed for the 2012 London Olympics by Elite Athlete Performance (EAP).

EAP Director Heath Matthews said the success of Indian gold medalist rifle shooter Abhinav Bindra at the Beijing Olympics last year had prompted the Mittal Champions Trust to sponsor the training for the athletes.

“(The Trust) has confidence in our work since we have in the past conditioned Bindra. We have also had India’s number one squash player, Joshna Chinnappa, and two top Indian boxers Akhil and Jitendra Kumar train with us,” Matthews said.

“We combine sports science, sports medicine and coaching to develop world class athletes,” Matthews added.

A spokesman for the group of athletes who hail from all over India, Sinimole Paulose of Kerala, said the training programme was a tough one, but the large Indian population in Durban had made them feel very much at home.

“We are well taken care of and with the ten of us living like a family, there has not been a chance yet to miss home.”

Matthews said he hoped the presence of the Indian athletes would prove to the South African Indian community that they too could succeed in the international sporting arena.

Although many South African Indians participate in athletic events, there has not yet been a national or international winner from the community in this field.

[LM1]

http://www.sindhtoday.net/news/1/43513.htm

And again, yes we can. Can't get any bigger print media coverage than this: The world's most famous newspaper, the New York Times, giving coverage to Durban's Olympic aspirations.

---------------

Durban's Ambition Exceeds World Cup
Published: August 19, 2009
Filed at 8:07 p.m. ET

DURBAN, South Africa (Reuters) - Durban's stadium will be one of the most dazzling in the 2010 World Cup but the brash port's ambition soars even higher, like the spectacular arch spanning the arena with a view across the Indian Ocean.

Intensely competitive with the more famous tourist mecca of Cape Town along the coast, Durban is pulling out all the stops to ensure nobody forgets it when the soccer World Cup is over.

Grimier but also more African than sophisticated, Europeanised Cape Town, Durban -- which will host seven matches including a semi-final -- markets itself on its miles of sandy beaches and the year-round warm weather that makes it a winter playground for South Africans.

City officials aim to turn Durban into Africa's capital for sports, entertainment and other events and make no secret of their ultimate target -- to host the Olympics.

A brochure prepared by Durban for the World Cup loses no time in pointing out that the stadium will have capacity for 70,000 people during the football festival but can be expanded to 85,000 for events like the Olympics or Commonwealth Games.

Julie-May Ellingson, the city official heading the 2010 project, said that although a decision whether to bid for the Olympics must be made by South Africa's president, Durban had its eye on the 2020 or 2024 events.

"There is this perception that the world ends after 2010. In Durban we have never ever seen that. Going right back to 2004 we spoke of 2010 and beyond," she told Reuters.

"It is not about what FIFA wants. FIFA will come and go. It's about what is important for the citizens of Durban."

The city has already won a contest to host the 2011 congress of the International Olympic Committee, the first to be held in Africa and a golden opportunity to court top officials.

MODERNISED FACILITIES

To match its ambition, Durban is doing much more than building a stadium for the World Cup.

Sports facilities will be modernised and centralised in the expansive Kings Park precinct where both the new Moses Mabhida and existing rugby stadiums are situated.

"In the next few years, Durban will become one of the few cities in Africa where most of the main Olympic sporting codes can be played in a centrally-located, international-standard destination," a city handout says.

Plans include a retail mall and restaurants in the stadium, a walkway linking it to the adjacent beach, a "People's Park," training pitches, a walking and running track, and space for fans to enjoy barbecues and concerts before and after matches -- an idea taken from the neighbouring Absa stadium.

But it is the new stadium itself that steals the eye. A gleaming white edifice topped by a Teflon-coated roof resembling sails, with the arch rising overhead to dominate the city.

The 350-metre (1,150 foot) long arch is shaped like the Y on South Africa's flag, symbolising the unity of a long-divided nation.

To access the view a "sky car" will run up the single northern span to the 106 metre (348 foot) summit, while intrepid visitors can climb 550 steep steps up one southern arm and down the other in an "adventure walk" like Sydney's harbour bridge.

For the even more adventurous, a bungee swing will be suspended from one of the concrete supporting rungs across the top of the stadium, whose material is intended to prevent dirt marring the brilliant white.

NEW ARENA

As with many of South Africa's new stadiums, Durban has not escaped controversy over the decision to build a new arena right next to an existing one, with critics suggesting the money would have been better used to improve the lot of the nation's army of poor and unemployed.

This controversy also feeds into the traditional rivalry between football -- predominantly a black sport -- and rugby which appeals more to whites.

So far the Sharks, one of the nation's top rugby teams, have resisted overtures to eventually move to Moses Mabhida, but planners have made modifications in changing rooms and elsewhere to ensure it will be suitable for rugby, which brings in big revenue, to encourage them to change their minds.

Like all the cities building new stadiums, officials are well rehearsed in the arguments for spending huge amounts on a new arena -- in the case of Durban 3 billion rand ($370.3 million).

AGGRESSIVE AMBITION

In accordance with its aggressive ambition, Durban wanted a stadium that could compete with the best in the world for everything from sports to pop concerts to religious meetings -- an essential part of the strategy to avoid it becoming a white elephant after 2010.

Remodelling the 52-year-old Absa rugby venue, at a cost of 800 million rand ($98.7 million), would never have achieved that, officials say.

"It became quite clear to us that we could throw as much money as we liked at the Absa stadium and we still would not have ended up with a world-class product to lead us into the future," Ellingson said.

Most working class South Africans seem to agree, despite the eye-watering amounts that have been spent.

"We have to give people what they normally have in London and elsewhere and let them play in a good stadium. So they will go home and tell other people to come," said Durban shuttle driver Joe Mboneni Ndlovu.

Despite all the drive and ambition, winning the Olympics will not be easy. FIFA boss Sepp Blatter had a strong personal commitment to bringing the World Cup to Africa and the tournament already rotates around the continents.

The International Olympic Committee has no such policy so South Africa would need to overcome intense competition from around the globe, which is another reason so much is hanging on how it performs in 2010.

Big problems with transport or accommodation, already highlighted by FIFA as concerns, or a major assault by South Africa's notoriously violent criminals, and Durban's ambition could come to nothing.

(Editing by Dave Thompson To query or comment on this story email sportsfeedback@thomsonreuters.com)

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/08/19/sports/sports-uk-soccer-world-durban.html?_r=1

sorry... dont know if I am being naughty here, but here's a cross post from the DBN thread

... fu#*&#*ing HUGE global publicity!!!

Can't get any bigger print media coverage than this: The world's most famous newspaper, the New York Times, giving coverage to Durban's Olympic aspirations.

---------------

Durban's Ambition Exceeds World Cup
Published: August 19, 2009
Filed at 8:07 p.m. ET

DURBAN, South Africa (Reuters) - Durban's stadium will be one of the most dazzling in the 2010 World Cup but the brash port's ambition soars even higher, like the spectacular arch spanning the arena with a view across the Indian Ocean.

Intensely competitive with the more famous tourist mecca of Cape Town along the coast, Durban is pulling out all the stops to ensure nobody forgets it when the soccer World Cup is over.

Grimier but also more African than sophisticated, Europeanised Cape Town, Durban -- which will host seven matches including a semi-final -- markets itself on its miles of sandy beaches and the year-round warm weather that makes it a winter playground for South Africans.

City officials aim to turn Durban into Africa's capital for sports, entertainment and other events and make no secret of their ultimate target -- to host the Olympics.

A brochure prepared by Durban for the World Cup loses no time in pointing out that the stadium will have capacity for 70,000 people during the football festival but can be expanded to 85,000 for events like the Olympics or Commonwealth Games.

Julie-May Ellingson, the city official heading the 2010 project, said that although a decision whether to bid for the Olympics must be made by South Africa's president, Durban had its eye on the 2020 or 2024 events.

"There is this perception that the world ends after 2010. In Durban we have never ever seen that. Going right back to 2004 we spoke of 2010 and beyond," she told Reuters.

"It is not about what FIFA wants. FIFA will come and go. It's about what is important for the citizens of Durban."

The city has already won a contest to host the 2011 congress of the International Olympic Committee, the first to be held in Africa and a golden opportunity to court top officials.

MODERNISED FACILITIES

To match its ambition, Durban is doing much more than building a stadium for the World Cup.

Sports facilities will be modernised and centralised in the expansive Kings Park precinct where both the new Moses Mabhida and existing rugby stadiums are situated.

"In the next few years, Durban will become one of the few cities in Africa where most of the main Olympic sporting codes can be played in a centrally-located, international-standard destination," a city handout says.

Plans include a retail mall and restaurants in the stadium, a walkway linking it to the adjacent beach, a "People's Park," training pitches, a walking and running track, and space for fans to enjoy barbecues and concerts before and after matches -- an idea taken from the neighbouring Absa stadium.

But it is the new stadium itself that steals the eye. A gleaming white edifice topped by a Teflon-coated roof resembling sails, with the arch rising overhead to dominate the city.

The 350-metre (1,150 foot) long arch is shaped like the Y on South Africa's flag, symbolising the unity of a long-divided nation.

To access the view a "sky car" will run up the single northern span to the 106 metre (348 foot) summit, while intrepid visitors can climb 550 steep steps up one southern arm and down the other in an "adventure walk" like Sydney's harbour bridge.

For the even more adventurous, a bungee swing will be suspended from one of the concrete supporting rungs across the top of the stadium, whose material is intended to prevent dirt marring the brilliant white.

NEW ARENA

As with many of South Africa's new stadiums, Durban has not escaped controversy over the decision to build a new arena right next to an existing one, with critics suggesting the money would have been better used to improve the lot of the nation's army of poor and unemployed.

This controversy also feeds into the traditional rivalry between football -- predominantly a black sport -- and rugby which appeals more to whites.

So far the Sharks, one of the nation's top rugby teams, have resisted overtures to eventually move to Moses Mabhida, but planners have made modifications in changing rooms and elsewhere to ensure it will be suitable for rugby, which brings in big revenue, to encourage them to change their minds.

Like all the cities building new stadiums, officials are well rehearsed in the arguments for spending huge amounts on a new arena -- in the case of Durban 3 billion rand ($370.3 million).

AGGRESSIVE AMBITION

In accordance with its aggressive ambition, Durban wanted a stadium that could compete with the best in the world for everything from sports to pop concerts to religious meetings -- an essential part of the strategy to avoid it becoming a white elephant after 2010.

Remodelling the 52-year-old Absa rugby venue, at a cost of 800 million rand ($98.7 million), would never have achieved that, officials say.

"It became quite clear to us that we could throw as much money as we liked at the Absa stadium and we still would not have ended up with a world-class product to lead us into the future," Ellingson said.

Most working class South Africans seem to agree, despite the eye-watering amounts that have been spent.

"We have to give people what they normally have in London and elsewhere and let them play in a good stadium. So they will go home and tell other people to come," said Durban shuttle driver Joe Mboneni Ndlovu.

Despite all the drive and ambition, winning the Olympics will not be easy. FIFA boss Sepp Blatter had a strong personal commitment to bringing the World Cup to Africa and the tournament already rotates around the continents.

The International Olympic Committee has no such policy so South Africa would need to overcome intense competition from around the globe, which is another reason so much is hanging on how it performs in 2010.

Big problems with transport or accommodation, already highlighted by FIFA as concerns, or a major assault by South Africa's notoriously violent criminals, and Durban's ambition could come to nothing.

(Editing by Dave Thompson To query or comment on this story email sportsfeedback@thomsonreuters.com)

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/08/19/sports/sports-uk-soccer-world-durban.html?_r=1

RomanSA - it is BIGGER than you think...
In fact this is fu#*&#*ing HUGE global publicity!!!

:dance::dance::dance::dance:
It was used from Reuters wires/syndicated service - so it is not just the NY Times but quite literally 100's of newspapers, websites and yahoo.news ect around the world!
search on google in fact...]

http://www.google.co.za/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=Durban+Olympics+Reuters&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&aq=o&oq=

I have to ask Quick if he can check at the wires at Independent too...
I am telling you the Olympics is serious for Durban - just ask JZ... imagine when our Olympic Dream becomes a reality.

u guys should be glad even if south africa gets it...its historic....durban or capetown...u guys should be united for one city...at the end its gonna be south africa hosting it not individual cities....we are choosing unity over division isnt that case south africa?.....get it together!

100%!
my 5c worth here...
While I am clearly for Durban. I 100% agree. I am a Proudly South African!
I supported Cape Town for 2004 in the final race, and will do so for whichever city is in the running as the country representative against the world next time!
... It's just like with the World Cup... a opening ceremony would be great in DBN in 2010, but that does not mean I won't be trying my utmost best to get tickets for the opening and closing of the 2010 WC at Soccer City!

Watch out for DBN - even with our sometimes crazy city leadership... 2010 is going to unravel it's unbelievable potential as a tourism and investment destination globally...

Big things ahead :cheers2:

It's nice to see the Durbanites supportive of a CT bid. We have yet to see similar support from most of the Capetonians for a Durbs bid. In the end, as long as SA gets it, regardless of city, the whole country will share in the glow.

I've said it before and for you Roman, I'll say it again.

It is my opinion, and only mine, that Cape Town is the better bid, technically,globally and in terms of successfully bidding and hosting it.

That said, when/if Durban bids, it is a South African bid, a bid each of us should and would support 105%, including myself.

[ ...Grimier but also more African than sophisticated, Europeanised Cape Town,...
so 'african' means unsophisticated and grimy. The fact that CT is clean and looked after, seem to make people dislike it. :ohno: I'm sorry, but CT refuse to apologize for its rich heritage, and of being a much better organised and maintained city than the rest.

We have yet to see similar support from most of the Capetonians for a Durbs bid. In the end, as long as SA gets it, regardless of city, the whole country will share in the glow.
You are rocking the boat on this one, because I have given my support for a Durban Olympic Games. I infact said that I would rather see Durban than CT getting it.

It's nice to see the Durbanites supportive of a CT bid. We have yet to see similar support from most of the Capetonians for a Durbs bid. In the end, as long as SA gets it, regardless of city, the whole country will share in the glow.

:) Don't be a Noo-Noo, of course we'll support Durban's bid, if they're chosen. I would like to see Durban get a proper urban core (Safe, Swanky, Sophisticated CBD/Beachfront) out of this especially! Umhlanga's cool, but would much prefer to see the old CBD getting most of the "shine" again.

I've said it before and for you Roman, I'll say it again.

It is my opinion, and only mine, that Cape Town is the better bid, technically,globally and in terms of successfully bidding and hosting it.

That said, when/if Durban bids, it is a South African bid, a bid each of us should and would support 105%, including myself.

Mo, asside from Cape Town being more famous and better known than Durban, do you really think it would have a greater capacity to host the event successfully? I've lived in both cities, I've been to both the Commrades and the Two Oceans, the July and the J&B, rugby matches at Kings Park and Newlands and very honestly the Durban events are bigger and are very well run.

If Cape Town is to be the front runner it needs a better reason than being more famous than Durban.

Mo, asside from Cape Town being more famous and better known than Durban, do you really think it would have a greater capacity to host the event successfully? I've lived in both cities, I've been to both the Commrades and the Two Oceans, the July and the J&B, rugby matches at Kings Park and Newlands and very honestly the Durban events are bigger and are very well run.

If Cape Town is to be the front runner it needs a better reason than being more famous than Durban.

Both of you... please, let's not dive back into this. We know each cities' merits and don't need to debate the same issue over and over again.

Both of you... please, let's not dive back into this. We know each cities' merits and don't need to debate the same issue over and over again.

i think the point he has raised is very valid as it is often raised that Cape Town would win a bid hands down based on its beauty and world standing.

An article i read today stated that Durban is using every event and contact it can to position the city. It is an ambition that is running throughout all city plans and levels. This is very different from any oapprach by any other city and is highly commendable

:) Don't be a Noo-Noo, of course we'll support Durban's bid, if they're chosen. I would like to see Durban get a proper urban core (Safe, Swanky, Sophisticated CBD/Beachfront) out of this especially! Umhlanga's cool, but would much prefer to see the old CBD getting most of the "shine" again.

