|
Not sure what "white elephants" means.
I don't know anything about the Allianz stadium, but are you sure there was no government spending? Sports stadiums in the US are often a joint venture between a franchise and city and other investors. It is a long standing and reoccuring practice, so I would assume it is a relatively safe investment opprotunity.
In this case, most would agree the water cube is far more than your average stadium as well. The Allianz stadium is nice, but it is just something very well done, not anything amazing. The water cube could be a modern marvel, in the class of the Petronas towers.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, its excessive in the sense that a significantly cheaper, yet just as functional stadium would generate marginally less sporting revenue... and Beijing's skies are particularly bad right now since all non-sanctioned construction is to be halted in 2007 to clear up the atmosphere, and thus everybody is trying as hard as possible to get as much construction in right now as possible.
On October 08 2006 11:56 garandou wrote:
[removed quote within quote]
Why do you have a PC? Why do you play video games? Why do you spend money on movies and other entertainment? Why do you eat meat? Why do you go on holiday? All the money you spend for anything other than your primary needs, wouldn't it much better be spent helping the poor?
I am not saying that China doesn't have better things to do than to polish its international image, but your argument is pure hypocrisy, and nothing else.
There's quite a big difference. Yes, I spend money on things I don't need to survive, but it isn't quite as excessive. In addition, it would be my money that I earned. Overall, the benefits provided by a pair of supercool sporting arenas are far outweighed by the price tag. And who's paying for it? The people of course.
|
so you mean we should just cancel the olympics all together right? i don't know how much they spend on it but it is a trivial amount compared with what is needed to combat national poverty areas.
anyway i hope u know the beijing olympic is also funded by sponsors and such JUST like any other olympics in history. and every Olympics makes money. If not immediately then it will in the long term. it will greatly stimulate the local economy.
|
itz a huge waste of money! china is still a underdeveloped country with billions of ppl longing for food and education!!!!!!
on the other hand, the building is awesome lol
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
Hurm,
Seoul is the textbook example of a "good olympics" - the world was focused on Korea, and Korea got to show off how developed and democratized it had become. Money was made, worldwide goodwill was created, we were kickass hosts, and everybody pretty much went home happy (except Ben Johnson)
Beijing hosting the Olympics is different from London or Atlanta hosting the Olympics. The UK or US are established powers, and most of the world expects them to be able to pull off something like the Olympics. It's almost routine. So even though Atlanta hosted a decent Olympics, the lasting images of the '96 games was over-sponsership and the bombing. (Somehow I trust London to do a good job though)
Beijing is pretty much looking at Seoul in '88 and saying "ok we want exactly that." Remember, Seoul in '88 was only 43 years removed from Japanese occupation, only 38 years removed from the Korean war, and like 5 years removed from democratization protesters being shot by the military. Koreans had this incredible group mentality to show how far they've come. And it worked, a major success. China is also working hard to show how far they've come economically and politically. My only worry is that the Chinese government will try too hard and overdo it, (which they tend to do)
That being said, I don't think the building is a waste, I think it's gorgeous. It's actually unfortunate that the '88 Olympics in Seoul were held right at the dying moments of the "ugly concrete bowl" era of stadium design. Back then we all thought that concrete bowls were the hippest thing in sports venue architecture. It would be nice if the Olympic Stadium in Seoul weren't so ugly.
Oh well, we have an incredibly beautiful soccer stadium, yay.
|
Nifty. I don't think it's a waste of money.
It's like "Hey guys come to my house to watch the game on my 20" TV!" or "Hey guys come to my house to watch the game on my 62" High-def plasma TV!".
|
17083 Posts
In regards to the Beijing sky comment, I'd like to say it's not true.
It manages to turn a lovely grey after it rains.
|
its all about face. but again u want to be unique not boring olympics like all the others
|
They should put fish in it.
|
Already done, my friend.
