Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Ban on cameras at the Olympics
From: jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 20:08:26 +0530
References: <BCFC75C0-6BEB-4BCD-AE52-C1C962F14558@me.com> <dfc6d4cc19cbaff85542379461c2ac04.squirrel@webmail.frozenlight.eu> <CAE3QcF4y4ACNc6GXrXGntOKhCTx90LwTbuRPAQKg26mTbNbE8Q@mail.gmail.com>

Geoff,
What would you think would have been the impact if the same amount of
money was spent on the same city on more urgent social/infrastructure
projects rather than stuff like stadiums and dwellings for the
athletes? I agree that some parts of the infrastructure spend help a
lot (roads, telecommunications, public transport, etc), dwellings can
always be sold off to the well-to-do, but a large proportion of the
money spent is an utter waste, especially the stadiums, which probably
get used 15 -20 days a year - some, especially those for the more
esoteric and niche sports, probably get used even less.
Cheers
Jayanand

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> 
wrote:
> Interesting discussion, in that I 've just been to Barcelona Olympic venues
> with Ted and chatted on the effects on Barcelona with tour drivers, various
> locals and of course Lluis. I also spent maybe half an hour with Mariela
> on-line helping locate the old media village (now local apartments). That
> meant researching on a number of websites on the subject including the
> socio-economic significance for Barcelona residents.
> I guess no-one on the LUG who knows Ted would be surprised to hear that he
> has very fond memories from '92 and enjoyd his return visit. The main
> stadium and the swimming centre particularly are alive, vibrant and very
> popular with locals and visitors alike. I'd add that it was a real pleasure
> to be there with him naturally and some photos will follow.
>
> >From my very unscientific straw poll, the venues, the redevelopment and 
> >new
> roads particularly continue to benefit the local economy. I was told
> several times that the Games did really raise the city's profile and
> persuade some locals that the new influx of visitors proved to be no bad
> thing.
>
> I saw the Munich '72 site a few days earlier (next to the BMW facilities!).
> Thet are still poular with visitors but I ran out of time before geting
> inside them. The particular area is most remarkable for being on artificial
> hills which were actually built on the discarded rubble from the
> substantially destroyed city.
>
> Sydney in 2000 I think by any measure was very successful. Part of that may
> have been supported by a national enthusiasm for sport. That last in
> contrast to some largely empty venues in Athens for example. Anecdotally
> Atlanta was not well regarded here.
> London seems as convenient a place as any to kick British and US butts in
> some events.
>
> my 2 EURO cents on the topic anyway.
> On 13 July 2012 22:51, Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu> wrote:
>
>> I have never understood why first-class cities like London or Paris bother
>> with the Olympics. There is no case of Olympics delivering any kind of
>> lasting benefit. Mostly, they result in huge debts which the taxpayers end
>> up paying.
>>
>> Some justification can be made for second-rate cities like Atlanta or
>> Barcelona that hope the Olympics will "put them on the map". That
>> certainly happened to Barcelona after 1992, but the question is whether it
>> would not have happened anyway as Spain was entering its period of
>> economic boom following accession to the EU in 1986.
>>
>> If I lived in London I would look for an opportunity to leave town during
>> the Olympics, and I would not dream of visiting the city during the games.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nathan
>>
>> Op Vr, 13 juli, 2012 12:41, schreef Gerry Walden:
>> > This should rile Ted up:
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2191402/london-2012-olympic-games-organisers-refuse-to-clarify-photography-rules-in-advance
>> >
>> > We have already had cafe owners threatened with prosecution if they have
>> > an 'Olympic Breakfast' on their menu, and a florist threatened for 
>> > making
>> > the Olympic rings out of flowers for her shop window (both because of
>> > copyright!) In addition it is taking 3+ hours to get through Customs at
>> > the airport, and they are siting surface to air missiles on some
>> apartment
>> > blocks. I think the majority of the British public will be pleased when
>> > this is all over as it is suffering from severe overkill.
>> >
>> > Gerry
>> >
>> > Gerry Walden
>> > +44 (0)23 8046 3076 or
>> > +44 (0)797 287 7932
>> > www.gwpics.com
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Leica Users Group.
>> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nathan Wajsman
>> photo at frozenlight.eu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Ban on cameras at the Olympics)
In reply to: Message from gerry.walden at me.com (Gerry Walden) ([Leica] Ban on cameras at the Olympics)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Ban on cameras at the Olympics)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Ban on cameras at the Olympics)