Well the go ahead for the Point now and the R200million beachfront upgrade are tools in the right direction. There is also the little known fact that R2.5 billion has been spent in the Durban CBD in the past year in development, and that 5 major cbd towers are currently being redeveloped from C/B grade space to AAA. So things are turning, it has just taken longer than CT and will lag for many years still, but many of the reports i have heard about the Durban CBD being "a disaster" or "totally unsafe" are way off the mark

i think the point he has raised is very valid as it is often raised that Cape Town would win a bid hands down based on its beauty and world standing.

An article i read today stated that Durban is using every event and contact it can to position the city. It is an ambition that is running throughout all city plans and levels. This is very different from any oapprach by any other city and is highly commendable

I know, I just don't want it turning into: "Mine is bigger than yours" type of inter-city argument again... these debates always seem to get off track. Would much rather wait and see what with SA Olympic Committee decides. Just my opinion though.

Durban bid getting more press. And some views of SASCOC.

---------------------

Durban first out of Olympic bid blocks

Liam Del Carme
Published:Aug 22, 2009

A lot of water will have to flow down the Umgeni River into the Indian Ocean before Durban can put forward a bid to host the 2020 Olympic Games.

The eThekwini municipality have over the past year expressed the desire to host the event, even if they created the impression that they had placed the cart before the horse.

This week, however, Mike Sutcliffe, e Thekwini ’s city manager, spoke in measured tones about hosting the Games. Protocol dictates that he can’t yet adopt a “bring it on” attitude.

“There is no bid yet. Cities will be invited to bid,” he said.

That invitation will come from the South African Sports Commission and Olympic Committee (Sascoc), according to their president, Gideon Sam.

“We will be led by government’s desire to host such an event because we have to get certain guarantees from them,” Sam said. “The minister (of sport) has indicated that they would not be opposed to such a notion. “We haven’t had a formal approach because we first have to ask all our affiliate provinces if they wish to stage the event. Only then can we go to individual cities and ask them if they would like to put forward a bid.”

At this stage, nobody else has indicated they are interested in bidding, said Sam.

That does not preclude Durban from positioning itself as “undoubtedly Africa’s sporting capital”, according to Sutcliffe.

“We have hosted a huge range of events in Durban and our city is the warmest all year round. The other cities either have poor weather or altitude to deal with. We are positioning ourselves to host big international events. It’s not just the Olympics, but events such as kick boxing and wrestling.”

If Durban does throw its hat into the Olympic ring, much will centre on the impressive Moses Mabhida Stadium.

“We invited competition before the stadium was built. We gave six consortiums R1million each and asked them to come up with (the concept of) a well-built, sustainable stadium that will also be able to host an event such as the Olympic Games,” Sutcliffe said.

The stadium’s capacity can be stretched from 70000 to 85000 to meet IOC requirements.

Although, there is “a long process ahead”, according to Sam, Durban will get the opportunity to put its best foot forward when it hosts the 2011 International Olympic Committee (IOC) Congress.

“Our strategy is to work with Sascoc and start making the IOC aware of Durban, South Africa and Africa,” said Sutcliffe. “It is a wonderful opportunity because it a huge international event.”

Look at how Berlin has been showcased during the World Athletics Championships.

“In the southern hemisphere we rarely get that kind of action except perhaps for Melbourne and Sydney. At the congress we will get the opportunity to thank the IOC. They were the first sporting body to support the struggle against apartheid and we have to recognise that,” Sutcliffe said.

The Sunday Times could not gauge government’s appetite to host the Olympics as questions put to the sports ministry have not been answered.

http://www.thetimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Sport/Article.aspx?id=1054033

Lets hope Julie May gets it right this time. 2020 not 2016!

Best of luck. Race should be interesting.

That said, when/if Durban bids, it is a South African bid, a bid each of us should and would support 105%, including myself.

would you give it 105% support as well or just 99.9% ;)

would you give it 105% support as well or just 99.9% ;)
99.95%

Gamesbids.com, probably the most famous website specifically dedicated to games bidding, has finally picked up on the Durban Olympics buzz, although they have wrongfully attributed to article to the Sowetan (which also carried the Reuters story).

--------------

Durban Looks To 2020 Or 2024 Olympic Bid

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 10:57am EDT GB Staff

Durban South Africa is looking beyond hosting the 2010 World Cup to a possible bid for the 2020 or 2024 Summer Olympic Games, reports Sowetan

City officials reportedly want to turn Durban into Africa's capital for sports, entertainment and other events and make no secret of their ultimate target, that is to host the Summer Olympic Games.

Sowetan reports a brochure prepared by Durban for the World Cup points out that the stadium will have the capacity for 70,000 people during the World Cup, but can be expanded to 85,000 for events like the Olympics or Commonwealth Games.

Julie-May Ellingson, the city official heading the 2010 World Cup, said though a decision on whether to bid for the Olympics must be made by South Africa's president, Durban is eyeing the 2020 or 2024 Olympics. She said, "there is this perception that the world ends after 2010. In Durban we have never ever seen that. Going right back to 2004 we spoke of 2010 and beyond. It is not about what Fifa wants. Fifa will come and go. It's about what is important for the citizens of Durban".

The city will be hosting the 2011 congress of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the first to be held in Africa and what is reportedly a golden opportunity to court top officials.

Facilities are being modernized and centralized in the expansive Kings Park precinct where both the new Moses Mabhida and existing rugby stadiums are situated.

The new stadium built for the World Cup is reportedly "a gleaming white edifice topped by a Teflon-coated roof resembling sails, with an arch rising overhead to dominate the city".

The 350m long arch is shaped like the "Y" on South Africa's flag, symbolizing the unity of a long-divided nation.

To access the view, a "sky car" will run up the single northern span to the 106m summit, and visitors can climb the 550 steep steps up one southern arm and down the other in an "adventure walk" like Sydney's harbour bridge.

Plans include a retail mall and restaurants in the stadium, a walkway linking it to the adjacent beach, a "People's Park", training pitches, a walking and running track, and a space for fans to enjoy braais and concerts before and after matches.

A municipal brochure says, "in the next few years Durban will become one of the few cities in Africa where most of the main Olympic sporting codes can be played in a centrally located, international-standard destination".

http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/olympic_bids/future_bids_2016/1216134612.html

I support Durban in wanting to hold the olympics over Capetown. For one reason only, Capetown is already worldwide known, while Durban pratically nobody ever heard of. So I think if they win the bid for the olympics, it will be the step foward that Durban needs to become an internationally known city. Durban certainly has everything to become one of the worlds top holiday destination city, as already occures within south africa's boarders, where durban is the prefered city for south africans to pass their holidays.

The problem is only becuase Durban will bid for it doesn't mean it will be given of how far it will get. Cape Town has already nearly clinched the 2004 olympics, and seeing its massive improvement since then, who knows. Also everyone knows CT which will boost its chances. Remember the IOC isn't that keen in choosing relatively unkown cities. However the WC might change that...

Not that Durban is by any stretch of the imagine an "unknown city" (less well known than CT and JHB, but not "unknown"), what is evidence base for saying that "the IOC isn't that keen in choosing relatively unkown cities"? That famous cities have been selected on many occasions is not an indication that the IOC deliberatly does not choose less famous cities just because they are not famous. How many Winter Olympic host cities were/are famous? Most are unknown internationally until they become candidate cities. And Durban will definitely be known to the IOC when it hosts their congress in 2011.

I didn't mean unknown entirely, but on an international arena when you ask people about SA, Cape Town and Joburg comes to mind.

Winter Olympics are different. They are choosen for the popularity of their winter sport facilities which thus makes the locations popular in winter. Sochi, Vancouver, Salt Lak City are all very well known spots when it comes to winter sports.

When it comes to summer olympics though, they look at how popular the city is by itself along with facilities and infrastructure. This is becuase the olympics is an expensive venture for a tourist, therefore the location must be made worthwhile. Although we all know Durban is great and has alot to offer, internationally this is unknown. And it is presumed that a tourist is less willing to venture to a relatively unknown location, which can affect expected revenue.
Imagine Russia arranged its olympics at Yekaterinburg (a major, well developed but internationally unknown city), would you go?
Now imagine Russia arranged the olympics at St Petersburg, would you rather go to this one?
Personally I would way much rather go to St Petersburg, since I know more of the city and what it has to offer. Its a global city.
Just look at the list of host cities. If popularity wasn't a factor, then why were cities like Baku and Doha eliminated for the 2016 olympics....

But again this might change after the WC....

that is so true about known cities when it comes to the summer games.
well known cities hosts

2008: beijing
2004: athens
2000: sydney
1996: atlanta
1992: barcelona
1988: seoul
1984: los angeles
1980: moscow
1976: montreal
1972: munich
1968: Mexico city

atlanta and montreal are major cities in north america but not the most popular.......new york and toronto are the biggest and are the two most well known cities in both countries....

so i still think if Durban gets it ....it will bring new tourism to the kzn area...they have the best weather in SA.

they have the best weather in SA.
Yeah... if you like to sweat! :lol: :) Best weather is all relative. IMO, the best weather for being mild, never too hot, never too cold, is the Garden Route.

Well, I think best weather relative to Olympic hosting period (July-Aug) is the issue. On that factor, Durbs has the best weather, hands down. No/low humidy, mild, comfortable temps (low to med twenties everyday), hardly any rain.

Lol well first Montreal is VERY well known.

Second, Atlanta is a mystery. I think it was chosen cuz it was in the US, so regardless of major city, it wuld hav been successful in some way. And Atlanta, altho not for tourist reasons, is a very well known city outside the US.

Lol well first Montreal is VERY well known.

Second, Atlanta is a mystery. I think it was chosen cuz it was in the US, so regardless of major city, it wuld hav been successful in some way. And Atlanta, altho not for tourist reasons, is a very well known city outside the US.

yea it they both known but not to the capacity of chicago, los angeles, toronto, vancouver, new york......even dallas and houston are more popular than atlanta....its like brisbane in aussie...or gold coast in aussie...they are big major cities but not as major as melbourne or sydney!

^^ Lol no Atlanta is different. First becuase its in the US, and second becuase of its large capacity and infrastructure. Also remember, Atlanta is a major hub travel wise, with the world's busiest airport accepting flights from both northern and southern hemisphere. I've been to Atlanta plenty of times and its an amazing city.

Btw Montreal is as known as Toronto and Vancouver, but more popular touristic wise (well back then especially since vancouver has leaped alot recently!)

Montreal has faded into Toronto's shadow, but in the 1970s was still the financial and cultural centre of Canada. It managed to hang on a while longer, but once the separatist party was elected to power, the English-speaking upper class packed up and moved to Toronto, elevating Toronto to its current position. Even the Bank of Montreal isn't headquartered in Montreal any more.

Today's the big day. Winning city for 2016 is about to be announced any minute now. Looks like it's between Rio and Chicago, with Rio apparently posing a real threat to Chicago.

If Chicago wins 2016, Rio is almost certainly going to get 2020. I still think SA should make a bid for 2020 as it will give the country good exposure and the bidding city good experience for a 2024 bid.

That said, I think Durbs will be a good candidate city for 2024 as the city will officially turn 200 years old in that year. Will be a nice marketing push for the city to bring the games to Africa for the first time in it's double centenary year.

damn chicago is gone......im sure africa will get 2020

Ouch! In a stunning upset, Chicago has been knocked out in the 1st round.

Tokyo has been knocked out in the 2nd round.

It's now between Madrid and Rio. But with Europe (London) hosting 2012, I'm not so sure that Madrid will bag it just 4 years later. Crossing thumbs it will be Rio. However, then the city will be concurrently preparing for 2014 World Cup finals and 2016 Olympics. Will be crazy, crazy, crazy if they win it. But I hope so. The Games need to come to South America and Africa.

Rio wins!!! The party on the beach looks insane!!

Sydney-Athens-Beijing-London-Rio-Cape Town

Well done rio. Think that cuts an sa win in 2020. 2024 should be our target. But it means the commonwealth games should be our target now me thinks.

my only concern though is soccer world cup and then 4 years later olympics, will be a massive burden on the economy, here's hoping they pull it off

Well done Rio!!

Now Africa is the only continent not to have won a bid to host the Olympics. SA vs Brazil would have been tough but against other countries from regions that have hosted multi Olympics, it's ours to lose. If Rio, with high crime levels and little experience in hosting major sporting events can win the Olympics, so can SA. I've been to Rio twice and believe SA's major cities have the infrastructure that rivals and exceeds Rio's. I say back to back Games in two of the world's most influential developing countries would be remarkable. We almost must put in a bid now for 2020 and 2024.

If Brazil can do it, so can we.

Its about time...FIFA has acted awarding two world cups to africa and south america....now its the IOC turn to award the games to africa....now that rio got the 2016 games...it will only be fair if u complete the next decade with africa hosting the games in 2020!

Hey Yo Mo can u explain again if cape town is going to host....u are saying they shouldnt expand greenpoint...but build a 25,000 stadium at the old greenpoint for track....that wont work......ioc is just going to eliminate cape town like they did with chicago....unless capetown is going to build a brand new 80,000 seats stadium with athletic tracks...otherwise durban is looking good to get the games in 2020.....but i would love to see cape town get it .

Go Durban we need a fun olympics! Like Rio full of people dancing on the warm tropical beach. Not a bunch of old capetonians climbing an old mountain to lower their blood pressure setting up frickken knitting classes and bitching at the tourist!!!

http://www.track-backs.com/images/fronts/scb%20401%20blk.gif

Hey Yo Mo can u explain again if cape town is going to host....u are saying they shouldnt expand greenpoint...but build a 25,000 stadium at the old greenpoint for track....that wont work......ioc is just going to eliminate cape town like they did with chicago....unless capetown is going to build a brand new 80,000 seats stadium with athletic tracks...otherwise durban is looking good to get the games in 2020.....but i would love to see cape town get it .

like they eliminated london.

This guy sums up most of my feelings on SA bidding for the Olympics. As most of you know i not for it saying we should rather aim for Commonwealth now and maybe Olympics in 30 years if it still exists (which i doubt)

Would getting Olympics have changed us?

Rodney Hartman
October 02 2009 at 08:40AM

DO you remember how we once bid to host the Olympic Games? Democracy had barely dawned in South Africa and there we were, all fired up and ready to take on the world.

Can you believe it was 12 years ago that the name pulled out of the hat as Olympic hosts for 2004 was Athens and not Cape Town.

How disappointed we were after a fraught process in which Pick n Pay boss Raymond Ackerman set the ball rolling with his Cape Town bid, then fell out with SA Olympic chief Sam Ramsamy, and finally Chris Ball, "the ANC's banker", took over as bid chief as the normal politicking and backstabbing continued.

Could we have hosted an Olympic Games five years ago? A lot of people say it is just as well we didn't win that bid, but, then again, if the world commands that you deliver, you have to find ways to do so.

Is that not the case for 2010 when South Africa must deliver the next Fifa World Cup? If you're handed the ticket, you've got to take the ride.

How different would SA be today had it staged the Olympic Games in 2004? For a start, it's just possible we wouldn't have been left with enough money to bid for a World Cup.

So maybe things come around as they should and maybe we were just a little over-ambitious in our initial surge to make a big impact on a world we had rejoined. At least a successful World Cup next year will finally prove our capabilities and might then open the door for a second crack at the Olympics.

There has been talk already of bidding for the Games of 2020. Durban, for one, with its magnificent new stadium and extended multi-sport precinct plan, could be a most popular venue. Cape Town, no doubt, would also like to bid again, but South Africa cannot afford to have more than one city bidding at a time.

It's bad enough how much money an Olympic Games sets you back, but simply bidding for one costs an arm and a leg.

Incidentally, did you know how obsessive Nazi Germany was to host the 1936 Olympics? Not only did Berlin bid, and win, but so too did Cologne, Frankfurt and Nuremberg.

Tonight, of course, in Copenhagen, large parts of the world will hold their breath when the IOC announce the winner of the bid for the 2016 Olympics. These were the Games that South Africa had originally targeted, particularly after IOC president Jacques Rogge had urged African nations to apply, but we clearly pulled back to give the 2010 World Cup a clear run.

