A recent Worth Magazine article ("Fool's Gold," 3/1/08) asserted that at a whopping $34 billion, this summer's Olympics in Beijing "are going to be the most expensive games in history." To put this in perspective, the most recent Olympic Games just four years ago in Athens -- with its massive cost overruns and security expense -- carried a then-hefty price tag of $8 billion, while the last summer games in the U.S. (Atlanta in 1996), came in at a mere $1.8 billion. Of course, the paradigm shift attributable to the events of 9/11 has driven some of the budget inflation, such that the security line item alone for the 2004 Athens Olympics was pegged at $1.5 billion. But with the uncertain economic return on investment, why is it that Beijing in 2008 and other cities at other times trip over themselves to pay exorbitant sums for the "privilege" of hosting an Olympics or even a World Cup?
Articles-->
http://www.worth.com/Editorial/Thought-Leaders/Politics-Policy/World-Marketplace-Fools-Gold-Print.asp
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121614671139755287.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hey Prof. Hamakawa,
The return on investment will prove itself over the long run, as China opens the floodgate and awakens it's still slumbering (from the western perspective) economic might borne from the exposure gained from the "privilege" of hosting the games.
Post a Comment