OT: Is Canada hosting the World Cup more bitter or sweet to British Columbians?

Is it a big deal to you that Vancouver isnt hosting any WC games in 2026?


  • Total voters
    74

Hockey Rush

Registered User
Feb 22, 2018
505
169
It's not worth the financial investment for a week of fun activities. If this was a world cup of hockey sure I can see it getting a wider support base. A world cup of hockey would also be considerably cheaper to host.
 

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
It's not worth the financial investment for a week of fun activities. If this was a world cup of hockey sure I can see it getting a wider support base. A world cup of hockey would also be considerably cheaper to host.

According to the advocates on here who have posted facts, BC would end up “in the black” as opposed to being “in the red” with the financial investment.

I respect the NDP and most political parties, but this is proving to be one more reason (on top of numerous other reasons) why I choose not to vote for the NDP.
 

Tb0ne

Registered User
Nov 29, 2004
5,452
33
Victoria
I enjoy soccer/football but the Olympics was only 8 years ago and the housing situation is already ridiculous. I can't imagine a World Cup would help.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
Big problem when the entirity of the financial details is "you will make $160m to $480m". These things are usually Voodoo economic BS. Brazil must have made billions from the world cup and Olympics..... You know the economic firm paid to make the bid look good would have found big economic benefits in the proposal.


That's just it though, Canada Soccer paid some guys to produce a report saying that if the government funded Canada Soccer's idea they would get rich.... A Nigerian prince offered me an amazing opportunity that would make me rich, all I had to do was fund it.


I had a look at that more extensive report, all the same weaselnomics: the supposed value is in future benefits, brand value for Vancouver, economic multipliers (spend $1 get a $2 or $3 as it gets on spent etc).

Branding: BC/Vancouver already had great branding, it won't gain much of anything considering it is one of the prettiest cities in the world, constantly in the lists of best cities of the world, hosted the Winter Olympics, has the famed BC wilderness and the Rockies etc.

Economic multipliers: so spend the money on a hospitals/more trains/better roads etc that provides à genuine long term benefit as well.

Economically Vancouver can leech of Edmonton, supplying goods and services in the lead up and cashing in on tourists traveling to and from the games. Free money.

I love the world cup, fixed draws, match fixing and suspicious games, corruption and all it is the Christmas of soccer. Once a yeary some people turn up at aa churc, once every 4 years non--occer people care about soccer. It is even better when someone else foots the bill.
 

Chubros

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
1,526
22
Again, it's fine to be sceptical with BCG's numbers.

But why not take the 3 years to fully assess the deal? They could easily have commissioned their own independent report or assigned one of the countless bureaucrats supported by tax dollars to more closely vet the numbers.
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,831
4,924
Vancouver
Visit site
Again, it's fine to be sceptical with BCG's numbers.

But why not take the 3 years to fully assess the deal? They could easily have commissioned their own independent report or assigned one of the countless bureaucrats supported by tax dollars to more closely vet the numbers.

Two things I can see.

First, the city/government has already had 8 years to analyze the "incremental economic activity from increased tourism and organizing committee spending" an event like this can have. The Olympics were more expensive but also a much bigger scale, since it's not us getting a few left over games but rather exclusively hosting the thing for its duration.

Second, from a political perspective if the NDP doesn't think it's a good idea then its probably going to be much more damaging to them to say yes now and then no later. That's like letting the kids see a big present under the Christmas tree but then taking it back and returning it before Christmas morning.

Analogy aside this is especially true if you don't think the report is going to show anything positive. I mean it's really hard to picture there being enough outside money coming in to justify the spending, and I'd imagine to be fiscally balanced you'd need the taxed portion of that revenue to match your expenditure. I haven't seen all the cities involved, but while we're in a good position to receive fans from Asia I'd imagine we're still playing 2nd or 3rd fiddle to other West Coast cities like LA or Seattle.

A problem with calculating economic benefit with this format is its such a massive and spread out WC. It's already a long enough flight for a German to fly into NY or Toronto, so unless there's a game out here they're probably not going to want to take another flight to the West Coast.
 

hookshott

Registered User
Dec 13, 2016
562
362
According to the advocates on here who have posted facts, BC would end up “in the black” as opposed to being “in the red” with the financial investment.

I respect the NDP and most political parties, but this is proving to be one more reason (on top of numerous other reasons) why I choose not to vote for the NDP.
Okay, nice political statement (though I highly question your statement "I respect the NDP" ) ....we know where you are coming from. However, are you telling me that those advocates and yourself are properly able to financially evaluate this....when FIFA has given itself the opportunity to "change the rules" and, thus, financial commitment required...at any time! I am doubtful anyone would personally sign a deal like that with their own money...why do you suggest our government should? This was a very wise financial decision for the taxpayers of this province. Too bad for those who like to party and do not care about the cost.
 
Last edited:

Chubros

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
1,526
22
Two things I can see.

First, the city/government has already had 8 years to analyze the "incremental economic activity from increased tourism and organizing committee spending" an event like this can have. The Olympics were more expensive but also a much bigger scale, since it's not us getting a few left over games but rather exclusively hosting the thing for its duration.