No African city can win tonight.


This article was originally published on page 24 of The Star on October 02, 2009

like they eliminated london.

what are u talking about???? london is building a brand new 80k olympic stadium....not like the one u suggested.

I am arguing with this dude in the north american thread about the games coming to south africa....Mo or Lydon come make ur arguements...

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=971880

As much as I am glad that Rio won, I am saddened, coz I think it hurts Durbans chances for 2020. I still back the Durban 2020 bid over Cape Town. But realistically, I think that Durbans real chance now lays in the 2024 Games.

what are u talking about???? london is building a brand new 80k olympic stadium....not like the one u suggested.

They're building exact one I suggested.

25,000 seats, 80,000 for the Games, 25,000 after the Games.

After the Rio choice, I honestly think SA, any city in SA, should drop trying for 2020, 'cos it isn't going to happen after a South American games. Which city in SA deserves it is debatable, but think gunning for anything before 2024, and agreed with previous comments, would be a waste of time and money.

After the Rio choice, I honestly think SA, any city in SA, should drop trying for 2020, 'cos it isn't going to happen after a South American games. Which city in SA deserves it is debatable, but think gunning for anything before 2024, and agreed with previous comments, would be a waste of time and money.

I disagree. I've been following these races quite closely. Post 2010 success, the momentum to go to Africa could be even greater. Two new frontier hosts are tricky but it all comes down to the type of cities that bid. I'd fancy Cape Town's chances over a Rome in the final round.

Anyway, apparently Julie was outside the venue in Copenhangen, to gain experience. Charming.

It would be the same thing as the World cup just in reverse. South Africa 2010 WC, Brazil 2014 WC. Brazil 2016 olympics, south africa 2020 olympics. But everything depends on brazil cuz if they mess up you guys will be out of luck.

South Africa should definately bid for the 2020 games, its africa time just like the ioc giving south america a chance they will do the same for africa because the 2010 will be successfull and ioc will give capetown a chance.

South Africa should definately bid for the 2020 games, its africa time just like the ioc giving south america a chance they will do the same for africa because the 2010 will be successfull and ioc will give capetown a chance.

Actually, you gave me an idea! What if, the criteria for being chosen as SA's 2020 or 2024 Olympic host city was simple: The city to be the best host for the FIFA WC 2010 gets to put in the bid for SA... do you guys think that's fair? I think it makes easy sense and sets a solid benchmark that is measurable.

I hear you Mo, although not 100% convinced that methodology would sink into the IOC, you may have a valid point.

^^ except that really only ct or durbs can bid from sa only the gauteng metropolitan area is big enough outside of those 2 but its altitude from what i understand really hamstrings its chances in a country which has 2 major sea level city. So if you want to go for which ever of durbs/ct put on a better show fair enough. But that might put ct at a slight disadvantage because of timing, but I think it would be a reasonable measure. The other problem is though, how do you measure!

I agree with Mike that we need to aim for 2024 even though I would like us to put a bid 4 2020.

^^ except that really only ct or durbs can bid from sa only the gauteng metropolitan area is big enough outside of those 2 but its altitude from what i understand really hamstrings its chances in a country which has 2 major sea level city. So if you want to go for which ever of durbs/ct put on a better show fair enough. But that might put ct at a slight disadvantage because of timing, but I think it would be a reasonable measure. The other problem is though, how do you measure!

I would assume one would look at transportation efficiency; convenience to attendees ; options for accommodation; overall urban experience; incidences of crimes reported on attendees; cleanliness, sophistication and efficiency of venues; ease of attendee access to matches and amenities and of course, attendees overall view of the city once the tournament is complete (by survey perhaps). Could allow local Olympic committee to make a fair judgment of the city in questions' ability and competency to pull off a major sporting event alone.

When it comes down to it, we can rant and rave about which city is best, and obviously, most people will choose their own... But, the most important thing regarding an event of that magnitude, is which city has the competency, expertise, efficiency and foresight to pull it off properly as to make the Olympics a success.

^^ oh ok, in my sleepy state this morning I didnt really think what you were saying through properlt but that deffinately makes sense. I must say I prefer a 2024 bid personally

I dont think it's the end of the world that Rio got the bid. They have been plugging away for the last couple of bids and in this business sentimentality counts a lot - it was now Rio's (and South America's) turn.

SA should still go for 2020, and if that fails, 2024. Had Rio lost 2016, they would have been nearly unstopable in 2020.

IMO the selection of Rio is the first indication that Africa would actually have a chance of hosting the olympics. However I still think it's way too expensive for SA and certainly the costs would outweigh the benifits. Of the recent host cities it seems the only one that's really benefited from a long term image and tourism boom specifically as a result of the olympics is Barcelona.

I'm delighted that Rio was selected. It's not going to be slick and sophisticated and will probably suffer from moments of chaos but it's going to be the most fun games ever. And that will do a lot to revive an event that seems to get more boring with each hosting.

I say we go for 2020, and if we don't get it, try again for 2024.

Do you think if capetown was among the final list for the 2016 games, Rio would have got it? I think the IOC would have given it to Africa over Rio given capetown past record in bidding.

As much as I am glad that Rio won, I am saddened, coz I think it hurts Durbans chances for 2020. I still back the Durban 2020 bid over Cape Town. But realistically, I think that Durbans real chance now lays in the 2024 Games.

After the Rio choice, I honestly think SA, any city in SA, should drop trying for 2020, 'cos it isn't going to happen after a South American games. Which city in SA deserves it is debatable, but think gunning for anything before 2024, and agreed with previous comments, would be a waste of time and money.

I have to agree here, i do not see two "new frontier" countries in a row, especially both in the Southern Hemisphere, both having similar settings (in the case of Cape Town and Rio) and both ravaged with the same social problems.

I disagree. I've been following these races quite closely. Post 2010 success, the momentum to go to Africa could be even greater. Two new frontier hosts are tricky but it all comes down to the type of cities that bid. I'd fancy Cape Town's chances over a Rome in the final round.

Anyway, apparently Julie was outside the venue in Copenhangen, to gain experience. Charming.

Were the CT people there? Just a question...

Yes momentum...but i still think 2024/28 should be the target now, with 2018 Commonwealth and an IAAF world champs to go for first

I would assume one would look at transportation efficiency; convenience to attendees ; options for accommodation; overall urban experience; incidences of crimes reported on attendees; cleanliness, sophistication and efficiency of venues; ease of attendee access to matches and amenities and of course, attendees overall view of the city once the tournament is complete (by survey perhaps). Could allow local Olympic committee to make a fair judgment of the city in questions' ability and competency to pull off a major sporting event alone.

When it comes down to it, we can rant and rave about which city is best, and obviously, most people will choose their own... But, the most important thing regarding an event of that magnitude, is which city has the competency, expertise, efficiency and foresight to pull it off properly as to make the Olympics a success.

Its a good start, these criteria, but i think political will is a huge factor that needs to be considered.

Also, the hosting of the WC on current infrastructure is not really a true indication to base on future infrastructure.

But you have a decent base

Do you think if capetown was among the final list for the 2016 games, Rio would have got it? I think the IOC would have given it to Africa over Rio given capetown past record in bidding.

I personally highly doubt it

everyone here will be dead by the time you people settle on a year. Damn just go for the next year. I hear people talking about 2028 and shyt. Everything is later, next week we will be hearing 2098!!

Dude, 2028 is like 19 years away...that's not long. I don't plan on being dead by then, do you? o_O

You never know what can happen these days. And half the population will be wiped out by 2012 anyways, we will eat the weak for diner. I will survive dont know about u though..Mmm I wonder what a BBQ cape town boy taste likes?

Ah, so you ARE into boys ;)

The secrets are revealed.

^^ What do you get if you cross Hannibal Hector with Priscilla Queen of the Desert!? :lol:

RGB's stupidity is quite funny but hell dude ur getting anoying!!!!!!!

I am not gay. I am just saying if there is no food post 2012 I will normal eat a person, not the eating u do to a girl. Anyways it was a joke...Shyt man I am tired.

wow reggae tone it down dude you can get banned for using that word.

Back to the theme of this thread...

I don't this article has been posted yet

------------------------

Durban continue to push 2020 Olympic bid

August 24

Durban is confident that it will be given the go-ahead by South Africa's Government to bid for the 2020 Olympics as it seeks to bring the Games to Africa for the first time.

As reported last month on insidethegames, the city, located on the shores of the Indian Ocean, has already expressed a serious intention to host the Games and has received encouragement from Gideon Sam, the President of the South African Sports Commission and Olympic Committee (SASCOC).

He said: “There is no bid yet.

"Cities will be invited to bid.

“We will be led by Government’s desire to host such an event because we have to get certain guarantees from them.

"The Minister [of Sport] has indicated that they would not be opposed to such a notion."

Indeed, it had been the Sports and Recreation Minister Makhenkesi Stofile who had revealed last month that South Africa are considering the bid which, they hope, will follow a successful FIFA World Cup that the country due to host next year.

In 1997 Cape Town was beaten by Athens to host the 2004 Olympics but they currently have no plans to bid again.

Sam said: “We haven’t had a formal approach because we first have to ask all our affiliate provinces if they wish to stage the event.

"Only then can we go to individual cities and ask them if they would like to put forward a bid.”

With Durban so far being the only South African city to express an interest in bidding for the event, Mike Sutcliffe, the city manager of e Thekwini, the municipality which governs the city, is already pushing their claims.

He said: “We have hosted a huge range of events in Durban and our city is the warmest all year round.

"The other cities either have poor weather or altitude to deal with.

"We are positioning ourselves to host big international events.

"It’s not just the Olympics, but events such as kick boxing and wrestling.”

If Durban, which is South Africa's second biggest biggest city with a population of 3.4 million, does decide to bid, its campaign will centre on the impressive new Moses Mabhida Stadium (pictured), which is due to play a major role in next year's World Cup.

The Stadium will host five group games, one second round game, one quarter-final and a semi-final match.

Sutcliffe said: “We invited competition before the stadium was built.

"We gave six consortiums R1million (£78,000) each and asked them to come up with [the concept of] a well-built, sustainable stadium that will also be able to host an event such as the Olympic Games."

The stadium’s capacity can be rised from 70,000 to 85,000 to meet International Olympic Committee (IOC) guidelines, Sutcliffe said.

There will be early opportunity for Durban to showcase its candidature when it hosts the IOC Session in July 2011, when the host city for the 2018 Winter Olympics will be chosen.

Sutcliffe said: “Our strategy is to work with SASCOC and start making the IOC aware of Durban, South Africa and Africa.

"It is a wonderful opportunity because it a huge international event.”

Sutcliffe believes that major events should be held more often in the Southern Hempishere.

He said: “We rarely get that kind of action except perhaps for Melbourne and Sydney.

"At the congress [sic] we will get the opportunity to thank the IOC.

"They were the first sporting body to support the struggle against apartheid and we have to recognise that."

Other candidate cities expected to put themselves forward for the 2020 Olympics are Dubai and New Delhi.

The IOC is due to make a decision on the 2020 host city at its Session in 2013.


http://www.insidethegames.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5264:durban-continue-to-push-2020-olympic-bid&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=1

Frankie Fredericks, SA / Namibia's most famous sprinter (and now an influential IOC official), feels that Rio's win will enhance Africa's prospect of hosting the Olympics.

------------------------
Exclusive: Rio victory opens door to African bid for 2020 says Fredericks
Tuesday, 06 October 2009

By Duncan Mackay in Copenhagen

October 6 - Rio de Janeiro's successful campaign to host the 2016 Olympics should encourage an African city to bid for the 2020 Games, Frankie Fredericks said here today.

The International Olympic Committee's (IOC) decision to award the Games to a city in South America for the first time in its 113-year history leaves Africa as the last continent not to have staged the event.

Fredericks, a four-time Olympic silver medallist, and now the chairman of the IOC's influential Athletes Commission, said that he hopes that is something that can be rectified when the 2020 Games are awarded.

The Namibian said: "The African continent has to start dreaming and come up with a good bid."

Fredericks claimed that the fact that FIFA have decided to stage the World Cup in Africa next year for the first time would give a potential Olympic bid momentum.

He said: "It is not going to be easy but Africa has the chance to host a good World Cup next year and then can start thinking about hosting the 2020 Olympics."

Cape Town bid for the 2004 Olympics, reaching the last three in the 1997 vote before the Games were awarded to Athens.

Durban is already considering putting itself forward for the 2020 Olympics but Fredericks claimed that several other countries in Africa, the world's second biggest continent, could mount serious bids.

Fredericks told insidethegames: "South Africa has already hosted a successful Rugby World Cup and any of the big cities in South Africa would be capable of hosting the Olympics.

"But we have to decide which of the African powerhouses should bid.

"That could be South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt or Morocco.

"But the African continent must get behind the bid."

Rabat, Morocco's capital, has already been mentioned as a possible African contender.

Fredericks believes that Africa hosting the Olympics could also help the development of sport in the continent, he said at a "Newsmaker Breakfast" organised by Around The Rings.

He said: "It would give our athletes the opportunity to dream.

"We are already seeing it with the World Cup in South Africa next year and it would be the same if Africa was chosen to the host the Olympics."


http://insidethegames.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7342:exclusive-rio-victory-opens-door-to-african-bid-for-2020-says-fredericks&catid=1:latest-news

Go Durban Go

i have changed my mind about the best location for the olympics.....cape town will be the best setting

Nice article on the challenges that Rio will face in hosting the Games (which are similar and even more daunting than any of the 3 big SA cities). Also interesting to see that Durban's possible bid is now cementing in the eyes of the international media, above other African cities.

-----------------------------

Rio Mayor ready to repay the world's faith
Wednesday, 07 October 2009

By Duncan Mackay in Copenhagen

Eduardo Paes is a youthful looking 39. He will be hoping that the next few years will not age him too fast. Paes is the elected Mayor of Rio de Janeiro, a prominent figure in the Brazilian city’s successful campaign to host the 2016 Olympics and Paralympics.

The hangovers of the Cariocas - as local residents are known - from the massive party held on Copacabana Beach to celebrate Rio’s choice as host ahead of Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo last weekend are beginning to clear and now the real work must begin.

There is no doubt that taking the Olympics to South America for the first time is a popular choice but it also fair to say that Rio’s progress will be followed with close interest. If it hosts successful Games then it could open the Olympic door to other currently unchartered cities, like Durban and New Delhi. But if it fails then it could slam the door shut in the face for cities in Africa and the rest of the developing world for decades.

Paes, who is one of the keynote speakers at the Global Sports Industry Congress to be held in London on October 18 and 19, knows that he not only owes a responsibility to the people of Rio and Brazil but also the rest of the world to deliver a great Games. "The Olympic movement is a global movement, so it has to be global," he said. "It has to go to all the continents, all the countries, all the areas of the world. We're pretty emotional here at this moment because we know it's a very important moment for a city that has a lot to give. It's going to change forever the Olympic Movement."

In the past, the IOC has bestowed its seal of approval on uncharted regions at propitious times in their histories. Tokyo won the 1964 Games as Japan was still emerging from the shadow of the Second World War and the country's economy was taking off. Seoul's 1988 Games helped promote "brand Korea," while Chinese officials originally sought the 2008 Beijing Games to escape their global isolation. Paes is hoping that staging the Olympics will help boost Rio's image internationally. "Rio has everything and more than everything, it has Cariocas who are the most marvelous people," he said.

It was Brazil's resilience to the global financial crisis that boosted Rio’s bid and underlined their status as a growing financial superpower. While the United States, Japan, and Spain were hit hard by the crisis, Brazil got off relatively lightly and has rebounded this year after slipping into a brief recession. "I think the reaction of Brazil to the crisis, the control of markets, and the strength of the Brazilian economy had a positive impact on Rio's candidacy," Paes said. "It's a country that is economically strong, powerful, and that is growing."

Paes (pictured kissing the pen during the signing ceremony after the 2016 decision) claimed that, unlike in its wealthy rival cities, Rio would be transformed by the investments the Games would bring. But he said most of the upgrades to the city's infrastructure were planned anyway, reducing the chances of major cost overruns. Memories in Rio are fresh of the 2007 Pan-American Games that they hosted successfully but which cost four times the original budget. "It is obvious that the proposal contained exaggerations that clearly could not be fulfilled," Paes admits.

