Why no country wants to host the Olympics?

A wave of reluctance has been observed in many countries of the world whenever it comes to host the Olympics. As a result, the mega-event has become the most hated sporting competition.

Despite a planned budget of 6.8 billion euros in 2017, the Paris Olympics costs outweighed 8.9 billion euros, 3.2 of which will be given out of the French taxpayer’s pockets. An astonishing thing is that this far surpassing of the planned budget was expected as it had appeared in nearly every Olympic games. An Oxford study had previously predicted the Paris Games budget to overrun 115 percent from the one planned.

Los Angeles, the host to the 2028 Olympics is readying to welcome the slew of athletes with an estimated budget of $7 billion. A considerable portion of the population does want the city to become the next host. Once the cities have made their bids, it is not permissible to withdraw from it, but the members of the group No Olympic LA are convinced that with the right amount and intensity of protests, the city can successfully withdraw.

Los Angeles, along with Paris were given the rights back then to host the 2024 and 2028 Olympics just because three other cities had withdrawn from the bidding, leaving the French capital and the Californian city the only two candidates. The auction ended with a first-ever decision in which Paris was handed over to host the 2024 games while the 2028 ones went to Los Angeles.

It’s not only about the Olympics, the upcoming Commonwealth Games have no host since the most potential host city of Victoria, Australia withdrew from the bidding leaving the games without any city to welcome.

Why is it that so many countries and cities no longer want to have the Olympics? Why has the charm and charisma of hosting such iconic games been reduced to none?

One of the major concerns is the exorbitant budget. Throughout history, cities are initially shown a projected budget that seems palatable. All seems doable within this amount until when the time happens and the budget ends up becoming astronomically high.

It happened in the 2012 London games which were to be hosted in 2.4 billion euros. But it cost an enormous sum of 13.5 billion euros instead. One could notice that for the past 5 decades, the Olympics have surpassed their estimated budget.

There are around 35 different venues to be constructed whenever a city is to welcome the Olympics. This requires costs for further construction of facilities, transportation, establishing of custom routes, housing units for the athletes as well as a whopping marketing budget for the advertisements and performances. Things like these can easily suck billions out of the city’s treasury with little to no profit in sight.

Speaking of profit, it is presented in exaggerated numbers along with other benefits such as boosting tourism and increasing the country’s soft power, etc. The lessons from previous high-cost games are completely ignored as the bids for the new ones are made. The truth is that cities like Paris and London which are already tourism hubs should not be drawn to these benefits.

When Athens hosted the Olympics in 2004. It cost the city 8.5 billion euros which played a role in aggravating the already looming financial crisis of the country. Greece failed to cash any profit from it.

Economist Adam Zimbalist says that up till now, Los Angeles is the only city in history that has profited from the Olympic games. This was 1984 when the city had negotiated with favorable conditions from the Olympic committee as it was the only city ready to host. Back then it had staged the games in its already-made stadiums and facilities instead of constructing new ones. But as it gears up to host the games again, many are doubtful it will generate any profit.

Let alone hosting, and bidding for the games is equally expensive. The best example is Chicago which put $100 million on the line to host the 2016 games and still lost.

The second reason is the extent to which the Games disturbed the city’s structure and everyday cycle. A French group revealed that 12,000 homeless people were displaced in Paris due to the Olympics staging. The transit system doubled its ticket prices till the games ended just after collapsing a week before the start of the games.

It was said that the houses built for the 2012 London Games would be affordable. Only 10 percent of them were. Things like these cost the cities beyond what they can handle, thus resulting in protests and challenges for the citizens.

The third reason is the damage these games cause to the natural surroundings. This was evident in the 2018 Winter Olympics that were held in Pyeongchang, South Korea. Enormous damage was observed as they had cleared a large forest part cornering many endangered animals. Furthermore, a vast majority of the snow used in winter sports was artificial and produced by heavy water and electricity consumption. The artificial snow consisted of chemicals that disturbed the natural ecosystem of the area.

In the 2024 games in Sochi, Russia, a huge dumping of wasted water ravaged marine life and affected the migrations of marine animals.

As a result, only two countries had bid for the 2022 games: China and Kazakhstan (China won the bid and is reported to have invested $39 billion in games hosting)

Despite the effort of the Olympic committee to introduce the 2020 Olympic Agenda to battle cost and environmental impact challenges, little improvement has been shown.

With the world on the brink of World War 3 with an economic crisis brewing in many corners, the high costs for the games and no profits present a skeptical case for the International Olympic Committee. Different economists have proposed plans to mitigate the risks. These include deciding on one permanent host and getting rid of the bidding system. But the question is: Will the committee actually consider these and take the matter seriously?