Second, from a political perspective if the NDP doesn't think it's a good idea then its probably going to be much more damaging to them to say yes now and then no later. That's like letting the kids see a big present under the Christmas tree but then taking it back and returning it before Christmas morning.

Analogy aside this is especially true if you don't think the report is going to show anything positive. I mean it's really hard to picture there being enough outside money coming in to justify the spending, and I'd imagine to be fiscally balanced you'd need the taxed portion of that revenue to match your expenditure. I haven't seen all the cities involved, but while we're in a good position to receive fans from Asia I'd imagine we're still playing 2nd or 3rd fiddle to other West Coast cities like LA or Seattle.

A problem with calculating economic benefit with this format is its such a massive and spread out WC. It's already a long enough flight for a German to fly into NY or Toronto, so unless there's a game out here they're probably not going to want to take another flight to the West Coast.

How has the NDP had 8 years to analyze the bid when they only formed government about 1 year ago? Plus since then they have had a full plate of other things to deal with from housing to Site C to Kinder Morgan, etc. etc. There is no way that they had the time to do an appropriate analysis of the World Cup bid.

They City (COV) may have had more time but they were supportive of the bid and expressed disappointment at the provincial govt's decision. But of course they would have supported it given they would have reaped most of the benefits while the Province would have borne much of the cost.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
Okay, nice political statement (though I highly question your statement "I respect the NDP" ) ....we know where you are coming from. However, are you telling me that those advocates and yourself are properly able to financially evaluate this....when FIFA has given itself the opportunity to "change the rules" and, thus, financial commitment required...at any time! I am doubtful anyone would personally sign a deal like that with their own money...why do you suggest our government should? This was a very wise financial decision for the taxpayers of this province. Too bad for those who like to party and do not care about the cost.

Canada only gets 10 games, so it would have been something like 3+ for Toronto, 3 for Montreal and 2 each for Vancouver and Edmonton. We would be lucky to get one team Canada here, more likely it would be something like Iran vs Hungary or if they want to push the Asia connections Japan vs Chile. A big name like France could be used instead. 6+ games would be good but 2 games??? Huge investment and huge disruption for minimal benefit.

Sports bars will still be doing good business as people go and watch games on TV, what they would have done anyway, unless they were fans of Panama vs Senegal.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
25,592
9,427
Canada only gets 10 games, so it would have been something like 3+ for Toronto, 3 for Montreal and 2 each for Vancouver and Edmonton. We would be lucky to get one team Canada here, more likely it would be something like Iran vs Hungary or if they want to push the Asia connections Japan vs Chile. A big name like France could be used instead. 6+ games would be good but 2 games??? Huge investment and huge disruption for minimal benefit.

Sports bars will still be doing good business as people go and watch games on TV, what they would have done anyway, unless they were fans of Panama vs Senegal.
Per the bid committee there will only be 16 cities hosting games. Usa gets 10 sites. No chance Canada gets 4 to Mexico’s 2.

So, we are talking 3 games. Honestly, I watched some of the games this week Nd with my dad. I didn’t see anything from the broadcast about the host cities that the teams were playing in. And I watched Portugal, Germany, Brazil, and Argentina play. And these are some of the big nations.

How much economic impact comes from 3 games? Nations don’t play all of heir games in one stadium, especially not with the expanded format.

16 groups of 3 teams who play against each other. Top 2 advance.

Team A and B from pool A plays at bc place on the opening Saturday. A and C would not play until like Thursday. THen B and C close out the pool on Tuesday. Who knows how they setup the location of the matches.
 

Mr Plow

Registered User
Apr 15, 2016
662
258
It would have been nice to get a world class grass playing field but overall it'll still be great for Canadian soccer so I can't be too upset.
 

The Alien

From another world.
Apr 1, 2015
395
41
BC
I want to vote yes, because it's kind of a big deal that our government is standing up to FIFA, but I guess that vote would mean I'm angry about it? Should I vote no? I'll just vote no. Where's the "proud of us" option?
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,043
14,073
Diego Maradona is a bizarre commentator at times, but this time he's right....Canada has no business hosting World Cup Games until they prove their own national squad is good enough to make the Tournament on its own merits.
 

mossey3535

Registered User
Feb 7, 2011
13,218
9,645
Diego Maradona is a bizarre commentator at times, but this time he's right....Canada has no business hosting World Cup Games until they prove their own national squad is good enough to make the Tournament on its own merits.

You mean like Dubai?

Shouldn't the tournament be held where fans will show up and in this case, where football needs to be grown and cultivated?

I'm not even the biggest footie fan but that's the argument I would use for hockey too.
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,831
4,924
Vancouver
Visit site
How has the NDP had 8 years to analyze the bid when they only formed government about 1 year ago? Plus since then they have had a full plate of other things to deal with from housing to Site C to Kinder Morgan, etc. etc. There is no way that they had the time to do an appropriate analysis of the World Cup bid.

They City (COV) may have had more time but they were supportive of the bid and expressed disappointment at the provincial govt's decision. But of course they would have supported it given they would have reaped most of the benefits while the Province would have borne much of the cost.