That will not happen this time, he promised, even though Rio was the least prepared in terms of infrastructure and sports venues, with only 29 per cent of the facilities demanded by the IOC in place and another 24 per cent needing modernisation.

The city's transport system alone needs a $5 billion (£3 billion) upgrade to be ready for the Olympics, organisers admit. In total, the Games would cost about $15 billion (£9.4 billion), they say. Paes is confident that the event will not bankrupt the city. "The total [of Rio's Olympic budget] is this because we included absolutely everything that affects the Games ... in this respect, Rio's proposal was the most realistic of all," he said.

Paes, a member of the centrist Brazilian Democratic Movement Party, was elected Mayor last September when he defeated Fernando Gabeira, a Brazilian congressman who helped kidnap an American Ambassador during Brazil’s military dictatorship, with more than half the vote.

Paes, formerly served as an administrator of Jacarepaguá and of Barra da Tijuca, two neighborhoods of Rio. He was backed by Sérgio Cabral, the Governor of Rio State. Paes campaigned during the election that he would be a better administrator than Gabeira, and that he was the better choice to act as a bridge between the State and City Governments. It was that cooperation that helped make Rio's bid so attractive.

It is indisputable that the beachside city of Bossa Nova and Carnival was the most picturesque and romantic choice but Rio also faces concerns over a high crime rate and the pollution that affects some lakes and Guanabara Bay overlooked by the famous Sugarloaf Mountain.

Paes, who has waged a campaign to bring order to Rio's often chaotic streets since his election, acknowledged that security was a problem that Rio needed to tackle, but said it would not affect a one-off event like the Olympics.

Hundreds of slums in Rio are controlled by heavily armed drug traffickers, many within a stone's throw of tourist areas such as Ipanema and Copacabana beaches. Thousands of federal police were drafted in to secure the city during the Pan-American Games. "For the Olympics I don't have any doubt that these difficulties that Rio has, which we don't hide, will be easily overcome," Paes said.

Rio's bid benefited on the almost fanatical support of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who has backed it from the start and made winning the Games a national priority. "He is the face of a stronger Brazil that has confronted the economic crisis very well ... of a world organisation that no longer sees rich countries taking all the decisions," Paes said of Lula, a hugely popular former union leader.

Rio officials also claimed hosting the 2014 FIFA World Cup was an "asset" for Games preparations, despite IOC concerns that the World Cup could cut into Olympic sponsorship efforts with both events so close together.

"Having the World Cup is an asset for our campaign,” said Paes. “Almost all of the things that are in our bid book, they will be ready by 2014. For us having the World Cup is big chance of having things ready. It is a fantastic city, it is a marvellous city and it will change forever the Olympic Games."

Eduardo Paes, Mayor of Rio, host of the 2016 Summer Olympics, will appear at the Global Sports Industry Congress in London on October 19. For more details on the Global Sports Industry Congress click here.

Duncan Mackay is the publisher and editor of insidethegames.biz. He was the 2004 British Sports Journalist of the Year and was the athletics correspondent of The Guardian for 11 years, being the only British daily newspaper writer to correctly predict in 2005 that London's Olympic bid would be successful

http://insidethegames.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7349:rio-mayor-ready-to-repay-the-worlds-faith&catid=72:big-read-issue-1&Itemid=270

Olympic hopes boosted
Article By: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:39

Friday's announcement that Rio de Janeiro will host the 31st Olympiad in 2016 has raised South Africa's hopes of hosting the event in 2020, writes Craig Urquhart.

The World Cup and the Summer Olympics — the two biggest sporting events on the planet — are to be held in Africa and South America for the first time.

And with Brazil hosting the next edition of the World Cup in 2014, the southern hemisphere has certainly staked its claim for hosting mega-sporting events. In addition, these endorsements bear testimony to Brazil and South Africa's growing stature in the international arena and they have raised the hopes of hundreds of millions of people who desperately need the cash injection that these events provide.

There are other interesting parallels between these two countries. Firstly, Rio had twice previously failed to make the IOC shortlist for earlier Olympics while Cape Town failed in its bid to host the event in 2004. With hindsight, we can be grateful that South Africa lost out on that bid because it may have drained the cash reserves needed to back a second major sporting event.

Similarly, we were fortunate to lose the rights to host the 2006 World Cup to Germany (by the narrowest margin in FIFA's history) because we would never have been ready to stage the tournament in time. Looking forward, South Africa's chances of hosting the 2020 Olympics will depend on next year's World Cup, but there is a growing consensus that it will be a safe and successful event.

Three cities — Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg — would all be in the running, largely thanks to the new world-class stadia and facilities that are nearing completion. However, Durban is emerging as the front-runner because it has incorporated its Olympic plans into its 2010 preparations. Like Melbourne, city planners aim to turn Durban into a sporting Mecca with the Olympic Games the ultimate target.

The new Moses Mabhida stadium — framed by an extraordinary arch — will have capacity for 70 000 for the World Cup but can be expanded to 85 000 for events like the Olympics or the Commonwealth Games. Over the next few years, the port city will become one of the few cities in Africa where most of the main Olympic sporting codes can be played in a centrally-located, international-standard destination.

In addition, the city has already secured the rights to host the 2011 congress of the International Olympic Committee, the first to be held in Africa.

"There is this perception that the world ends after 2010 but we have never ever seen that. Going right back to 2004 we spoke of 2010 and beyond," said Julie-May Ellingson, who heads the 2010 project.

Irrespective of whether South Africa will host the Olympic Games, the 2010 World Cup has given it the opportunity to stake a serious claim.

http://sport.iafrica.com/sasoccer/news/breaking/1969820.htm

http://www.irishtimes.com/images/v3/generic/irishtimes-logo.gif





Politics of the Games beyond Americans' ken

TOM HUMPHRIES
Mon, Oct 05, 2009
LOCKER ROOM: Despite the combined forces of the Obamas and Oprah Winfrey, America’s bid to host the Olympics still came up short again
FUN IT was to be in Copenhagen last Friday evening. Fun, even for those of us who had been rooting for the great and fair city of Chicago to be awarded the Olympic Games of 2016. I’ve never met anybody who has spent anytime in Chicago who didn’t love the place. The possibility of an Olympic Games being held there, knowing how brilliantly and with what pride the city can run big events, was mouthwatering.
And yet, when it was announced to huge gasps in the massive press centre that Chicago had been bumped out in the first round of voting, the entertainment was so good it made Brazilians of us all. People from Rio and Madrid high-fived. The Japanese looked at each other earnestly. But every American in the place jumped to their feet and formed a righteous posse charged with finding out who was to blame and hanging them from a rafter.
Now I love and slavishly imitate the writing style of American sports hacks and I envy them their admiring sense of their own worth, this picture they have of themselves of being important players in the scheme of things.
We Irish hacks know by contrast that if the plane carrying ourselves and the Irish soccer team ever went down on the way to a game we’d reach under our seats and there would be flotation devices for our laptops but not for us.
The recovery of our moderately expensive machines would be presented as one of those inspiring good news stories like “dog found alive after earthquake” or “O’Donoghue Stays in Four Star Hotel”. Anyway, I digress.
American hacks are fine but as a herd they are a pain in the ass. The males of the species are all neat and dapper like the Mormon missionaries you have to shoo away from your door occasionally. The females are very intimidating and speak very loudly even by American standards. You may as well have a tour bus full of plaid-slacked, early bird-eating, Bob and Wilma-type American tourists disgorged into a press centre as let three American sports hacks in. The volume is the same and the depressing effect on the rest of the room is the same.
Usually they come in to a large press hall and spread out strategically. They are adept at separating themselves with precisely the amount of distance at which they can still hear each other when shouting at the top of their voices.
“BOB, ANY THOUGHTS ON DINNER TONIGHT?” “I’LL SPEAK TO STACEY ABOUT IT. SHE’S BEEN TO YURP BEFORE. STACE?” “NEAT. THANKS BOB.” “STACE??? STACE???”! “STACEY’S GONE TO THE BATHROOM, BOB. LOCAL FOOD ISSUE.” “YEAH, BOB IT’S STACEY. I’M IN THE BATHROOM BUT I CAN HEAR YOU. WHAT IS IT? YOU GUYS NEED DIRECTIONS TO MICKEY D’S?”
Anyway on Friday afternoon Chicago was eliminated straight off and suddenly it was Pearl Harbour. The shouting reached the sort of levels prone to cause tinnitus in the rest of us and there was a stampede of loud self- righteousness straight out the door and towards the hall in which the IOC were in session. Thinking the Americans were definitely going to invade the place and napalm the poor old dudes, a large number of us who had better things to be doing followed along for the entertainment.
The Danes still eat their fish raw and don’t know how to put a top slice of bread on to a sandwich, but they are smart and resolute. They created a narrow pass through which the the forces of the American Fourth Estate could not pass. This created wonderful chaos.
The guys charged with keeping the diarrhoea of breaking news flowing back to American TV stations kept turning their backs to the fighting and announcing, again and again, Chicago were out and there were “no availabilities for now from the Chicago bid team.”
Behind them the storm-troopers of the written press, for whom the term “no availabilities” is insufficient in terms of written copy, were roaring at the implacable Danes and roaring at dazed members of the Chicago bid team whom they could glimpse in the distance. “Bob. Bob. Over here Bob. Over here.”
Finally and deliciously, just as the Danes were making a push forward to clear the area, a foolhardy member of the Chicago bid team, whose name was actually Bob, made a run for it. He got as far as the door beside the Gourmet Cafe (which retails topless sandwiches at exorbitant prices) and he got brought down. Penned in aft and rear, he chose to give his interview while standing in the door frame, which meant in scientific terms he was receiving the same amount of physical pressure from the massive scrum behind him as he was from the great heave of hacks in front of him. We pushed him hither and thither like it was some mad party game while he tried to answer questions about why the IOC had just bitch-slapped president Obama and the entire American nation.
It was all frightening and very amusing in equal measure. Then some of the hacks at the back of the scrum had a brilliant idea. Unable to hear a word Bob was saying, they proposed repeating the exercise but with the “guys at the back rotating to the front”. The guys at the front who were pressed groin to groin with poor Bob didn’t think this was such a swell idea so with Bob trapped helplessly in the middle, media men and women tried uselessly to slide past each other, inadvertently performing acts of lewdness on each other which are still illegal in many southern states.
The whole rotation exercise broke down briefly and, spotting a gap, Bob made a run for it, his egress helped by the diversionary sighting of two United States Olympic Committee members standing on the far side of the entrance lobby talking to each other. Chaaaaaaaaaarge! By the time the guys and gals reached the railing separating them from the two USOC members they were in disarray.
Reporters were separated from their camera operators and instructions had to be given to Steffi and (I think, another) Bob that when this reporter was asking a question Steffi or Bob had to look at that camera over there.
So it proceeded. How could the most American of American cities which had presented the IOC with not just President Obama, but Oprah too, have been snubbed this way?
And in the answers that followed and the reports they generated you could find the answer without even trying. Many American reports felt Chicago had lost because America lacks clout at IOC politics level. In fact, Anita de Franz is one of the most respected IOC members. The IOC owns the Games, however. It does what it likes with them. It’s not about clout. America, whose companies cough up most of the finance for the Games and America, which takes back the same-sized slice as all the other 205 nations divide up between themselves, will never accept this or even fully understand it. Not just won’t accept it but can’t see it, cannot get a grasp on the whole phoney baloney spirit of Olympism for long enough to see the other 205 nations aren’t just the supporting cast in an everlasting narrative about American sporting glory but have their own hopes and aspirations, their own narratives to write.
Americans can’t come to grips with the fact that if their TV companies pay more for the Games than anybody else does, and their corporations chip in more sponsorship, it is for no other reason than that the market will sustain that. Nobody except its own competitive market forces NBC to pay so much to be the Olympic channel. NBC’s money buys it lots of privileges and gives the Games saturation coverage on US televisions which means it makes sense for American corporations to weigh in as sponsors.
The IOC owns the Games though! In two successive campaigns the IOC has emphatically rejected the claims of great American cities to host the Games. There was no post 9/11 sympathy vote for New York four years ago. President Obama’s brief visit to Copenhagen was described by one former IOC member, Kai Holm, as being “too businesslike. It can be that some IOC members see it as a lack of respect.” He hit the nail on the head.
The IOC may be an absurd collection of the grand poobahs of sport but they own the Games and they run the Games. On Friday the IOC smiled at the Obamas and then settled its own score with the USOC.


It will be a long time before another leading American politician will take the risk which Barack Obama took last Friday. Probably even longer before we see a summer games going to the USA. Having opened up South America to the Games the IOC will be sweet on the idea of doing the same with Africa and Cape Town is the early favourite for 2020.




Our American friends? They won’t get the Games again till they get the politics of the Games.
© 2009 The Irish Times

Chicago's 2016 Bid Demise Is Poetic Justice for Los Angeles

http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/user_pictures/0003/7413/dscn0426_small.jpg (http://bleacherreport.com/users/7636-Jo-Ryan-Salazar) by Jo-Ryan Salazar (http://bleacherreport.com/users/7636-Jo-Ryan-Salazar) [/URL]

Now I don't know about you, but the fact that Chicago got eliminated in the first round of voting is a sign of redemption.
Here's the thing: Chicago and Los Angeles were vying to be the US Candidate City for the 2016 Olympic Games, which went to Rio de Janeiro as all of you should know. Los Angeles was ready for these games. Just about all the venues for the events were set up.
Not a lot of money needed to be spent, maybe just for a few new venues.
But no, the United States Olympic Committee decided to wag the proverbial middle finger and give the Candidate City honors to Chi-town, Barack Obama's stomping grounds.
That was a big mistake. Even a rally monkey from Anaheim would have had better sense to commit suicide by selecting the Windy City over La-La Land.
I mean, how the bloody heck would a city that does not have a strong case have even a hair of a chance of winning the 2016 Olympic Games? I was an opponent of having the Games in Chicago immediately after the USOC made their announcement.
I personally wanted Tokyo to win this because they were a safe option, but the IOC voted Rio simply because South America never got a chance to host the Games. Buenos Aires (2004) tried to plead their case in the past, but they were unsuccessful.
So, Brazil not only gets to host the 2014 FIFA World Cup, but they also get to host the 2016 games. Not too bad of a deal. It's pretty swell. It's these types of news that make me want to skedaddle over to the local churrascaria near Cal-State Long Beach.
Chicago did not deserve to win this bid. They did not deserve to host these Games. If the USOC chose Los Angeles instead, LA would have perhaps finished ahead of Madrid, maybe even Tokyo.
I know there are a lot of broken hearts in Chi-town tonight, but look on the bright side: At least you got the Bulls, Bears, and Blackhawks to give you consolation.
This also has to be a day to remember in Miami and Oklahoma City. And Mexico City. And Kobe and Warsaw. And ever cities like Lagos, Montpelier (in France), Seoul, Caracas, Managua, Saint Petersburg (in Russia), Tunis, Ramallah, Istanbul, Barcelona, and even Madrid. These are a number of Rio's sister cities.
I am confident that Rio de Janeiro will put on a great show. The middle of the 20-teens is scheduled to become Brazil's most defining moment in sports to date.
All those living in or near the City of Angels will be tuning in, thinking, "It could have been us. But Chicago ruined it like Raymond Clark ruining Annie Le's wedding by murdering her. And they are paying the price."


