yup, danny buttstain is wrong. some cities have done quite well after hosting the olympics, and of course others not so much.
It appears to depend on the planning that goes into it years before a bid is even placed.
Salt lake city, for example, did great. Others didn't make a ton of money, but are still better off with the new infrastructure.
http://www.today.com/sochi/what-happens ... 2D12152101
then, you have the couple like athens and Sarajevo that went to absolute shit after the games, but the reasons are not directly tied to the olympics
Quote:
The bobsled venue served as a Bosnian-Serb artillery stronghold during the war, and now is mostly covered in graffiti and vegetation. The podium for the medal winners is riddled with bullet holes and was the site of executions. Some of the mountains that hosted Alpine skiing races are believed to still contain land mines, and Zetra Olympic Hall, which hosted the ice skating events, was destroyed by bombs.
ouch. evil ioc!
wait
Quote:
However, it was rebuilt in 1999 with the help of an $11.5 million donation from the International Olympic Committee and is now known as Olympic Hall Juan Antonio Samaranch, in honor of the seventh president of the International Olympic Committee.
oh. well thats nice. Whats also nice is the majority of cities that benefited from the olympics, and continue to do so even decades after theyre done.
waiting for bernsie to reply "nooo the IOC is evil and the games are just a money grab!"