Afam4eva:
So what if it's the capital. Glasgow is the Lagos of Scotland and not even Edinburgh. That a city is a capital does not mean it's better than another city that's not a capital. You have to do away with that Nigerian mentality. Do you know that Chicago is the 3rd or 4th most important US city? How can you compare those Scottish and Welsh cities with Miami or Boston or Melbourne. These cities are global cities.

Symphony007: no need to argue too much.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other-sports/olympics-2012/4618507.stm

note the first reason.

Afam4eva:
We're saying the same thing. I said London won because they presented a better case but i'm not aware of the details and it could be what you asserted.

Btw, your link is broken.

Symphony007: what nigerian mentality? We are talking of wealth and capacity to host and olympics. And the fact is non of the city you mentioned are as rich as edinburgh. Aberdeen according to wikipedia is the richest city in the world by GDP. So drop that arguement.

Symphony007: a good thing you've conceded. London won because the team that presented it's bid worked overtime not because it was somehow better than manchester.

Sorry for the link but at least you got the point.

Afam4eva:
It's a correlation of different factors. What worked for London in addition to the city being one of the greatest in the world is what you alluded to. That does not mean that Abakaliki will beat New York or Los Angeles if it presents a good case. You must have the infrastructure first and foremost before anything and the cities that contested this time around all had that and it now came to something very vital that made Tokyo win it.

Symphony007: good. It's a combination of different factors so manchester lost both it's bid because it did'nt present a good case but it had the infastructure.

Afam4eva:
You were of the opinion that since Edinburgh and Cardiff are capital ciities that they are better than those other cities that i listed...Aberdeen has the highest GDP in the world? Like seriously? I think you got your information here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP and if you had played a close attention, you would have noticed that cities around the world were listed in an alphabetical order and Aberden came first followed by Abidjan. Does Abidjan have the second highest GDP in the world?

MacLovington:


Ada, Hapi beffday!

No candlelight dinner with Mazi Afam? e-dinner thinz.

We're going to Paris

Symphony007: i was not under the impression that the fact they are capital cities make them better or more capable at hosting. I based my belief on the fact that they are both rich and infastructurally stable cities.

Afam4eva:
It didn't have a better infrastructure than it's competitors. Manchester is just an above average city by every indices.

Afam4eva:
And you made mention of Aberdeen having the largest GDP in the world and that is laughable. Aberdeen doesn't even come close to the top 50 while those cities i listed are somewhere in the top 20.

Symphony007: where in my post did i argue that manchester has better infastructure than the other cities? I only said they had the infastructure and capabilities but could'nt make the case why they should be awarded.

Afam4eva:
You didn't say so but i'm saying maybe the fact that they didn't have as much infrastructure as other cities marred their bid somehow. I think cities like Manchester should stick with hosting events like the commonwealth games or the "All European Games" if there's any compeition like that. Olympics is for the bigger boys and most cities that win the bid are either mega or global cities.

Symphony007: i totally disgree with that premise. What makes them less capable of hosting an olympic? Manchester and rio which has better infastructure, lower crime rate.etc..

Ola one:
Haaa, memories?
You're probably 9 years old in 2005 na.

Too young for memories jare

Symphony007: spain is bankrupt, even if madrid won, the citizens will revolt and demand it be taken back...in a country with over 20% unemployment, spending money on olympics is the last thing on their mind.

Afam4eva:
Rio does. Pls don't because brazil an emerging economy and that just any city in a developed country can trounce it. Rio is ranked 31st in the list of cities with highest GDP while Manchester is nowhere to be found. I'm not saying Manchester is not capable of hosting, all i'm saying is, if they ever get awarded with the right then it can best be described as a miracle.

Symphony007: there will be nothing miraculous about manchester winning the bid. For one, they won't be spending so much money on new infastructure, transport network. Hotels, and even security. Like rio is doing. It will be a walk over. Is it not funny that it is now that rio is spending over a billion dollars on CCTV camera's, police cars and command centers yet the IOC is still worried about security. All these aminities are on ground in manchester and money will only be spent of essential which won't cost a fortune and drive protestors into the streets like rio.

Afam4eva:
The first Olympic of this century was hosted by Sydney in Australia and not Athen, Greece.

Reference:

They took it away from Athens very early on due to their slack preparations. Sydney did not have the first call. But there are certain countries that are always prepared to step in at short notice when others fail due to their experience, expertise, infrastructure and strong economy. America, Australia, Korea and now China can host any event at short notice just like South Africa is often used as an alternative host for pan african sporting events.

Afam4eva:
Even London spent about $14.46 billion, how much more Manchester. Does Manchester now have more Infrastructure than London? Meanwhile, Rio has almost the same budget as London, so i don't get what you're saying.

Symphony007: bear in mind that that was'nt london's initial budget but at the end it skyrocketed to this. The reason why london spent so much despite it's infastructure is because the olympic village was built at the outskirts of london, east london to be particular, a barren land. So it had to be built from scratch and tube lines connected there, it won't be same if manchester hosted because it has no barren lands. The stadium will be built in the city center and new tube lines would not be needed.

Brazil has not finished a the olympic stadium but they are already hitting their budget, yet they still have to spen more money on transport, security, demolishing pavillars and compensating residents. Etc...let's watch and see.

SIR KOL!:
2020?? End time tins!!!

Afam4eva:
So, how much did London use in the construction of olympic village? I don't think it took a large chunk of their budget. It seems Manchester may even have to spend more than London and Rio because most of their sports facilities are below par for the Olympics. They shouldn't think of using someof the sports arenas that they used for the commonwealth games. The olympics is a different ball game.

cowleg: WONDERFULL TOKYO, LETS EXPECT SOME MAGICAL THINGS BUTTTTTTTTTTT HOW MANY OF US WILL STAY ALIVE TILL THEN??

spongeback: But it's almost end time

adaobi123:


We're going to Paris