And the only thing that needs to be done is a city like Cape Town to finally get their shot and have the Games come to Africa.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/img/global/tol-logo-222x25.gif

Print this page (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/olympics/article6860138.ece?print=yes&randnum=1254951314931#)




From The Sunday Times
October 4, 2009
Rio rules the world

With a little help from Britain, Rio beat the odds to land the 2016 Olympics despite the intervention of Barack Obama

John Goodbody

div#related-article-links p a, div#related-article-links p a:visited { color:#06c; } For the United States a stinging embarrassment, for Brazil a long-awaited triumph. What was so extraordinary about the decision of International Olympic Committee (IOC) to award the 2016 Olympics to South America for the first time was not that Rio de Janeiro came out on top, but that it won so convincingly. Everyone in Olympic circles had expected that the presence of Barack and Michelle Obama in Copenhagen would tilt the voting towards Chicago.
Obama’s global popularity was anticipated to be a significant advantage, particularly when it was combined with the fact that the United States, whose television and sponsors produce the majority of the revenue for the IOC, has not hosted the Olympics since Atlanta in 1996. However, Obama was upstaged by the Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, whose impassioned speech to the IOC members won over a majority of the members. He was in tears when he realised the Games had been awarded to Brazil. Escorted by Pele, he secured the greatest prize in sport, with Brazil already hosting the World Cup in 2014. Staging both events, two years apart, emphasises the rise in the country’s diplomatic and economic status.
As Da Silva said: “All those people who thought we had no ability to govern this country will now learn we can host the Olympics. The world has recognised that the time has come for Brazil.” Da Lula played heavily on the fact that South America had never hosted the Olympics, a fact that was often illustrated with a display behind him in the build-up to the vote. He told the IOC: “It is time to address this imbalance. The opportunity is now to extend the Games to a new continent. It’s an opportunity for an Olympics in a tropical country for the first time, to feel the warmth of our people, the exuberance of our culture and the sensation of our joy.”
Rio was advised by Mike Lee, who was director of communications for London when it won the Games in 2005. The IOC, whose behaviour and voting patterns are always difficult to predict, probably was drawn by the fact that Brazil is a country of 191m and it is keen to attract new, young people and emerging nations to the Olympic movement. Rio will give the IOC this opportunity, and Brazil is in a similar time zone to the United States, which will help American television audiences and so nullified one advantage possessed by Chicago.
Yet for the American city to go out in the first round of voting was an amazing rebuff. Several factors certainly damaged Chicago’s bid. There are lingering memories of the 1996 Games in Atlanta, regarded as being the worst in the past 20 years, and the attitude of the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) has not helped either. It has been trying to set up its own television channel, which would affect the value of the American TV rights, and has been in conflict over the distribution of money from US TV companies and sponsors. The USOC gets a disproportionate share and the rest of the world has not been happy.
For Brazil, the euphoria of the celebrations will be followed by a headache. After winning the games, Rio de Janeiro will have to meet a host of challenges. Although Rio hosted the 2007 Pan American Games, the size of the Olympics dwarfs all other events, including the World Cup. In fact, holding the World Cup two years before the Olympics may well be an advantage, because it will give the country the opportunity to learn how to cope with the hundreds of thousands of visitors and the problems of transportation and security.
Rio responded well to the fact that it had twice previously failed to make the IOC shortlist for earlier Olympics by building new venues for the Pan American Games. However, it still needs to construct nearly half the stadium capacity it needs for 2016, as well as the Olympic Village for 25,000 people. Eonomically, it should easily be able to cope. After all, Brazil is the world’s 10th largest economy and many of its exports, such as aircraft, cars, soya beans, iron ore, textiles and, of course, coffee, are booming.
Lula has already secured backing for the infrastructure budget of £7 billion. This was underwritten by the government, the state and the city. Almost half of this sum will be spent on rapid-transit bus lines from the city centre and the beachside neighbourhoods of Ipanema and Copacabana to Barra da Tijuca. Many of the events will be staged in the outer suburbs of a city of six million. It is hoped that the competitors will take only 25 minutes to reach these venues.
Security is a major concern. Approximately one million people live in shanty towns, or favelas, where violent crime is rife, much of it between warring drug gangs. Although most of the event venues will be some way from these slums, there are exceptions, one being the famous Maracana football stadium, which will be renovated for the World Cup, and which is close to the Manguiera favela. The local police shoot dead about three people a day in the city, many of them black youths. Still, there were few security problems in such international events as the recent Pan American Games and the 1992 Earth Summit.
Rio is also planning to spend about £2.5billion on cleaning up the sea and the lakes near the city, where many of the water sports will take place. The Rodrigo de Freitas lagoon suffers from the draining of sewage from local townships and is the subject of complaints by the rowers and sailors who use it. The cost of staging the 2007 Pan American Games escalated from about £340m to £2billion. You can expect a proportionate rise on a far greater scale for the Olympics. Rio has been warned.
DENVER PULL OUT OF WINTER GAMES BID AFTER CHICAGO'S HUMILIATION
THE United States is the biggest loser from the decision of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to award the 2016 Olympics to Rio de Janeiro. So shell-shocked was Denver by the elimination of Chicago in the first round that it immediately announced it would not be bidding, as planned, for the 2018 Winter Games. The Denver officials are wise. IOC members still remember that Denver pulled out of staging the 1976 Winter Olympics, having already been awarded them, because the Colorado State voters refused to pay any further money towards the cost of hosting the event.
However, future summer Games will also be affected. Few American cities will feel it worthwhile to try for 2020 since they risk similar humiliation as Chicago. Kevan Gosper, the IOC member in Australia, said yesterday that the early elimination of Chicago could do “untold damage” to the already fraught relations between the IOC and the United States Olympic Committee, who have to endorse any bids from its country.
The United States will also be affected by the unofficial rotation of the summer Olympics, whereby no continent stages consecutive celebrations. This last occurred when London hosted the 1948 Olympics and Helsinki the Games of 1952. The Olympics in 2020 should now go to either Europe or Asia. Neither the Madrid mayor, Alberto Ruiz-Gallardon, nor Shintaro Ishihara, the Governor of Tokyo, would confirm their cities would definitely be trying again, but neither ruled it out.
The IOC likes to see persistent commitment from its candidates and both may well feel that they can return in four years with their bids strengthened. But so might Paris, where the Games have not been held since 1924 and which was runner-up to London for 2012.


The most intriguing scenario is that perhaps an African city, heartened by the achievement of Rio de Janeiro, will now try to bring the world’s biggest sporting event to the one continent that has never staged it.


South Africa might be stimulated after the 2010 World Cup to put forward a city, probably Cape Town, for 2020.

Lol, seems lots of internationals are into Cape Town hosting it.

Rio de Janeiro and the Future of the Olympics (http://www.sportsofboston.com/2009/10/05/rio-de-janeiro-and-the-future-of-the-olympics/)

By Teddy (http://www.sportsofboston.com/author/ed/) in Featured (http://www.sportsofboston.com/featured/), Opinion (http://www.sportsofboston.com/opinion/) ⋅ October 5, 2009 at 6:00am ⋅ Post a comment (http://www.sportsofboston.com/2009/10/05/rio-de-janeiro-and-the-future-of-the-olympics/#comments)

(http://www.sportsofboston.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/100409_obama_olympics.jpg)
There was commotion, excitement and anticipation, but in the end, there was just disappointment as Chicago was not given the bid for the 2016 Olympics. Instead, Rio de Janeiro will become the first South American country to host the games. Now, America will have to wait at least another four years before they get the chance to host again.
The last time the Summer games were held in the United States was way back in 1996. There, Atlanta, Georgia surprised the world when it beat out Athens (Greece), Toronto (Canada), Melbourne (Australia), Manchester (Great Britain) and Belgrade (Yugoslavia). Two countries, Australia and Greece, have already hosted the games and England will get the games in 2012. Canada will even see the Winter Games in 2010, so there is still hope for the United States in the future. Atlanta did have problems though with the bombing, which could have swayed voters away with safety concerns.
Chicago Did All It Could

Despite appearances from President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama and even Oprah, the city couldn’t pull in the games. In a Cubs-like performance, they were one of the contenders and a favorite to win it all, before being eliminated in the first round (Sorry Cubs fans). Chicago couldn’t compete with Madrid (Spain), Tokyo (Japan) and Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), the eventual winner. Chicago seemed to do everything possible, but couldn’t pull it out.
Despite great architecture, first-class cuisine and being one great sports city, it didn’t seem to compare with its international counterparts. So much time and money were spent to draw attention, but everything failed. The only thing else that could have been done was for Chicago’s greatest athlete to travel to Denmark, where the voting was taking place. Instead, Michael Jordan decided to stay home, which was unwise according to Soccer star Pele.
“It is important to participate when your country needs you.” said Pele. “If I have to die for my country, I would die for my country. If I had to die for my sport, I would die for my sport. I feel very happy if I can help my country.”
Rio Deserves It

It’s hard to argue that Rio didn’t deserve the games over Chicago. On three separate occasions, the city tried to win the games, losing out for the games in 1936, 2004 and 2012. In fact, there has only been two previous games which have been hosted in the southern hemisphere, both in Australia. The IOC, International Olympic Committee, always emphasized spreading the games around. Rio will be the seventh country outside of North America and Europe to host the games. For reference, North America and Europe have hosted the games 21 out of 28 times and the United States has hosted the most games with four, St. Louis in 1904, Los Angeles 1932 and 1984, and Atlanta in 1996.


For Chicago, many people crowded to watch the votes and when the city was eliminated, there seemed to be faces saying, “Well, what are you going to do?” There was not much shock, or real disappointment. On the other hemisphere, 50,000 filled Copacabana Beach and were crying and rejoicing that their city would be the center of the world during the summer of 2016. Pele couldn’t hold back his tears knowing that Brazil did what no other South American country could do, win the games. There was no sense that this was the end of the world with Chicago, where this was everything for the people of Rio.


It doesn’t appear that America truly cares about hosting the games, only winning at the Olympics. Despite winning the most medals, the USA was second to China in Golds. For Brazil, the medals are not as important as hosting. The idea that Rio will be hosting the greatest athletes in the World means more then anything. For viewers, a real glimpse will be in 2014 when Brazil hosts the other world celebration, the World Cup. Two enormous events in the span of two years will be more the Rio could ever ask for.

Future Games In The States

With Chicago still stunned from its defeat, the United States will look onwards to host once again. Three cities are hoping they can get the support from USOC to put in a bid for the 2020 games. Minneapolis/St. Paul are praying the twin cities can bring the games in the midwest. Mayor Larry Langford is getting the ball moving in an attempt for the games to come to Birmingham, Alabama, with the slogan, “Olympics 2020: Why not Birmingham?” Finally, one city that is doing preliminary research to decide wether or not it’s city could host the games is Boston, Massachusetts.
That’s right New Englanders, Boston is looking into seeing if it can get support from citizens and if the city has what it takes to host the games. Should the city decide to go through with the bidding process, it will be the likely front runner for a USOC vote. However, two things get in the way. Tokyo is expecting another run at the game since not hosting since 1964, but with Beijing hosting last year, it is unlikely another Asian country will host for sometime.



Many members of the IOC have stated that an African country should get the games, thus having all inhabited continents having hosted the games. Even though Morocco is looking into the games, the front runner for the 2020 games will be Cape Town, South Africa. Next year’s World Cup will be a deciding factor in South Africa’s chances. Paris, Madrid, and possibly Chicago and New York will also hurt Boston’s chance.


So that means the United States might have to look even further down the road. Unless Toronto pulls out a miracle in 2020 (the city did host in 1976), the next possible time North America might host will be in 2028. Seattle, Washington is looking way down the road and possibly joining forces with Vancouver, Canada to co-host the games. The problem: Vancouver is already the site of the 2010 Winter Olympics. No city has hosted both games and due to the timeframe being so close, it is a long shot at best.
See You In London

The Summer games are one of the greatest sports experiences in the world. The greatest athletes from all corners of the globe descend on the host. In 2012, London will have the opportunity to shine and bring the games back to Europe (the last time was 2004’s Athens games). For Rio, 2016 is a rebirth for the games. South America now has hope that future games could come to countries like Argentina and Chile, which have previously not had strong hopes of hosting. Should Africa get the opportunity in 2020, then the Olympics would really become the world’s games.


With the United States, we might finally have to wait our turn. No other country has hosted as much as the States. Mexico and Canada both would like to host the next time they come to North America. If America truly wants to host again, it should look to a new idea. Boston and New York could work to co-host by celebrating the history Boston brings with the modern style New York possesses. If our cities keep competing with each other, instead of working together, it could be a long time before the games return to American soil.

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/bei...urn=oly,194104 (http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijing/blog/fourth_place_medal/post/The-five-leading-candidates-to-host-the-2020-Sum;_ylt=AkcGaW4CZsuTkhm4kYWiXgrNycIF?urn=oly,194104)

The five leading candidates to host the 2020 Summer Olympics

Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:38 pm EDT
By Chris Chase


Rio de Janeiro was just named host of the 2016 Summer Olympics, so you know what that means: Time to start speculating about which city is the favorite to host the Games of 2020!

Fourth-Place Medal ranks the five most likely host cities for the next, next, next Olympics. Each of the cities has, at some point, been rumored to be considering a bid for 2020.

1) Rome -- Rome 2020 has three things going for it: The IOC will want to get back to Europe after Rio de Janeiro, the Games haven't been in the city since 1960 and there are more Italian members of the IOC than any other country.

2) Minneapolis -- The story of the USOC/IOC rift is as overblown this week as it was under-blown last week. Yes, it mattered (we had been warning of this since last August), but it wasn't a bid-killer. There were a half-dozen reasons Chicago didn't get the Games and anti-American bias is just one them. The IOC is, was, and always will be Eurocentric. But it was Eurocentric when Atlanta got the 1996 Games and Eurocentric when Salt Lake City hosted in 2002. It's always a hurdle to overcome, but it can be done. And it will be done sooner rather than later. At some point the IOC is going to have to make some political concessions and come back to the United States. Both Minneapolis and Boston are said to be considering bids for 2020. We'd give the edge to Minneapolis since support from citizenry is a major factor in these things (CHICAGO) and we get the sense that Minnesota would rally behind something as unifying as an Olympic bid. (Little-known fact: Minneapolis finished second in the voting for the 1952 Olympics behind Helsinki.)

3) Madrid -- Always the dama de honor, never la novia.

4) Dubai/Doha -- We're lumping these two cities together (from the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, respectively) because they both have the same pros and cons: The IOC has never gone to the Middle East and, as the Rio vote showed, the organization loves to try things for the first time. More importantly, both of these places are flush with oil money, so funding would be a breeze and the facilities would likely be the greatest the sports world has ever seen. But no amount of money can change the weather, and the 100+ degree average temperatures in these cities in July, August and September make holding outdoor events an impossibility. Yes, they could build climate-controlled domes, but I doubt the IOC would go for that. And what about events that have to be outside like the marathon, rowing, long-distance walking and beach volleyball?

5) Toronto -- All the benefits of the United States without the need to capitulate to the USOC.

Not on the list: Birmingham (seriously, the mayor wants to make a bid) ... Tulsa (see: Birmingham) ... Guadalajara (IOC isn't going to Latin America twice in a row) ... St. Petersburg ... Cape Town (this will happen one day, but the fear of back-to-back southern hemisphere Olympics will prevent it from going down in 2020).

Probably based largely on the 1996 SA bid, seems some foreign media are still operating on the mistaken assumption that CT is the only SA city that the SA government is willing to put forward as its bid city. If they do a bit of investigative journalism, they would learn otherwise.

Probably based largely on the 1996 SA bid, seems some foreign media are still operating on the mistaken assumption that CT is the only SA city that the SA government is willing to put forward as its bid city. If they do a bit of investigative journalism, they would learn otherwise.

What worries me, is that international visibility does have a large effect on popularity of choice as an Olympic candidate city and will have an effect on the way the IOC will vote. We have not had a relatively unknown global city host the games since Atlanta, and even then, it's a major business and leisure travel hub (largest US South-east city; busiest airport in the world; CNN & CocaCola HQ's).

All personal city preference must be put aside, there is only one question to ask: Who will get the IOC vote? That's the only thing to really consider when putting forward a candidate: Joburg; CT; Durban? Who can win it for SA? The secondary question is then, what is the most efficient, well-governed and events/tourism friendly city that can pull off a big event like this alone?

Summation: Two questions to debate actually...

Who would the IOC likely vote for presented with a choice of JHB/DBN/CPT?
Which city can put together the best bid, has the most potential and has the competence of governance to pull it off?

