£11bn Olympics Benefit Target Met

Originally Posted by colin25

I said...perhaps beyond your comprehension so will repeat with simpler words

Is this really the best use of money?

It might help if you actually read before commenting

and i've asked you what the hell money are you on about ,the article does not mention any money being spent it talks about money being earned from the olympic investment ,so if that is the money you are on about then you missed the boat because that investment is now earning us 11billion a year ,or maybe you would have preferred no investment just ploughing the money into benefits

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Nidge41

Really? Have they forget to mention how much they lost with the ticketing fiasco? How much the retailers lost while the games were on? Hotels that were half empty. Add all that up and it will take the shine off any made up figure.

I don't think they lost money on the tickets ,the problem with the tickets was the allocation ,they where still paid for and if retailers can't capitalise on an event as big as the Olympics then that is there problem

[colin25]

Originally Posted by martyh

and i've asked you what the hell money are you on about ,the article does not mention any money being spent it talks about money being earned from the olympic investment ,so if that is the money you are on about then you missed the boat because that investment is now earning us 11billion a year ,or maybe you would have preferred no investment just ploughing the money into benefits

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------



I don't think they lost money on the tickets ,the problem with the tickets was the allocation ,they where still paid for and if retailers can't capitalise on an event as big as the Olympics then that is there problem

I suspect you are the idiot child in the family...but..let's go to basics

Money was spent on olympics...it wasn't good faries who magically made it happen, nor was it donated by wealthy individuals.

Sorry to shatter your illusion.

And, that makes it relevant, if it wasn't the most appropriate way to spend the money.

As to the contracts, are you benefiting from those contracts. Or is it the same tories who benefited from the original spend, now benefiting from these contracts.

As to retailers benefiting from the Olympics? You mean the businesses who were banned from displaying anything about the olympics because it was against the olympics rules. The multi-corporation did well, but they pay a good amount of back handers to the olympic committee members.

---------- Post added at 01:51 ---------- Previous post was at 01:48 ----------

oh, and you must not know how it works.

The game, is to point to everything that happened that could be construed as being because of the olympics, and count that as a benefit. Even if it likely would have happened.

Politics...go figure

Originally Posted by colin25

I suspect you are the idiot child in the family...but..let's go to basics

Money was spent on olympics...it wasn't good faries who magically made it happen, nor was it donated by wealthy individuals.

Sorry to shatter your illusion.

And, that makes it relevant, if it wasn't the most appropriate way to spend the money.

As to the contracts, are you benefiting from those contracts. Or is it the same tories who benefited from the original spend, now benefiting from these contracts.

As to retailers benefiting from the Olympics? You mean the businesses who were banned from displaying anything about the olympics because it was against the olympics rules. The multi-corporation did well, but they pay a good amount of back handers to the olympic committee members.

---------- Post added at 01:51 ---------- Previous post was at 01:48 ----------

oh, and you must not know how it works.

The game, is to point to everything that happened that could be construed as being because of the olympics, and count that as a benefit. Even if it likely would have happened.

Politics...go figure

well since you aren't going to bother reading any links posted before commenting i'll do it for you

The UK economy has benefited from a £11.06 billion trade and investment boost through businesses securing contract wins, additional sales and new foreign investment.

The £11.06 billion figure includes £130 million of contracts won by UK companies for the Brazil 2014 World Cup and the Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games. More than 60 UK companies have also won contracts for the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics, most of them mid-sized enterprises.

Note the word "additional" and "new" ,these are contracts EXTRA to what would normally be expected

“The delivery of London 2012 on time and on budget led to hosting nations turning to the UK to help deliver their own events with supply opportunities running into the billions.

oh, and you must not know how it works.

The game, is to point to everything that happened that could be construed as being because of the olympics, and count that as a benefit. Even if it likely would have happened.

Politics...go figure

well you obviously don't ,UKTI is an advisory dept that advises companies on foreign investment ,the figures they are quoting are from the companies that have won the contracts and signed the deals and then reported back to UKTI on the results so they are not just made up numbers by a government dept

[Nidge41]

Originally Posted by martyh

and i've asked you what the hell money are you on about ,the article does not mention any money being spent it talks about money being earned from the olympic investment ,so if that is the money you are on about then you missed the boat because that investment is now earning us 11billion a year ,or maybe you would have preferred no investment just ploughing the money into benefits

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------



I don't think they lost money on the tickets ,the problem with the tickets was the allocation ,they where still paid for and if retailers can't capitalise on an event as big as the Olympics then that is there problem

They were given away by the Sponsors Coca Cola and MacDonalds.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by martyh

I don't think they lost money on the tickets ,the problem with the tickets was the allocation ,they where still paid for and if retailers can't capitalise on an event as big as the Olympics then that is there problem

The problem, at least at Greenwich. where I work, is that the local shops and market were told that the Olympics would bring in a massive increase in trade then when it came to the actual event, TFL did an excellent job of getting the spectators to and from Greenwich station, but kept them away from a lot of the shops, and effectively sealed off the major market in the area. As such, most of the shops, and the market, took fairly heavy losses.

Originally Posted by Stuart

The problem, at least at Greenwich. where I work, is that the local shops and market were told that the Olympics would bring in a massive increase in trade then when it came to the actual event, TFL did an excellent job of getting the spectators to and from Greenwich station, but kept them away from a lot of the shops, and effectively sealed off the major market in the area. As such, most of the shops, and the market, took fairly heavy losses.

Then i stand corrected .With an operation as large as the Olympics was i can't see how everybody could benefit but as the greater good i still say it was the right to do

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Stuart

The problem, at least at Greenwich. where I work, is that the local shops and market were told that the Olympics would bring in a massive increase in trade then when it came to the actual event, TFL did an excellent job of getting the spectators to and from Greenwich station, but kept them away from a lot of the shops, and effectively sealed off the major market in the area. As such, most of the shops, and the market, took fairly heavy losses.

Yes that was a problem but with such a major event I think things like that were always going to happen because things could so easily have ground to a halt and they had to err on the side of caution. In an effort to ensure London didn't grind to a halt, the authorities did such a good job of warning off potential ad-hoc visitors about congestion that quite a bit of trade was lost by taxi drivers, restaurants etc.

[Taf]

Less than 1% of the £2.5bn the UK government says has been invested by foreign firms after the Olympic and Paralympics has come to Wales, a House of Lords report has found.

The economic benefits from 2012 were "disproportionally weighted" towards southern England, the report said.

Fewer than 500 jobs were created in Wales, out of a total of 30,000.

"We should in Wales have had a full Barnett consequential of that spending, in fact we only got £9m of the £250m we should have expected."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24983593

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by martyh

Then i stand corrected .With an operation as large as the Olympics was i can't see how everybody could benefit but as the greater good i still say it was the right to do

Originally Posted by Osem

Yes that was a problem but with such a major event I think things like that were always going to happen because things could so easily have ground to a halt and they had to err on the side of caution. In an effort to ensure London didn't grind to a halt, the authorities did such a good job of warning off potential ad-hoc visitors about congestion that quite a bit of trade was lost by taxi drivers, restaurants etc.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why they did it, and I suspect, had they not done it, chaos would have ensued. Thankfully I don't work in the market or the shops, so I just got the benefit (assuming you could get in it, the market does excellent food and for those two weeks at least, there was no queues).