I'd prefer a mutant shark to a gigantic gold fish though.
|
so this is where all those chinese tax dollars are going
|
i think that when beijing 2008 olympics opening.
money is not problem.
|
you guys ranting how much of a waste this money is have no idea about economics and politics.
a) even in hard factors the olympic games will pay off, as posted before.
b) soft factors are much more important (look at germany's gdp growth and business climate ratings from 2005 to 2007; we basicallly run our country off the football wc ^^).
c) such buildings not only draw attention to the event (resulting in point a)) but also serve as landmarks to make the city/country more popular and well known for many many years. i will post some pictures as an example.
d) it is unbelievably important for china to polish it's image as an open country. both for politics and for the economy that is. modern architecture and more importantly, hosting memorable olympic games will accomplish just that.
e) if you want to bring the olympic games to your country you will have to show a damn impressive program with a huge budget to get the vote. there are always many contenders who offer billions to bring the olympic games to their country.
all of these pics show up when you enter a cities name in the google picture search. and all of those buildings are to a great extent responsible for tourism to those cities.
|
the thing is beijing doesn't need any of that kind of building! they already have Greet Wall and the Forbiden City!! isn't that enough??
|
On October 09 2006 07:38 overuoveruoveru wrote:
the thing is beijing doesn't need any of that kind of building! they already have Greet Wall and the Forbiden City!! isn't that enough??
beijjing has the great wall?
the forbidden city is a good point, but it's picture isn't that well known and not that eye-catching. personally i just googled how it looks (of course i've seen it before but didn't memorize it).
|
On October 08 2006 16:53 HonestTea wrote:Hurm, Seoul is the textbook example of a "good olympics" - the world was focused on Korea, and Korea got to show off how developed and democratized it had become. Money was made, worldwide goodwill was created, we were kickass hosts, and everybody pretty much went home happy (except Ben Johnson) Beijing hosting the Olympics is different from London or Atlanta hosting the Olympics. The UK or US are established powers, and most of the world expects them to be able to pull off something like the Olympics. It's almost routine. So even though Atlanta hosted a decent Olympics, the lasting images of the '96 games was over-sponsership and the bombing. (Somehow I trust London to do a good job though) Beijing is pretty much looking at Seoul in '88 and saying "ok we want exactly that." Remember, Seoul in '88 was only 43 years removed from Japanese occupation, only 38 years removed from the Korean war, and like 5 years removed from democratization protesters being shot by the military. Koreans had this incredible group mentality to show how far they've come. And it worked, a major success. China is also working hard to show how far they've come economically and politically. My only worry is that the Chinese government will try too hard and overdo it, (which they tend to do) That being said, I don't think the building is a waste, I think it's gorgeous. It's actually unfortunate that the '88 Olympics in Seoul were held right at the dying moments of the " ugly concrete bowl" era of stadium design. Back then we all thought that concrete bowls were the hippest thing in sports venue architecture. It would be nice if the Olympic Stadium in Seoul weren't so ugly. Oh well, we have an incredibly beautiful soccer stadium, yay.
I think that post pretty much sums it all up perfectly...
FOR DA MOTHERLAND!!! (at least until I get my US citizenship sometime next year)
|
The difference between the water cube being a landmark and the Forbidden City is the water cube is modern, so it adds a different effect to peoples impression of the city. There are many with a good opinion of China's history, but don't think positively about it in modern times.
|
There's quite a big difference. Yes, I spend money on things I don't need to survive, but it isn't quite as excessive. In addition, it would be my money that I earned. Overall, the benefits provided by a pair of supercool sporting arenas are far outweighed by the price tag. And who's paying for it? The people of course.
wth you're saying?
so in the first place, why we have olympics or world cup?? even a shitty stadium would cost 600000kg of food, so?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5d/Watercube.jpg/300px-Watercube.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://k41.pbase.com/v3/07/12907/1/45934176.new_york_skyline.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.dubai-burjalarab.de/burjalarab01.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.fliegab.de/bilder/sidney.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.iup.fr/IMG/jpg/France_Paris_Eiffel_Tower_2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://glz-recklinghausen.de/Fotobild-Hauptverein-Ausflug-Bruessel4.jpg)
