Why The Olympics Are A Bad Investment For Host Cities


Photo: WikiMedia Commons

The Olympics are over, and it looks like the influx of tourists only provided a minimal stimulus to London.After getting off to a horrible start, London business saw some uptick in the second week of the Games.

But it still wasn’t much, only a 13 per cent increase from a year earlier, Samantha Conti at Women’s Wear Daily reported.

London spent up to $20 billion hosting the Olympics, but expected that the games would provide a huge boost for businesses.

Instead, Londoners hunkered down at home and international tourists weren’t enough to fill the gap. Everyone from retailers to taxi drivers reported their business has slowed.

British Prime Minister David Cameron estimated London could make money from the “halo effect” of hosting the games — but it’s going to take a whole decade to break even:

“In an article published in the Sunday Times of London, Cameron said: “Over a decade we can use the Olympics to bring home business worth 13 billion [pounds],” or $20.4 billion at current exchange. “That’s more than the cost of the Games.” He was referring more specifically to winning business and jobs for Britain in relation to contracts for the 2014 Winter Games in Russia and the 2016 Summer Games in Brazil.”

Beijing hosted the 2008 Olympics and has seen the stadiums and venues they invested so much in waste away.

The Olympics certainly put the host city in the spotlight. But it’s a costly two weeks of fame.

DON’T MISS: Beijing’s Olympic Stadiums Are Wasting Away >

Business Insider Emails & Alerts

Site highlights each day to your inbox.

Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram.