Speaking of the Olympics....

So Chicago is up for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Mayor Daley and crew went over to China on a "fact finding" mission to watch the games, and I'm sure as they were watching the opening ceremony the words "Holy Crap, how can we top this" went floating through their minds.

As I'm sure it flitted through the minds of every candidate city and city already chosen, and rightfully so - there's no way most democracies that operate under the direct scrutiny of the media, taxpayers and politicians and spend the $40 billion China spent on the games.

London is all "WTF" and "[We] don't think in terms of living up to (Beijing) or making direct comparisons." They've had to deal with a significant downturn in the global economy and cost overruns on the overall US $17.2 billion budget for Olympic venues and infrastructure. (To read a hilarious column with some ideas for how London can save money by recruiting free dancers by gathering participants from the clinically obese community via a quick trawl of the fast food restaurants, providing an "an unbeatable opportunity for the active participation of one of our core sponsors, McDonald's!" go here.)




Chicago's plans include more than a dozen new permanent and temporary venues and money to make existing venues Olympic caliber at an estimated cost of $900 million. There's also a $1 billion athletes' village that would be a public-private partnership.

Yeeeeeaaaaaa. I don't think I need to tell you that these numbers are causing a bit of... disbelief. But that's not the point of

This Blog Post!

I want to show the four different host cities up for the 2016 Olympics and have a discussion about their chances for winning!

And I thought the best way to do that was to look at their ready-made Bid Videos!

Enough with the Exclamations. We're starting with Madrid:







Um, so, doesn't Madrid seem a little weirdly obsessed with cars and mopeds? Actually, forms of transportation in general? And they spent an odd amount of time in an Olympic Video on their airport. Maybe they're very proud of it, I don't know. (Psst, hey Madrid, Chicago has an airport, too! Actually, we got two. Suck it!)






Rio's is just odd in all that Sepia tones... I couldn't quite figure out if it was my screen, or air pollution... and I do think it is so hilarious how they show the Rolling Stones - as if them hosting a concert is a viable reason to give them the games. It does look like a really pretty location though, I'm not going to lie.


As for Tokyo, I can't for the life of me find their video on You Tube, and I can't even get their videos from their website to play on my computer... they've got these weird commercials that are 15 seconds long that are obviously made to drum up support in the population...




Or, at least I think that's what they are. Here's their website, if anyone's interested: http://www.tokyo2016.or.jp/en/


And now, on to my hometown, Chicago. For your approval or disapproval:



Actually, Chicago had to put out a second video because... well, we had to change our logo. You see, it's not exactly kosher to use the Olympic Torch in a logo, apparently. So we changed our logo, and then the Olympic Committee got Chicago kids to explain what it means...




So what do we think? Which city has what it takes? Well, according to some other people that are not me:

"[The] IOC member called Chicago a "“hot favourite” to win the 2016 Summer Games and said only they can mess it up. He said “they are streets ahead of their rivals. They have been the frontrunners since day one and nothing has as yet changed my mind that they can lose. However, as the saying goes ‘it is theirs to lose’”.

And Chicago is the current favorite at $43 according to Intrade, an online trading exchange and prediction market website whose members speculate on the outcomes of non-sports related future events:





The "Dark Horse" in his race is Rio, and for a good reason - South America has never hosted the games so, you know, they kinda deserve to host it after 150 years of games. Intrade has them at $23.


I believe in the power of markets to predict some events. To a degree. Markets are like... competitive wikipedia. Playing the wisdom off other people's wisdom. Or other people's stupidity. Or inside trading. Whatever.

You know what else Intrade trades on? Elections. And those bets should be watched more keenly then the bets on the Olympics, because apparently the decision might be more about who is running the candidate city's country.

The whole thing will "boil down to one thing should the two frontrunners be neck and neck – the head of state of the country... " says an unnamed IOC source. Gamesbid.com says that "It is believed that British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Russian President Vladimir Putin played a big role in their countries winning the 2012 and 2016 Olympic Games."


Well, we got two leaders to think about, Mayor Daley, who largely gets what he wants, and the President of the United States, as yet to be determined. If Obama gets elected, the Olympics would be, indeed, ours to lose. The timing is too perfect, the location, idealic, and apparently the IOC likes Obama. There's some indication they're not so fond of McCain, so Daley would have to overcome that if Obama were to lose.


I'm not going to lie there's a whole host of other reasons having to do with tv sponsorships and private/public sponsorships, but... really, I think that about covers it. Who knows though - in this world, anything can happen.

The final decision is October 2, 2009. It's a long time off.

In the meantime, it's not a bad idea to show your support for Chicago is you think it's a good idea. Senator Durbin has set up a website to sign a petition and to send video messages directly to the IOC: http://ga3.org/campaign/olympics2016.

And here is the Chicago Olympic website http://www.chicago2016.org/News/Pages/home.aspx. It's fun because it gives you the opportunity to write in phrases of what you think Chicago is....

Like... Chicago is A Rockstar City! Or... Chicago is the Heart of America!

Woot!