The NDP have only been in government for a year but a study like this shouldn't be kept secret. If it's been 8 years and we don't actually know what kind of economic impact the Olympic games had on the city/province then I'd suggest these pre-event economic reports that try predict such things are utterly useless.

I'd also think that when it comes to the World Cup it's as much about the country as it is the city, so if there's any benefits we'll get some good carry over at zero cost from Edmonton's involvement.
 

Siludin

Registered User
Dec 9, 2010
7,304
5,228
Diego Maradona is a bizarre commentator at times, but this time he's right....Canada has no business hosting World Cup Games until they prove their own national squad is good enough to make the Tournament on its own merits.
By contrast, Argentina has no business hosting the World Cup until they get their economy in order.
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,081
4,325
chilliwacki
God - so much wrong here.

To make it clear where I am coming from, I intend to watch every game of this world cup. I missed 1 in 2010, and 3 in 2014. I only missed games when I had hockey games.

I support the decision to not involve. FIFA and the IOC are just scum. Would love to have games here, but these organizations are as bad as the Catholic Church or Donald Trump and the GOP.

For those who don't know me, I grew up privileged in West Van, family has had hockey tickets since 1970 and I was anti union. I retired at 53, am now mostly pro union and despise the GOP ( we put our house up for sale the day after Donnie was elected, and moved to Chilliwack).

So much misinformation here. The financial information on here is laughable. This is the sort of subject where lying with statistics is perfect. Both those opposed and those in support can claim the other side is wrong.

I just read all of the posts on here, and can't be bothered to go back and pick out the individual ones that were tiresome simplistic drivel.

Suggesting that old folks don't appreciate "soccer". That its not a popular sport. (My daughter was co-captain of a team that won the national university championships 2 years in a row - I spent my hours on rainy fields). I know Greg Kerfoot - some of those comments are laughable. That Canada is laughable as a host? You know that there will be 48 countries in 2026.
I would go on, but I have to get up in a 8 hours to watch football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peen

bobbyb2009

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
1,898
953
God - so much wrong here.

To make it clear where I am coming from, I intend to watch every game of this world cup. I missed 1 in 2010, and 3 in 2014. I only missed games when I had hockey games.

I support the decision to not involve. FIFA and the IOC are just scum. Would love to have games here, but these organizations are as bad as the Catholic Church or Donald Trump and the GOP.

For those who don't know me, I grew up privileged in West Van, family has had hockey tickets since 1970 and I was anti union. I retired at 53, am now mostly pro union and despise the GOP ( we put our house up for sale the day after Donnie was elected, and moved to Chilliwack).

So much misinformation here. The financial information on here is laughable. This is the sort of subject where lying with statistics is perfect. Both those opposed and those in support can claim the other side is wrong.

I just read all of the posts on here, and can't be bothered to go back and pick out the individual ones that were tiresome simplistic drivel.

Suggesting that old folks don't appreciate "soccer". That its not a popular sport. (My daughter was co-captain of a team that won the national university championships 2 years in a row - I spent my hours on rainy fields). I know Greg Kerfoot - some of those comments are laughable. That Canada is laughable as a host? You know that there will be 48 countries in 2026.
I would go on, but I have to get up in a 8 hours to watch football.

Fun! Hope you are enjoying the games. Wish I had more time to watch them all. Catching a bunch and love the different styles and tactics. Been a blast so far!

What school did your daughter play at?
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,081
4,325
chilliwacki
Fun! Hope you are enjoying the games. Wish I had more time to watch them all. Catching a bunch and love the different styles and tactics. Been a blast so far!

What school did your daughter play at?

Sadly Trinity Western ... not fond of the overly Christian fanaticism there. They love bombed her into a bunch of misery, which thankfully she dropped in the garbage can a couple of years later.
 

SeawaterOnIce

Being invaded again.
Aug 28, 2011
15,386
18,301
Worth noting some games this year have been utter garbage. Either one-sided or an inferior team parking the bus aiming for a nil nil draw. Costa Rica vs Brazil was horrible to watch. So was Tunesia vs Belgium.

I dread the 48 team format coming in 2026 because we'll see some really lousy competition in the group stage. Imagine a group of Germany, Trinidad and Tobego, Iraq and Ecuador? Ugh.
 

Dab

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
3,193
3,001
Again, it's fine to be sceptical with BCG's numbers.

But why not take the 3 years to fully assess the deal? They could easily have commissioned their own independent report or assigned one of the countless bureaucrats supported by tax dollars to more closely vet the numbers.
Yea why not make a controversial decision close to an election geee homey Are you a political science professor?
 

Dab

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
3,193
3,001
those "economic benefits" numbers are a laughable lie, sorry. It's the same garbage economics that NA sports teams use when they're asking for stadium handouts. It's complete fiction, and a certainly a tiresome one in 2018!
Pretty much this.
Those numbers represent a public expenditure and capture of the private profit. Not worth it at all. In the black? Ya right the taxpayer walks away holding the bag!
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->