Nobody Wants To Host The Olympics Anymore

And frankly, who can blame them?

The Olympics are the biggest and most prestigious sporting event on the planet. Every four years, even people with no real interest in sports take some time to marvel at the accomplishments of the world’s greatest athletes all gathered together.

Yet for all the glamor and glory of the Olympics, their future is seriously in doubt. The 2032 Games were awarded to Brisbane, Australia’s 3rd biggest city, after it was the only place to submit a bid. Voters in potential host cities like Hamburg and Budapest have rejected the possibility of welcoming the games in referendums.

It seems possible that in our lifetime, the Olympics as we know it will fade away — and the more you think about it, the more it makes sense. The Olympics can be a cruel mistress, overpromising and underdelivering.

Understandably, the Olympics are expensive to host. Even though they are usually held in major cities that already possess major stadiums, athletics tracks, hotels, transport options and so on, it’s never really possible to host them with whatever a city happens to already have lying around.

The Tokyo Olympics holds the record for being the priciest summer Olympics to date. The total expenditure for these games reached approximately 26 billion dollars, which is quite a significant figure. Interestingly, the initial projected cost for the Olympics was only 7.4 billion dollars, highlighting how the actual expenses ended up being over three times the original budget.

This occurrence might raise eyebrows, but it’s not unique to the Tokyo Olympics alone.

This trend has been unfolding since 1960. From that year onward, the expenses associated with hosting the Olympics have consistently exceeded the estimated budgets of the hosting nations.

Why are the Olympics so Expensive?

Hosting the Olympics is no trivial matter; it’s a significant undertaking. Any country aiming to be a host has to meticulously plan a decade in advance. This extended timeline is a result of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) setting specific criteria that must be met by the hosting nation. Naturally, meeting these criteria requires a substantial financial commitment. The initial bidding phase alone demands an expenditure in the tens of millions.

During the bidding process, numerous countries throw their hats into the ring, all vying for the chance to host the Olympics. However, the IOC eventually narrows down the selection to a single country that will have the honor of hosting the event. Throughout this evaluation, the IOC thoroughly assesses potential game venues and stadium construction sites. Sadly, the funds spent by the other countries involved in the bidding process end up as unrecoverable expenses, as they can’t be reversed or reclaimed.

Once the bidding process concludes successfully, the host nation embarks on an extensive journey to establish all the necessary infrastructure for hosting the games. In the present times, a hosting country is tasked with constructing 35 distinct athletic venues. An Olympic village, a crucial component, demands an investment ranging from 1.5 to 3 billion dollars. Additionally, the establishment of a media and television production facility, essential for broadcasting the event, can easily tally up to 0.5 to 1 billion dollars.

Further requisites encompass a media village, a ceremonial space, and designated green areas. Among these, a pivotal requirement involves creating a seamless transportation system to ferry athletes from the Olympic villages to the stadiums. This often necessitates the construction of separate lanes. Beyond these, a myriad of other expenses arise, extending beyond what’s outlined in this enumeration.

However, it’s important to note that the entirety of the blame cannot solely rest upon the shoulders of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). On occasion, the host nations themselves exceed reasonable limits when constructing the stadiums and Olympic villages. A noteworthy concern arises once the games conclude, as many nations find themselves grappling with the aftermath of these imposing structures. The upkeep of these buildings can swiftly accumulate costs reaching into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Tragically, a number of these edifices have gradually fallen into a state of disrepair after the Olympic festivities have come to an end. This aspect played a role in the escalated expenses incurred by this year’s Tokyo Olympics. Due to the postponement of the games, the Japanese government was compelled to allocate additional funds to maintain these structures, ensuring they remained operational until the rescheduled event.

These constructions not only strain the wallets of taxpayers but also cast a shadow over the environment. A poignant example is the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, where the process of preparation involved cutting into mountain slopes and felling trees. This unfortunate undertaking resulted in the devastation of an entire mountainside, leading to the displacement of trees and animals, some of which were already on the brink of extinction.

Rising Costs of the Olympics -source: Wired Magazine

The Olympics wield long-lasting effects on nations, and at times, the extravagant costs of hosting the games can plunge countries into significant debt. A notable example is the 1976 Montreal Olympics, where the Canadian Government’s expenses skyrocketed to 1.5 billion dollars, a staggering increase from the initial estimated cost of 120 million.