Well I read some where that Government will have the final say in which city will be given the right to put in a bid, but my fears are that the article is correct and back to back olympics in the southern hemisphere maybe put us in doubt, but seeing that Athens, Beijing & London are all in the northern they should hold it as a liability.

Cape Town (this will happen one day, but the fear of back-to-back southern hemisphere Olympics will prevent it from going down in 2020

Why is this suppose to be a problem, it seems to go to the Northern Hemisphere 3 times in a row...Athens 2004, Beijing 2008, London 2012...was also before Sydney...Seoul 1988, Barcelone 1992, Atlanta 1996.
I'd believe timeline might be a factor, but SA is the same times as most of Europe and the difference between SA and the USA is not different from Europe/USA?

Which city can put together the best bid, has the most potential and has the competence of governance to pull it off?
Sutcliffe and Julie May

Well I read some where that Government will have the final say in which city will be given the right to put in a bid, but my fears are that the article is correct and back to back olympics in the southern hemisphere maybe put us in doubt, but seeing that Athens, Beijing & London are all in the northern they should hold it as a liability.

I don't see a hemisphere being a problem. The northern (Europe, Russia, North America, Japan, South Korea, and China) and western (North America) hemispheres have hosted the Games (summer and winter) muiltiple times in a row and their respective hemispheres have never counted against them. Even the eastern hemisphere (Japan, South Korea, China, Australia) has hosted the Games on multiple occassions. Even developing nations have hosted the Games (Mexico, China, and now Brazil).

Rather, the issue is which continent has never hosted a Games. The 5 Olympic rings represent the 5 continents of the world united in fair play, and the colours, some say, represent each continent:

- The Americas [North and South], apparently represented by the red ring;
- Europe, apparently represented by the blue ring;
- Asia, apparently represented by the yellow ring;
- Australia, apparently represented by the green ring;
- Africa, apparently represented by the black ring.

As is evident, although Rio's award is really fantasic for the south and developing nations, the Americas (in the form of the US, Canada, and Mexico) have been awarded the Games on numerous occassions. Brazil can't even claim to be the first Latin American nation to have been awarded the Games as Mexico hosted in 1968.

Thus, the true GLARING omission is Africa. If a competent bid is made by an African nation, I can't see the IOC and the international community being able to deny it from a moral perspective. It's also hugely significant that black athletes hold almost every single track and field record yet their continent of origin / heritage has never hosted the Games. Methinks it's a prime time for Africa to put in a bid.

I thus don't think that back-to-back games in the southern hemisphere will really be a significant factor against an African country. This would mean that if the 2020 Games went to Europe or North America, Egypt and Morocco (both in the northern hemisphere) would be at an automatic disadvantage for the 2024 Games, which would obviously not be the case. Or conversely, that these two African countries are at an automatic advantage over SA re: 2020 Games because they are located in the northern hemisphere of the African continent. Definitely faulty reasoning using hemisphere to decide Games.

What worries me, is that international visibility does have a large effect on popularity of choice as an Olympic candidate city and will have an effect on the way the IOC will vote. We have not had a relatively unknown global city host the games since Atlanta, and even then, it's a major business and leisure travel hub (largest US South-east city; busiest airport in the world; CNN & CocaCola HQ's).

All personal city preference must be put aside, there is only one question to ask: Who will get the IOC vote? That's the only thing to really consider when putting forward a candidate: Joburg; CT; Durban? Who can win it for SA? The secondary question is then, what is the most efficient, well-governed and events/tourism friendly city that can pull off a big event like this alone?

Summation: Two questions to debate actually...

Who would the IOC likely vote for presented with a choice of JHB/DBN/CPT?
Which city can put together the best bid, has the most potential and has the competence of governance to pull it off?

Durban is definitely not as well known as CT internationally. However, it is certainly not an "unknown" city. One of the world's most (in)famous and contentious conferences, the World Conference Against Racism and Xenophobia has become simply known as the "Durban Conference". The very recent controversial review of this conference was referred to simply as "Durban II" although it was hosted in Geneva. Both conferences made headline news all over the world and were widely covered in the press and discussed by world leaders. This has given the city invaluable global branding, like the Kyoto Protocol has done for Kyoto, Japan.

Let's also not forget that Durban has hosted undoubtedly the most prominent medical (and otherwise) conference in the world: the World AIDS Conference, which gave rise to the now famous "Durban Declaration" (that HIV definitely causes AIDS). The African Union was also founded in Durban, never mind all the other major events the city has hosted and is widely known for (for one, the world's most famous statesman, behind Madiba, Mahatma Gandhi, developed his Satya Graha (truth or peaceful resistance) philosophy in Durban, at the Gandhi Settlement in Inanda. These are not insignificant events on the global scale and the city is inextricably linked to them. The world-famous SA stuggle song, "Give me hope Jo'anna" even refers to Durban in its first 10 words. Thus, I don't think the city is quite "unknown" as some people seem to think it is.

Let's not forget that even if Durban were to have escaped the world's and IOC's attention for whatever reason til now, it will certainly be known in 2011 when it hosts the IOC Congress, never mind the accolades it has already garnered internationally recently for hosting high-profile events like the prelim 2010 world cup draw, and soon, a WC semi-final.

^^ I appreciate your effort and thought that went into answering question 1... but what can make it stand out over and above JNB and CPT in the race to host? I'm mostly seeing a list of events held at the ICC. We could do the same for Sandton or CTICC. Plus, known songs or persons are not going to win it for Durbs, Oprah and Obama couldn't do it for Chicago. We need to find that "Durban edge."

I really think Durbs is on the rise, I'm worried it's too early yet... that after WC2010 catapults Durbs slowly into the global limelight and it has 10 years to get its name out there, then Durbs will be ready. But reality is: Urban SA to foreigners is still mostly JNB and CPT; it's seen in where international broadcasters are basing themselves for 2010. It would be great for SA to have 2 globally recognised coastal cities; I'm just using the logic that Durban is where CT was 12 years ago. A place with potential, on the rise, but somewhat unknown. That putting the bid in Durban's hands, may just be like it being put back in CT's hands in 1997: A good showing, a good bid, but not enough to win.

If Durban is to have the bid and Cape Town not considered, I would advise 2024/28, to give Durbs a decade to rack up its global standing. Let the marketing gurus of KZN do their work, get the CBD sorted out and integrated, let KSIA, ICC and even WC-marketing do its magic for a while. And to put the "global rotation" issues surrounding Rio to rest in 2020.

The other worry I have... good governance to pull it off???! With you guys constantly slating your own council, makes me wonder if they have the know how and city's best interest at heart to pull off an Olympics mostly on their own.

Not trying to hammer somewhere or glorify somewhere else. I'm just trying to determine which year's bid and which city would have the best chance of winning the games for South Africa.

I think they'll(SASCOC/ANC) go with Durban, perhaps, but it will suffer the same fate of the Brisbanes, Manchesters, Birminghams, Sau Paulos's, Brasilia's, Osaka's and Leipzig's i.e. not Sydney, London, Beijing, Rio etc.

^^ I appreciate your effort and thought that went into answering question 1... but what can make it stand out over and above JNB and CPT in the race to host? I'm mostly seeing a list of events held at the ICC. We could do the same for Sandton or CTICC. We need to find that "Durban edge."

I really think Durbs is on the rise, I'm worried it's too early yet... that after WC2010 catapults Durbs slowly into the global limelight and it has 10 years to get its name out there, then Durbs will be ready. But reality is: Urban SA to foreigners is still mostly JNB and CPT. It would be great for SA to have 2 globally recognised coastal cities; I'm just using the logic that Durban is where CT was 12 years ago. A place with potential, on the rise, but somewhat unknown. That putting the bid in Durban's hands, may just be like it being put back in CT's hands in 1997: A good showing, a good bid, but not enough to win.

If Durban is to have the bid and Cape Town not considered, I would advise 2024/28, to give Durbs a decade to rack up its global standing. Let the marketing gurus of KZN do their work, get the CBD sorted out and integrated, let KSIA, ICC and even WC-marketing do its magic for a while. And to put the "global rotation" issues surrounding Rio to rest in 2020.

The other worry I have... good governance to pull it off???! With you guys constantly slating your own council, makes me wonder if they have the know how and city's best interest at heart to pull off an Olympics mostly on their own.

What makes Durbs stand out over CT and JHB to host an Olympics? You mean besides the obvious like perfect weather during Olympic period (vs CT and JHB), sea level (vs altitude at JHB, which virtually rules that city out of running), dedicated, intergrated, and compact sports precinct, including an Olympic-compliant stadium, within close distance to thousands of hotel rooms (vs JHB and CT, where no equivalent exists)?

I concur that Durbs internationally is where CT was a decade ago: lots of potential and on the rise with more global branding to do. But that does not mean it is incapable of hosting something big or being a good bid city to host something 10-15 years down the line. Durbs may well lose out on a 2020 bid. However, the same happenned to CT in 1996 so it's not the end of the road. I personally feel a 2024 Durban bid would be better for reasons I've outlined before (city's double centenary birthday year etc).

And yes, the Durban forumers criticise the Dbn city leadership over several issues (street renaming, rates calculation, being the main chief issues) but overall, it's a very well-run city, as confirmed by its extremely high credit rating (best in Africa for a long time now), unqualified audits by the Auditor-General, and long-term city vision and plans. And despite the criticism the Durban formers mete out to the Dbn officials, the city has done well to prepare for the WC. Moreover, and most importantly, even if we have sub-optimal city leadership now, things changes. Remember CT a few years ago under the ANC mayor? Look at it now. The Durban leaders of today won't be around in even 5 years time.

Also, putting the bid "in Durban's hands" is not the same as putting the bid in CT's hands in 1997. Then, aside from the 1995 Rugby WC, the country had virtually no experience hosting international events. Things have changed radically since then. A bid by any SA city won't be left in the exclusive hands of local officials given the huge investments / role that national government will be making / playing in the event. We all know that the SA cities have had very little control over 2010 WC issues. It will be the same for the Olympics. The city will be the host but the IOC, and to some extent, national government, will be calling the shots. National officials, international consultants, and hopefully the best minds from throughout the country will be involved in getting the successful city ready for the bid / event. Not just local officials.

However, one has to keep in mind that Cape Town, and Joburg should it decide to bid, isn't going to stop bettering over time. If, for arguments sake, Durban is to be where Cape Town is today in 10 years, who knows where Cape Town will be? Obviously it's an over-exaggerated example, but one has to keep in mind that where there is room for improvement in Durban, there is room for improvement in Cape Town too.

However, one has to keep in mind that Cape Town, and Joburg should it decide to bid, isn't going to stop bettering over time. If, for arguments sake, Durban is to be where Cape Town is today in 10 years, who knows where Cape Town will be? Obviously it's an over-exaggerated example, but one has to keep in mind that where there is room for improvement in Durban, there is room for improvement in Cape Town too.

Spot on.

I've always said that. It has nothing to do with city rivalry.

So Durban gets a great new airport but other cities including Cape Town are moving forward e.g. with the double the capacity of KSIA, IRT links, transport plaza's, potential rail links etc. But Durban has more airbridges, but ORTIA has a bigger airport and more airbridges. All moving forward. Progressing.

What worries me, is that international visibility does have a large effect on popularity of choice as an Olympic candidate city and will have an effect on the way the IOC will vote. We have not had a relatively unknown global city host the games since Atlanta, and even then, it's a major business and leisure travel hub (largest US South-east city; busiest airport in the world; CNN & CocaCola HQ's).

All personal city preference must be put aside, there is only one question to ask: Who will get the IOC vote? That's the only thing to really consider when putting forward a candidate: Joburg; CT; Durban? Who can win it for SA? The secondary question is then, what is the most efficient, well-governed and events/tourism friendly city that can pull off a big event like this alone?

Summation: Two questions to debate actually...

Who would the IOC likely vote for presented with a choice of JHB/DBN/CPT?
Which city can put together the best bid, has the most potential and has the competence of governance to pull it off?

Just a small correction, Atlanta may be a major buisness hub in the U.S. but very few would consider it a tourist hub.

Even if it is smaller or packs less finacial punch then Atlanta it is one if not the most "recogonized" cities in sub-Africa while Atlanta was not even in the top ten in NA when it was awarded. At least that is how I think it is perceived from an American perspective.

^^ I think he meant travel hub as in to access other parts of america loads of people fly through atlanta, for both business and tourist reasons

^^ yea cuz atlanta jackson-hartfield airport is the busiest airport in the world....before u fly to dallas texas from lets say south africa u will have to go thru atlanta :D

Perhaps off-topic but America's "second" or "third" city...or even "fourth" and "fifth" city is not comparable to a South African second / third/fourth city. America just have so many more choices in terms of global appeal and ability to host.

Sydney- Melbourne is NOT Cape Town-Durban. Perhaps Cape Town-Johannesburg, but even then given the size of the Jhb/Gauteng economy is debatable.

^^ I think he meant travel hub as in to access other parts of america loads of people fly through atlanta, for both business and tourist reasons
Exactly what I meant. Had to slug my way from terminal to terminal flying Delta way too many time at Hartsfield-Jackson International. ATL is the largest air hub in the world by volume. But, another small correction from me for nomarandlee... when you're competing as Olympic host, you're competing in a global arena, thus Sub-Saharan African profile means almost nothing, global profile will be what counts. Unfortunate for our bids, but it's just the reality of globalisation.

when you're competing as Olympic host, you're competing in a global arena, thus Sub-Saharan African profile means almost nothing, global profile will be what counts. Unfortunate for our bids, but it's just the reality of globalisation.

Yes and no, if it is deemed the right time by Olympic delegates to award an African city the games then geography will have major pull. If winning had nothing to do with geography then it is much more likely Tokyo would have won or done much better for 2016 as Madrid, Chicago, or Rio can't really compete with it in terms of global profile.

On a practical level though Rio had only real serious competition from Buenos Aires to likely hold the first games every in South America though and I only see a few legitimate rivals for Cape Town. There will be a time sometime soon when the IOC will feel compelled to give it to Africa and Cape Town like Rio will likely benefit.

I dont think the "IOC" felt compelled to give it to Rio. It met the technical requirements and in the final round it was a case of new frontier or Europe. They chose the new frontier. The new frontier made a compelling case, even if their final presentation was a disaster.

100+ individual IOC members voting for their own reasons.

I think many love to believe the IOC make a collective choice or have a single voice.
Instead each member has his/her own view or set of priorities.

The one is obsessed with doping, the other e.g. Prince Albert, obsessed with stupid things, Nawal likes Oprah, then theres the Samaranch crew who might die when he dies...

^^ yea cuz atlanta jackson-hartfield airport is the busiest airport in the world....before u fly to dallas texas from lets say south africa u will have to go thru atlanta :D

I hate Atlanta's airport their is to many many people in it, and none of them are locals so if you get lost your dommed. :ohno:

^^when i finish school and start travelling i will go thru atlanta...i thought houston's george bush airport was confusing....

Perhaps off-topic but America's "second" or "third" city...or even "fourth" and "fifth" city is not comparable to a South African second / third/fourth city. America just have so many more choices in terms of global appeal and ability to host.

Sydney- Melbourne is NOT Cape Town-Durban. Perhaps Cape Town-Johannesburg, but even then given the size of the Jhb/Gauteng economy is debatable.

Just as Sao Paulo-Rio is not comparable to Jhb-CT. These Brazilian cities are both much bigger than Jhb and are used to hosting bigger events. The Olympics is out of our league.

Golf, rugby make Olympic roster for 2016, 2020
By MATTIAS KAREN, AP Sports Writer
2 hours, 8 minutes ago

Buzz up! PrintCOPENHAGEN (AP)—All those beautiful beaches and Tiger Woods, too!

After more than a century on the sidelines, golf will return to the Olympics at the Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro. Rugby, last played in 1924, is coming back as well.

Both were reinstated for the 2016 and 2020 games after a vote Friday by the International Olympic Committee. They are the first sports added since triathlon and taekwondo joined the program for the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

Each sport received majority support in separate votes after leading athletes and officials from both camps gave presentations, including a taped video message from Woods and other top pros. Woods has indicated he would play in the Olympics if golf were accepted for 2016.

