Wasserman CEO and LA 2024 co-Chair Casey Wasserman said the Olympics returning to L.A. is "low-risk in every way," as 97% of the venues that would be used in a potential Games "exist today." Wasserman appeared on CNBC this morning and noted there would be the need to build just "one permanent venue" should L.A. land the '24 Games. He noted the Olympic movement is "at a crossroads, and given the struggles that Rio's had -- and it’s been a great Games -- but getting to this point was a struggle.” Wasserman: “L.A. has already invested massively in infrastructure and we're Games ready. We think being Games ready means for seven years -- if we were fortunate enough to win -- we could focus on the experience of the Games as opposed to worrying about constructing and delivering the Games.” CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin noted the Rio Games are costing $12B to put on, and Brazil is "expected to lose" $4.6B on the event. He wondered if there is a way "to make this whole model economically viable.” Wasserman said, “When you have to build things, no. When you have to build an Olympic Village in an urban environment ... that's a large undertaking in any city anywhere. That's a $5-10 billion proposition if you have to build arenas and venues." However, L.A. would use existing dorms at UCLA "to house athletes in world-class facilities." Wasserman: "We're lucky enough to have great venues, and we’ve got a $3.5 billion stadium being privately financed constructed for the L.A. Rams we could use.”
THIRD TIME'S THE CHARM? L.A. is competing with Paris, Rome and Budapest for the '24 Games, and Sorkin noted the U.S. has "lost their last two attempts" -- Chicago ('16) and N.Y. ('12). Sorkin: "President Obama went (to the '16 vote) and still lost. What do you have to do differently?” Wasserman noted Chicago came in last in the vote for the '16 Games, but it "wasn't because the technical plan wasn't as good as Rio." He said, "We have to be humble and earn their trust and respect, because what we're asking IOC members to do is give us their most important asset for seven years. They’re not going to do that for people they don’t like, that they don’t know and they don’t trust." Wasserman has been in Rio during the Games to meet various Olympic officials, and he said, "That's what this process is about being in Rio, that's what the process for the next 12 months is -- getting to know those 90 voters, earning their trust, earning their respect and doing it in a humble way. This is a Euro-centric organization and we need to be respectful of that” ("Squawk Box," CNBC, 8/16).
SHOULD BID EFFORT CHANGE? Sorkin in today's N.Y. TIMES notes a question “has emerged about whether the modern Olympics should continue to crisscross the globe as the multibillion-dollar lottery ticket it has become.” Some have “suggested that the Olympics rotate among four of five permanent locations.” There are also “more complicated ideas, including having a ‘distributed’ Olympics that would take place at the same time in multiple cities, using existing stadiums and avoiding overwhelming any individual city.” Sorkin: “How about simultaneously granting a city the Olympics twice, once now and again 12 years later?” That would allow the host city to “enjoy the economic benefits of the Games twice, effectively bringing in double the revenue and amortizing the infrastructure costs over two events.” It would also force cities to “think long and hard about creating an infrastructure plan for the long term -- one that works not just for the Olympics but also for residents, who will have to live with what is left behind.” Additionally, it would allow emerging cities to “bid competitively on the Games against more established cities that might already have infrastructure in place” (N.Y. TIMES, 8/16).