Canada managed to pay off these debts only in 2016. Similarly, certain nations like Greece are grappling with economic crises primarily due to the weight of crippling debts linked to past Olympic events.

Interestingly, this wasn’t the case from the outset. In the past, host nations used to garner profits from the games. This was attainable as they were able to collect a portion of their revenue from television rights. However, the dynamics have shifted over the years, with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) claiming a progressively larger share. A telling contrast can be seen in the ’90s when the IOC took a mere 4% of the revenue, juxtaposed with the 70% slice it secured from the revenue of the 2016 Rio Olympics.

The sole instance of a nation reaping profit from the Olympics can be traced back to the 1984 Los Angeles (LA) Olympics. The event yielded a surplus of 215 million dollars. This success was attributed to LA’s existing infrastructure advantage and its unique status as the sole bidder for the Olympics during that period. This advantageous position enabled them to negotiate favorable terms with the IOC.

So is that it, No more Olympic Games?

Over the progression of time, there’s a recognizable decrease in the quantity of nations competing to have the Olympic Games. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) decided that Paris will host this year, while Los Angeles will assume the job of host in 2028 for the Mid year Olympics. This denotes an extraordinary event where two successive hosts have been chosen because of an absence of willing bidders.

By the by, it’s impossible that the Olympic custom will disappear. To address the mounting concerns, the top of the IOC has proposed a system to ease the monetary weight on have countries. The arrangement includes cooperative endeavors between the facilitating nation and the IOC to fastidiously configuration outlines for the necessary foundation, in this way limiting superfluous costs. Nonetheless, it’s significant that this recommendation stays hypothetical and its reasonable effect is yet to be noticed.

Source: Nexus

Which Countries Bring the Most Tourists to the Philippines?

While Filipinos yearn to escape, we mean, travel internationally, more foreigners are flocking to the Philippines than ever before.

Tourism in the Philippines is experiencing a major upswing, with revenues reaching P282.17 billion in the first half of 2024. This represents a 32.81% increase compared to the P212.47 billion earned in the same period last year, according to the Department of Tourism (DOT). 

From January to July 10, 2024, the country welcomed 3,173,694 tourists. A significant 92.55% of these visitors were foreign nationals, while only 7.45% were overseas Filipinos.

South Korea topped the list of foreign tourists with 824,798 visitors (25.99%).

Next is the United States with 522,667 visitors (16.47%), followed by our close neighbors China (6.3%), Japan (5.95%), and Australia (4.33%).

It was the same top five countries but in a different order in 2023, revealing a consistent preference among tourists from these countries for the Philippines as a travel destination.

Taiwan, Canada, the United Kingdom, and neighboring Southeast Asian nations, Singapore and Malaysia, are the sixth to tenth source markets.

Top tourist arrivals in the Philippines

The Philippines is consistently a top destination for South Koreans, a fact even before the COVID-19 pandemic. This trend continues to this day, with them favoring popular tourist destinations like Boracay, Cebu, and Bohol.

The World Travel & Tourism Council projects that the tourism sector’s contribution to the national economy will reach P5.4 trillion by the end of the year. This forecast surpasses the 2019 pre-pandemic record by 7.1%.

Employment in tourism is also expected to see a boost, with the sector anticipated to exceed 9.5 million jobs, comprising 20% of the national workforce. South Korea might top in numbers, but tourists from the United States brought in the most revenue in 2023.

"This is 215% higher than the tourism receipts from South Korea, so this is how important the American market (is). While the arrivals are fewer, the contribution is bigger," Philippine Tourism Director-Attache in New York Francisco Hilario Lardizabal was quoted as saying.

While the Philippines had been busy building stronger ties with the United States, Japan, and Australia through new tourism partnerships in recent years, its relationship with China has become rocky.

Chinese tourists visiting the Philippines have significantly lowered since the pandemic, according to Chinese Ambassador Huang Xilian. He noted the stark drop from almost 1.8 million Chinese tourists in 2019 to only 200,000 in 2023.

This is in due part of the Philippines tightening its visa requirements to combat fraudulent applications that have allowed independent—and often illegal—Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs) to flourish in the country.