More OlympicsBlog: Where will they play? Injury shelves Torres Jones' relay partners to keep medals? IOC re-elects Rogge Skater Meissner injured ADVERTISEMENT

“There are millions of young golfers worldwide who would be proud to represent their country,” Woods said from the Presidents Cup in San Francisco. “It would be an honor for anyone who plays this game to become an Olympian.”

Golf was approved 63-27 with two abstentions. Rugby was voted in 81-8 with one abstention.

“We were ecstatic and wanted to jump on the table, but we sort of restrained ourselves,” former New Zealand rugby great Jonah Lomu told The Associated Press. “It was just fantastic for the game.”

Golf will stage a 72-hole stroke-play tournament for men and women, with 60 players in each field. Rugby will organize a four-day seven-a-side tournament— instead of the more traditional 15-a-side game—for 12 men’s and women’s teams.

“I think it’s fantastic, an unbelievable day for the game of golf,” Jack Nicklaus said. “The impact is going to be felt all over the world, which is what I’ve always felt about the game. The game is a mature game in many countries, but it never had the opportunity to grow in many others. People of all walks of life will be inspired to play the game of golf, and play for sports’ highest recognition. For all sports, that has been a gold medal.”

The venue and schedule for both sports in Rio de Janeiro has yet to be decided. The golf tournament will not necessarily be played Thursday through Sunday, bid leader and PGA Tour vice president Ty Votaw said.

“It might be Wednesday to Saturday,” Votaw said. “Or it might be that the women’s competition is first, and the men’s is second. … All of those things need to be worked out over the next seven years.”

British bookmaker William Hill immediately made Woods the favorite in Rio, giving 6-1 odds that he will the gold medal. It gave the same odds for any player from Britain or Ireland winning.

Padraig Harrington and Michelle Wie addressed the IOC in person before the vote. Wie talked about taking up golf when she was 4, but never being able to dream of an Olympic medal until now.

“I can dream about doing something that neither Tiger nor Ernie (Els) have ever done, and that is to make the final putt to win an Olympic gold medal,” Wie said. “If this dream comes true, somewhere in the world there will be another 4-year-old who sees me on that podium and perhaps starts her own Olympic dream.”

Rugby officials touted their sport as a modern game that can attract young fans and new sponsors.

“Rugby and Rio were made for each other. A great atmosphere, great sport and a good time. And I think that’s what the Olympic Games are going to be all about,” said bid leader Mike Miller, the secretary-general of the International Rugby Board.

Golf gave a commitment to the IOC that it would not stage any major championships on the Olympic dates. The Rugby Sevens World Cup will be canceled if the sport is added to the Olympics.

The vote was a reversal of the IOC’s decision four years ago to reject golf and rugby for the 2012 Olympics, and brings the number of summer Olympic sports back to 28. There have been two openings on the program since baseball and softball were dropped in 2005 for the 2012 London Games.

Rugby and golf both made their Olympic debuts at the second modern games in Paris in 1900. Golf was played again only at the 1904 St. Louis Games, and 15-a-side rugby was featured three more times, its last appearance in the 1924 Paris Olympics.

Their status for the 2020 Olympics will be reviewed by the IOC in 2017.

“Time will show your decision (on the sports) was very wise,” said Jacques Rogge, the IOC president who was re-elected to a final four-year term hours earlier. The 67-year-old Belgian, the president since 2001, was the only candidate.

Golf and rugby were put forward by the executive board in August under Rogge’s guidance, at the expense of five other sports that were cut—baseball, softball, squash, karate and roller sports.

The selection process angered some IOC members, who wanted all seven sports put to a vote by the entire assembly. Senior Canadian member Dick Pound complained before the vote that the members were never told why the two sports were selected over the other five.

“It is not fair to the other five sports,” Pound said. “Because you decided the way you did, it is not a transparent process.”

The new selection system was put in place after the IOC failed to agree on which two sports should be added to the 2012 program, leaving the London Games with 26 sports instead of the usual 28. A similar failure this time would have been a blow to Rogge and the executive board.

As expected, golf faced more opposition than rugby. It also faced tougher questioning from IOC members, about the high cost of playing the sport, its accessibility in developing countries and the fact that some top clubs don’t admit women members.

“There are some serious problems with some clubs where major events are held, in terms of discrimination,” American member Anita DeFrantz said. She urged the IOC to “avoid going down a road that may be harmful to our image.”

Associated Press Writer Jan M. Olsen contributed to this report.

So stoked for the rugby, kinda over the golf though (because to me and I think many olympics will never be the pynical of golf)

I don't know why they're bothering with golf. Rugby I can see, but not golf. It's a shame karate didn't get in--I'm not an enthusiast, but at least it's a skill and not something they throw in so that pros can scoop up all the medals. Maybe they could squeeze it in by getting rid of the perky blonds spinning a ribbon on a stick. That is NOT A SPORT!

President Zuma is here in Brazil, and the news told he discussed with President Lula about Rio´s bid success so He can do the same for SA for 2020!!

Very interesting. I don't think our local media has covered that yet. Thanks, TEBC. Some of us are hoping either Cape Town or Durban is put forward as SA's bid city for 2020 or 2024.

Maybe they could squeeze it in by getting rid of the perky blonds spinning a ribbon on a stick. That is NOT A SPORT!

Yeah but its a good event!

Hiroshima, Nagasaki in joint bid for 2020 Games
(AFP)

TOKYO — The Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki said Sunday they were considering bidding for the 2020 Summer Olympics in tandem with a campaign to promote a nuclear-free world.

The two cities, which were rebuilt from the devastation of US atomic bombings in the closing days of World War II, said they would set up a committee to study the possibility of a joint bid.

Hiroshima mayor Tadatoshi Akiba, an advocate of nuclear disarmament who has called for the world to be free of atomic weapons by 2020, has previously said he wants the city to host the Olympics in the name of world peace.

"We are aiming for the abolition of nuclear weapons in 2020. If we are engaged in Olympic bidding activities in parallel, it is expected to produce a synergetic effect," Akiba told a news conference in Hiroshima.

"The Olympics started as a festival of peace in the first place. In this sense, too, our bid will be appropriate."

Nagasaki mayor Tomihisa Taue said last week's surprise award of the Nobel Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama, for his advocacy of a nuclear-free world, had "accelerated the trend toward the abolition of nuclear arms."

"If we can co-host the Olympics, it will send a message to help bring about peace," Taue said.

Nine days ago, Tokyo along with Chicago and Madrid failed in their bids to host the 2016 Summer Olympics, losing out to Rio de Janeiro. Tokyo has yet to decide whether it will bid for the 2020 Games.

Tokyo said it had spent 15 billion yen (169 million dollars) in its bidding activities. It had emphasised its plan to stage compact and "green" Olympics by reducing carbon emissions from Games-related projects and operations.

While the International Olympic Committee's rules state that in principle only one city can host the Olympics, there have been exceptions, such as the 2008 Beijing Summer Games, when Hong Kong staged equestrian events.

Hiroshima, which hosted the 1994 Asian Games, and Nagasaki are around 300 kilometres (190 miles) apart.

The IOC is due to announce the 2020 host city in 2013.

Japan has already hosted three Olympics -- the 1964 Summer Games in Tokyo as well as the 1972 and 1998 Winter Games in Sapporo and Nagano.

Rome and Venice are reportedly preparing to host the 2020 Summer Olympics. Other cities including Cape Town, Durban, Dubai and Rabat have also been mentioned as possible candidates.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gb8Iw1Jdjt4xkzhiJu8mCH7HeI-g

Seems as if Oz and Kenya may also be considering bids for the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

----------------

Queensland Premier meets with officials over $1 billion Commonwealth Games bid
Saturday, 10 October 2009

By Duncan Mackay

October 10 - Queensland Premier Anna Bligh has met with officials in India about the Gold Coast's proposed A$1 billion (£570 million) bid to host the Commonwealth Games in 2018.

Bligh attended New Delhi, where the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) is preparing for its Assembly, while in the Indian capital as part of an overseas trade mission.

Bligh says preliminary plans have been made for a Gold Coast bid, but a final decision will not be made until early next year.

She said: "We've had a very positive reaction but there's a lot of stiff competition.

"New Zealand's very keen about Auckland and we do expect to see Nigeria bid so we're going away with a lot of information and we've had a warm welcome."

Nigeria is expected to put forward Abuja, its capital beaten by Glasgow for the right to host the 2014 Commonwealth Games, while other bidders could come from Nairobi in Kenya and Durban in South Africa.

Bligh claims hosting the Games on the Gold Coast in 2018 could cost almost A$1 billion (£570 million).

She said: "Making a bid to host the Games is a significant decision for Government and not one that we will take lightly.

"Initial estimates suggest that it could cost around A$970 million (£553 million) over the next decade to prepare for and stage the event, including the cost of building the new infrastructure."

Bligh revealed that the State Government has developed preliminary plans on how the Gold Coast could host the Games, including plans for a new velodrome and Athlete's Village.

She said Queensland's State Parliament the final decision on whether to bid will be made early next year, but the event would bring huge economic benefits.

Bligh said: "It's estimated that more than 30,000 jobs across a range of industries would be generated if the Games go ahead in Queensland.

"Jobs in construction, manufacturing, recreation, cultural and business services and of course, the huge boost the games would deliver to the tourism industry - not just on the [Gold] Coast - but throughout the state."

Perry Crosswhite, the chief executive of the Australian Commonwealth Games Federation (ACGF), said: "The visit of the Premier is to is probably more about a fact-finding mission - just to find out whether there would be support for a bid from the Gold Coast.

"We haven't formally decided to bid and that decision will be made between the the Australian Commonwealth Games Association and the Queensland Government probably in the New Year."

Contact the writer of this story at duncan.mackay@insidethegames.biz


http://insidethegames.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7384:queensland-premier-meets-with-officials-over-1-billion-commonwealth-games-bid&catid=1:latest-news

The above article led me to another. Seems as if a bruising battle is emerging between Brisbane and Auckland for the 2018 Games.

-------------------------

Gold Coast is not withdrawing from 2018 race promises Clarke

September 21 - A Trans-Tasman row has broken out between Auckland and the Gold Coast over the 2018 Commonwealth Games with former 10,000 metres world record holder Ron Clarke (pictured) in the middle of it.

Clarke, now the Mayor of the Gold Coast, is angry at New Zealand claims that the Australian city is dropping its bid for the Games so that Auckland has a better chance of being chosen.

He said: "We've got a better climate and better credentials [than Auckland].

"Somebody wrote to me to say thanks us for pulling out but the Gold Coast will not be stepping aside."

The row has been ignited by John Banks, the Mayor of Auckland, who has claimed that Queensland has told him they will scrap their bid.

But Queensland's acting Premier Paul Lucas has dismissed the claim.

He said: "I couldn't think of a better place in the entire Commonwealth that has the advantage of having top facilities, a combined Gold Coast/Brisbane population almost the same size as New Zealand itself and is a tourism mecca.

"Of course Auckland wants us to withdraw - the Gold Coast is the front-runner.

"I've got news for them - it's a race we intend to win.

"Gold Coast, with a population equal to Tasmania, is the only non-capital city in Australia that has the capacity to host this event.

"Judging by the number of Kiwis on the Gold Coast I think there would be broad support in New Zealand for the Gold Coast Games bid as well."

Premier Anna Bligh is due lead a trade mission from Queensland to India early next month to meet officials from the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) and to formally present their bid.

Other cities expected to bid are Abuja, the Nigerian capital beaten by Glasgow for the right to host the 2014 Commonwealth Games, Nairobi in Kenya and Durban in South Africa.

Bob Gordon, the chairman of the Gold Coast bid, has dismissed the bid from Auckland, who hosted the 1990 Commonwealth Games, because he claims it lacks the facilities needed.

He said: "They've don't have the accommodation.

"What they're going to have to do is lease cruise ships from Europe to go down there.

"Their harbour is a poor imitation of Sydney Harbour."

Banks refused to comment.

http://www.insidethegames.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7087:gold-coast-is-not-withdrawing-from-2018-race-promises-clarke&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=1

hiroshima and nagasaki wont get it ...cuz they are both far apart....

oh well, there go's 2020 with a sympathy vote....

2010 boost for SA's Olympic hopes
13 October 2009
By:
Craig Urquhart

Johannesburg - The decision by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to give Rio de Janeiro the right to host the 31st Olympiad in 2016 has raised South Africa's hopes of hosting the event in 2020.

The 2010 FIFA World Cup and the summer Olympic Games – the two biggest sporting events on the planet – are now to be held in Africa and South America for the first time.

And with Brazil hosting the next edition of the football world cup in 2014, the southern hemisphere has certainly staked its claim for hosting mega-sporting events, reports SouthAfrica.info.

These endorsements also bear testimony to Brazil and South Africa's growing stature in the international arena, and have raised the hopes of hundreds of millions of people who desperately need the cash injection that these events provide.

There are other interesting parallels between the two countries. Firstly, Rio twice previously failed to make the IOC shortlist for earlier Olympics, while Cape Town failed in its bid to host the event in 2004.

With hindsight, South Africans can be grateful that the country lost out on that bid, because it may have drained the cash reserves needed to back a second major sporting event.

Similarly, South Africa was fortunate to lose the rights to host the 2006 World Cup to Germany (by the narrowest margin in Fifa's history) because the country would never have been ready to stage the tournament in time.

Looking forward, South Africa's chances of hosting the 2020 Olympics will depend on next year's world cup, but there is a growing consensus that it will be a safe and successful event.

Three cities – Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg – would all be in the running, largely thanks to the new world-class stadiums and facilities that are nearing completion.

However, Durban is emerging as the front-runner among the three, because it has incorporated its Olympic plans into its 2010 preparations. Like Melbourne, city planners aim to turn Durban into a sporting mecca, with the Olympic Games the ultimate target.

The new Moses Mabhida stadium – framed by an extraordinary arch – will have capacity for 70 000 for the world cup but can be expanded to 85 000 for events like the Olympics or the Commonwealth Games.

Over the next few years, the port city will become one of the few cities in Africa where most of the main Olympic sporting codes can be played in a centrally located, international standard destination.

In addition, the city has already secured the rights to host the 2011 congress of the International Olympic Committee, the first to be held in Africa.

"There is this perception that the world ends after 2010, but we have never ever seen that," says Julie-May Ellingson, who heads the city's 2010 project. "Going right back to 2004, we spoke of 2010 and beyond."

Irrespective of whether South Africa will host the Olympic Games, the 2010 FIFA World Cup has given it the opportunity to stake a serious claim. - BuaNews
source : http://www.sa2010.gov.za/en/node/2524

...

^^ I appreciate your effort and thought that went into answering question 1... but what can make it stand out over and above JNB and CPT in the race to host? I'm mostly seeing a list of events held at the ICC. We could do the same for Sandton or CTICC. Plus, known songs or persons are not going to win it for Durbs, Oprah and Obama couldn't do it for Chicago. We need to find that "Durban edge."

I really think Durbs is on the rise, I'm worried it's too early yet... that after WC2010 catapults Durbs slowly into the global limelight and it has 10 years to get its name out there, then Durbs will be ready. But reality is: Urban SA to foreigners is still mostly JNB and CPT; it's seen in where international broadcasters are basing themselves for 2010. It would be great for SA to have 2 globally recognised coastal cities; I'm just using the logic that Durban is where CT was 12 years ago. A place with potential, on the rise, but somewhat unknown. That putting the bid in Durban's hands, may just be like it being put back in CT's hands in 1997: A good showing, a good bid, but not enough to win.

If Durban is to have the bid and Cape Town not considered, I would advise 2024/28, to give Durbs a decade to rack up its global standing. Let the marketing gurus of KZN do their work, get the CBD sorted out and integrated, let KSIA, ICC and even WC-marketing do its magic for a while. And to put the "global rotation" issues surrounding Rio to rest in 2020.

The other worry I have... good governance to pull it off???! With you guys constantly slating your own council, makes me wonder if they have the know how and city's best interest at heart to pull off an Olympics mostly on their own.

Not trying to hammer somewhere or glorify somewhere else. I'm just trying to determine which year's bid and which city would have the best chance of winning the games for South Africa.

As a south african I have never been to Durban :nuts:!! I had Durban friends who came out to CT, but never got to vist them :) I mean, Besides its warm waters, what else is there of interest? The city is hardly advertised or promoted. In all honesty, I get my Durban updates from this site! Before, I had no idea what Durban looks like. Now, how much more ignorant -by no fault of their own- must foreigners be?
I have previously stated that I would like to see Durbs gets the Games, but then it should do a hell of a lot more to sell itself. Just do a quick study on this forum: Put up an international poll to find out how many forumers have heard or have some knowledge on Durban? That should give us an indication of Durban's popularity or importance.

As a south african I have never been to Durban :nuts:!! I had Durban friends who came out to CT, but never got to vist them :) I mean, Besides its warm waters, what else is there of interest? The city is hardly advertised or promoted. In all honesty, I get my Durban updates from this site! Before, I had no idea what Durban looks like. Now, how much more ignorant -by no fault of their own- must foreigners be?
I have previously stated that I would like to see Durbs gets the Games, but then it should do a hell of a lot more to sell itself. Just do a quick study on this forum: Put up an international poll to find out how many forumers have heard or have some knowledge on Durban? That should give us an indication of Durban's popularity or importance.

It's a pity that you have never been to Durban. It has lots to offer: mountains, hills, valleys, dramatic gorges, waterfalls, beaches, wildlife, etc. All within city boundries. Then there's the wealth of architecture (African, eastern, Art Deco, modern western, Edwardian, Victorian, Tudor, etc). Then there's the culture: African, eastern (Hindu and Islamic, and growing Chinese), western.

Please remember that while you may not have visited, and as you are seemingly unaware, Durban dominates in the domestic tourism stakes. BY FAR. In fact, overall (combined domestic and international), Durban is SA's top tourist destination, attracting significantly more tourists than CT. That said, the city certainly doesn't promote itself well internationally. As such, more foreigners will not have heard of it, than the other way around. However, please note: the fact that less foreigners know about it (vs. CT, for example) is not a measure of its "popularity or importance".

Re: popularity, as I pointed out, Durban is a *far* more popular overall tourist destination than any other place in SA (Kruger Park and CT included), as verified annually by tourism stats. Let's not confuse popularity with foreigner's knowledge of. If more international tourists actually knew about the city's varied attractions, it would probably be higher in the minds of the international community. And that again is an issue that city authorities will have to tackle.

Re: importance - Durbs is far more important to SA's economy than any other city in SA, JHB and CT included. Bear in mind that more than 65% of SA's imports (and a huge percentage of its exports too) go through its harbour. Let's not forget that most of SA's oil is also refined in Durbs (after Cairo, Durban is Africa's biggest oil refiner). Moreover, Durban is the country's 2nd biggest industrial basin, after JHB. In short, if Durban had to suddenly drop off the face of the earth, SA will be crippled. In fact, most of southern Africa will be crippled (since most of the imports of Botswana, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Malawi go through Durban's ports; accordingly, without Durban, most of those countries will be crippled too). Can any other SA city lay claim to the same, to the same degree?

Given the above, I think you are either ignorant of the city's popularity and importance, or are using faulty indicators (preception of popularity and importance) as your markers.

^^ I understand a lot of your points and all are true. But, what type of domestic tourists are they attracting? I had some extremely disturbing news from people that stayed on our wine estate last night. People who are born and bred Natalites, live in Mount Edgecombe and have many good things to say about the beauty, the countryside and vistas that KZN has to offer, but very little good to say about the city itself. I asked them as proud people from Durban, about the city, the stadium, KSIA, the tourism potential...

Their response...

KZN as a province is stunning (been there many times, I know), KSIA is looking impressive and are excited, although they're a little hesitant about the noise-factor, the stadium is stunning... but they said... Durban Metro, the city is the northern suburbs and Umhlanga... when it comes to Durban proper, they're not comfortable being anywhere near the CBD, Beachfront and surrounds. They said (and I repeat, it's them, not me saying this), the city is not safe, clean, well-kept or ready for upmarket people to call it a glorious place. Many buildings are derelict, people are dodgy and city management is deplorable.

First comment on Cape Town... everything is clean, well-kept, well managed, roads are fixed, buildings are renovated, police are visible and anywhere near the CBD seems safe to step out from your car, no matter what you're wearing, what camera you're carrying or where you're from.

This... is not what I see as an Olympic city and I repeat, Durban has potential, Durban is Cape Town a decade ago, but it does not seem to be the "bid winner" for SA just yet. Get rid of Mike-the-Terrible, fix up the city-proper, get the international marketing going crazy after 2010, then, bid for 2024/28.

Cape Town could win the bid immediately, Durban can win the bid with a decade of good urban-planning/administration and marketing work. Durban is not ready! These are not my words, these are born-and-bred Durbanites, laymen Durbanites whose family lives overseas, but who still live here. (So, it's not like they're the negative brand of Saffer that leave SA for dumb reasons) If SA wants a Durban Olympics and not a Capetonian one, starting the bid now is too soon.

And that was the word from the Durbanites, this is my own:

Durban's argument: We attract the most local tourist arrivals, but let's look at the Olympics, who are we attracting, locals or the world? Durban is attracting domestic tourism; but upmarket tourism, from Gauteng and overseas too, belongs to the Western Cape and Balito, Umhlanga, game reserves and the like.

If this was the Umhlanga, LaLucia, Balito Olympics, no problem, all for it... but it is a bid for the city of Durban. When Capetonians are uneasy going into central Durban, as my parents were during the Good Food and Wine Show at the ICC, I'm worried about the internationals. Will they be at unease, or will they be at naive-ease where they're seen as targets. That I don't know? Cape Town is ready and well-versed when it comes to welcoming the world to their city (specifically the CBD and surrounds) and doing it in a way that puts them at ease, makes them feel safe and allows them to be in a holiday mood without too much worry. They have a city that is well run and managed (after my travels around SA numerous times, it will be very hard convincing me another Metro in SA is as well governed as Cape Town is now).

I want a city to bid that wins it for South Africa, not just a city that bids for pride. I ask the question... Which city can win it for SA if the bid was put in this year, which city can make foreign tourists feel comfortable and which city is managed well and governed with competence? They can bid for 2020.

Else, fix things in other SA urban centres and aim for 2024/28.

This... is not what I see as an Olympic city and I repeat, Durban has potential, Durban is Cape Town a decade ago, but it does not seem to be the "bid winner" for SA just yet. Get rid of Mike-the-Terrible, fix up the city-proper, get the international marketing going crazy after 2010, then, bid for 2024/28.

To me Durban at the momet really does feel like Cape Town before the Cape Town partnership and CID's really got going (aswell as other things) its in that stage where if they play there cards right it will be great but its not there yet.

To me Durban at the momet really does feel like Cape Town before the Cape Town partnership and CID's really got going (aswell as other things) its in that stage where if they play there cards right it will be great but its not there yet.

That's my point! :) Durban ain't bad, Durban has what it takes, it's just... Not there yet. The Cape Town Partnership formed in 1998, and it took 11 years for our city to get where it is now. Durban must take the time, initiative and steps to counteract the negative and become a global player... then the Olympics can and will be theirs. Forget the city pride and do the ground work and hard graft before you claim a prize that has major implications for both your city, your civic pride and our country.

Annman, I can't comment on the views of your Durban friends or what they apparently said. However, overall, you made good and relevant points.

I also believe 2024 is a better goal. However, no developing world city wins the Olympics on its first attempt. If SA chooses Durban as its bid city, Durban should bid for 2020 to get global attention during the bidding process and to gain experience for a more serious 2024 bid, which I think it will likely get given the same factors that apply to South America (never hosted before) apply to Africa. The infrastructure in Durban for such a bid is there or will be in place by then.

Re: turning around Durban's CBD - its size (much bigger than CT's), history (historically white and non-white sections, with the latter historically in better condition) and demographics (previously largely middle-class white and Indian; now predominantly low, upper-low and low-middle income black, with pockets of upper-low and low-middle income Indians [in Grey Street vacinity] and low-middle and middle income whites [Vic Embankment, beachfront]) will present more challenges than CT's CBD re: turning the CBD around.

Aside from the Golden Mile (which forms the fringe of the CBD), the affluent and upper-middle class never really lived in the Durban city centre and are unlikely to ever do so. The Point Waterfront is changing that but it's a tiny area compared to the rest of the downtown. As such, the demographics of the Durban CBD will likely always be upper-low income and low middle-income (both of which have lower GDP per capita compared to the average CT downtown resident (who is of recent years increasingly from the middle and low-upper income brackets). This demographic affects maintenance of buildings and investments in the CBD. If the middle income and affluent don't want to move to the core CBD (in Durban there are so many options: Berea, West, North. Why then move to the CBD when you can afford better places in the aforementioned areas?), then sophisticated developments and upkeep / maintenance of building in CBD will be lower (the lower the income group, the higher the chances of levy defaults, which affects maintenance). CT doesnt have this challenge. Because of geographic constraints, there are less development options in CT vs Durbs, and thus the middle-class and upper-middle class in CT will consider the CT CBD as an accommodation option. Add to that the smaller size of the core CBD (which is easier to police), historical factors (no dedicated non-white areas in CT CBD, to my knowledge, which resulted in relatively higher income groups (vs Durbs) historically always living in the downtown buildings, equating to better maintained buildings), and the end result is that the CT CBD is in better shape than the Durbs CBD. This will probably always be the case. There is only so much the municipality can do to change this state of affairs.

That said, the Durban downtown is certainly not a write-off like parts of the JHB downtown and it still remains a very popular destination for locals (approx 400,000 people visit the Durban downtown a day). I believe that if Durban is chosen as SA's Olympic bid city, it will spur the city to do a lot more than its currently doing now, as it will be in the spotlight like never before, and it will likely also spur confidence and investor interest, which will hopefully have a spill-on effect, catalysing the refurbishment of the downtown.

Thus, in short, I don't think Durban's CBD is, or should be, a major hinderance to it hosting any major event. Moreover, I think that being given the opportunity to host a major event will actually be good for the city's downtown as it will spur confidence and investment there.

^^ Very good point... deadlines for cities make for added expenditure, development and overall beautification of the city. We see it all over SA with 2010. What I was just wondering though is are we bidding to try to win it, or are we bidding to gain additional exposure? I think you've answered the question, in that case... very good for Durbs and a much needed boost; pity for SA not "actually realistically aiming" for the 2020 games.

2020 Olympic vision fuels new bid dreams in Italy, Africa and Japan

KEIR RADNEDGE / Sports Features Communications

LONDON: The 2020 Olympic Games are threatening to prove the most popular in the movement’s history – at least as far as bidding interest is concerned. The high visibility of the 2016 process which saw Rio de Janeiro outbid Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo has whetted enthusiasm elsewhere around the world.

Further encouragement to more imaginative bidders has been generated by the International Olympic Committee’s opening of the door to innovation by heading to South America for the first time.

Madrid’s repeated failure has encouraged interest among various Italian cities in bringing the Games back to Europe, Japanese enthusiasm has not been eradicated by Tokyo’s failure and South Africa wants to build on the momentum created by next year’s hosting of football’s World Cup.

Within a week of the Copenhagen vote for Rio, Italian interest had been expressed by city and regional politicians and officials in both Rome and Venice. Now Filippo Grassia, president of the Olympic committee of Milan, has proposed his city.

Grassia said: “The hosting of Expo 2015 will provide significant infrastructure and we would still have five years to sort out whatever else would be needed.” Grassia would need, however, to work hard on persuasion since opponents to the proposal include the city’s sport and recreation director Alan Rizzi.

Jordaan message

South African interest in an eventual Olympic bid has been expressed at various times by Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg. Danny Jordaan, chief executive of the 2010 World Cup, offered encouragement after a meeting in New York with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

The IOC's 2011 session will be held in Durban, and Jordaan believes that could serve as a springboard. He said: “The IOC decided to give South America its first Olympics so the only continent now without an Olympics is Africa and therefore I think it's something that the IOC certainly will have to begin to think about."

The latest Japanese considerations have come from the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the two cities obliterated by atomic bombs at the end of the second world war. The two mayors have been encouraged by the political message emanating from the admission of the IOC to observer status at the United Nations earlier this week.

Tadatoshi Akiba of Hiroshima and Tomihisa Taue of Nagasaki have said they believe a unique joint hosting of the summer Games in their cities would complement perfectly the IOC’s wish to champion its values in the creation of a peaceful society - as well as move world opinion toward the abolition of nuclear weapons.

The Olympic Charter states that only one city can host the Olympics but the mayors believe this can be overcome through the practical impossibility – wherever the Games are officially hosted – of staging every event - sailing as one example - within the designated city locality.


http://www.sportsfeatures.com/index.php?section=olympic-article-view&title=2020+Olympic+vision+fuels+new+bid+dreams+in+Italy%2C+Africa+and+Japan&id=46098

South African World Cup Chief Weighs in on 2020 Olympic Bid

The top official for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa says a successful tournament could set up a great opportunity for Africa to get the Olympics for the first time.

Danny Jordaan, CEO for the 2010 World Cup, told the Associated Press in New York, that he can see Johannesburg, Cape Town or Durban bidding biding for the 2020 Games.

He made the comments after meeting with UN Secretary General Ban-ki Moon.

Jordaan said “the IOC decided to give South America its first Olympics, so the only continent now without an Olympics is the African continent, and therefore I think it’s something that the IOC certainly will have to begin to think about.”

The old concerns about Africa hosting multi-sport events would lead to huge deficits were proven wrong when FIFA said it expects record revenues from the South Africa World Cup.

"The argument was that any World Cup on the African continent will lead to huge financial losses. Therefore, Africa must wait," Jordaan said. "If we dismiss the argument for the World Cup, we've dismissed it also for the Olympics."

Predictions say more than $3 billion in revenue will be generated from the 2010 World Cup.

Jordaan added the secretary general “must” come to the World Cup next year.

Former IOC president Juan Antonio Samaranch returned to work this week. (ATR/Panasonic:Lumix) "He must not only come to the continent when there is war, when he wants to talk about Darfur," he said. "He must come to Africa when Africa celebrates, when Africa excels. When there is good news he must always be there."


http://www.aroundtherings.com/articles/view.aspx?id=33549

World Cup will help African Olympic bid claims Jordaan
Wednesday, 21 October 2009

By Duncan Mackay

October 22 - A successful World Cup in South Africa next year will provide the impetus for the continent to host the Olympics for the first time, the chief executive of next year's tournament has claimed.

Danny Jordaan added his voice to the growing call for the world's biggest to be taken to Africa by the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

He said: "The IOC decided to give South America its first Olympics, so the only continent now without an Olympics is the African continent, and therefore I think it's something that the IOC certainly will have to begin to think about."

Durban have already began investigating the possibility of launching a bid for the 2020 Olympics while Jordaan also said he believes that Cairo could stage the Games.

The IOC voted earlier this month to award the 2016 Olympics to Rio de Janeiro.

Since the end of apartheid and the first elections with universal suffrage in 1994, South Africa hosted the Rugby World Cup in 1995 and soccer's African Cup of Nations the following year, and it co-hosted the Cricket World Cup in 2003.

Next year's World Cup is soccer's first in Africa.

FIFA is projecting record revenue for the 2010 World Cup, with Jordaan claiming partners will generate $3.2 billion (£1.9 billion).

He said: "The argument was that any World Cup on the African continent will lead to huge financial losses.

"Therefore, Africa must wait.

"This event, because of television, is actually without boundaries and without borders.

"And so you can return the value of the investment in New York and Miami and London and Paris, and all over the world.

"If we dismiss the argument for the World Cup, we've dismissed it also for the Olympics."


http://insidethegames.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7604:world-cup-could-open-door-to-african-olympic-bid-claims-jordaan&catid=1:latest-news

I seriously do not see our country getting the games before the 2028 or 2032. Hec5. I dont even care. I do however find it funny that people believe our cities are ready, they are whoefully short. To say that cape town is ready is naive to the extreme. Both durban and cape town are miles away from a win, probably equally far, just for different reasons.

Well Rio got it, and its not that different from CPT