In 2022, Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri also cited Xilian’s statement that the Chinese government had actually blacklisted the Philippines as a tourist destination due to concerns over the safety of its nationals in relation to POGO operations.

Source: Spot

A look at the differences between Airbnb and Vrbo

Vacation rentals come in all layouts and sizes. But if you plan to book one, there’s a good chance you’ll do it on Airbnb or Vrbo. The two platforms are among the most popular options for travelers looking for lodging.

Madeline List, a senior research analyst at Phocuswright who has studied the short-term rental industry, said there is “a lot of cross-listing” so users may find the same rental on multiple platforms.

“So there is definitely some overlap between the two platforms,” she said. However, while they have similarities, there are some differences that may help prospective guests decide which is right for their trip.

What sets Airbnb apart?

For starters, it has more listings. “Airbnb is huge in the space, and it’s certainly dominant,” List said. Airbnb had over 7.7 million listings in its 2024 spring update, as compared with more than 2 million on Vrbo.

The platform boasts greater brand awareness, too. Phocuswright’s U.S. Short-Term Rental Report 2021 – its most recent that measured that metric – found that 78% of short-term rental users surveyed were aware of Airbnb as offering that type of accommodation, while 50% named Vrbo.

(Phocuswright surveyed adult consumers in the U.S. with internet access who had traveled overnight and stayed in a paid short-term rental for leisure within the previous two years, and got 983 qualified responses).

List noted, however, that the numbers may have shifted since and Vrbo has done a “push for more brand recognition.” She added that Airbnb “has also done a lot of really strong work trying to push properties that feel very unique and that feel like very differentiated experiences.”

The company recently launched its Icons category – including the clock room at the Musée d’Orsay and a replica of Carl Fredricksen’s house from Disney and Pixar’s “Up” – and has other listings ranging from houseboats to yurts.

“We believe Airbnb offers more unique places to stay and unforgettable experiences than any other travel platform,” Airbnb’s chief business officer Dave Stephenson said in an email.

“Whatever your travel budget or ideal getaway, whether you’re traveling solo or with a group, there are Airbnb listings with great amenities that can provide you with a magical time almost anywhere in the world.”

What sets Vrbo apart?

Vrbo may have fewer listings, but it had an established presence even before Airbnb existed. Expedia Group acquired the platform in 2015 – then known as VRBO – as part of HomeAway.

VRBO rebranded to Vrbo in 2019, before the company retired HomeAway in the U.S. the following year. “Vrbo pioneered the vacation rental category nearly 30 years ago and has remained dedicated to providing travelers with consistent and reliable vacation rentals,” Melanie Fish, vice president of Global PR for Expedia Group Brands, said in an email.

“It’s not about spaceships or a celebrity’s garage – just real, fully functioning homes meant to be lived in and enjoyed together with family and friends.” While Airbnb customers can rent a room in someone else’s home, Vrbo offers only private rentals. That way, Fish said, “guests always get the whole place to themselves and never share the space with a host.”

Vrbo guests can also participate in Expedia Group’s One Key rewards program, allowing them to earn OneKey- Cash they can use on the site, or Expedia. com and Hotels.com. The platform also shows total prices including fees by default (hidden charges have been a source of frustration for many travelers).

Airbnb users must use a toggle to turn on the total price display. Vrbo has also received 2,934 Better Business Bureau complaints in the past three years, while Airbnb has received 7,580.

Does Airbnb or Vrbo cost more?

Hosts set listing prices, List said, and those can vary. “It might be slightly different across sites for all sorts of technical reasons, like the types of commissions and fees they pay to the different booking sites or the types of dynamic pricing tools or fee structures that they’re able to set on the back end,” she noted.

If one platform allows them to add a certain fee and another doesn’t have that capability, the host may adjust the pricing to compensate. “The best way to save money on booking fees is by booking directly with (a rental) operator, but for various reasons that either might not be an option in certain destinations – not everyone has a direct booking site – or it might not be something people feel comfortable with because there’s certainly more purchase security when you book through these centralized sites like Airbnb and Vrbo,” List added.

Despite their differences, they have plenty in common, too (both offer 24/7 customer support, for instance). “The (user experience) certainly has a lot of similarities to it,” List said. 

Source: USA Today