This article is about the costs involved. How do you mean 'handled pretty well' ?! I think you have no idea what you are talking about and did not bother to spend a few seconds to look for facts ?
'The cost of the Barcelona Summer Olympics was USD11.4 billion (in 2009 dollars). The cost overrun was 417 percent in real terms. This compares with an average cost of USD5.7 billion (in 2009 dollars) for other summer Olympics over the past 50 years for which data are available and an average cost overrun for these Games of 252 per cent. Cost here includes only sports-related costs and thus does not include other public costs, such as road, rail, or airport infrastructure, or private costs, such as hotel upgrades or other business investments incurred in preparation of the Games, which are typically substantial but which vary drastically from city to city and are difficult to compare consistently.'
The Olympics are more than the direct cost of infrastructure or tickets sold.
Barcelona was hugely changed by the 1992 Games and was transformed into one of the richest cities in Europe and one of the most visited spots on Earth. It's significance, quality of life and wealth grew because of the event.
That's the point of most Olympic events, as former London mayor Ken Livingstone said it: It's not about three weeks of sports, it's about getting funds to rebuild your city. A lot of them don't pull it off, but Barcelona for one did it fine.
> The Olympics are more than the direct cost of infrastructure or tickets sold...
I don't think that anyone would argue that Barcelona was a success relative to other Olympics, but it still left much to be desired.
Gys is taking issue with the claim that Barcelona was handled "pretty well" in an absolute sense considering the fact that the sports-related infrastructure went WAY over budget.
Maybe things worked out overall for the economy, but I submit that incremental value from investments in public infrastructure and what sounds like capable governance made the difference. You have to wonder if these changes could've happened without the burden of financing the sports side or hosting the olympics.
The timing in Barcelona was very special. Spain had only recently become a democracy again when they were awarded the game. There was a lot of political capital available to be spent and a real need to turn a page.
The games in this case were a catalyst but not the reason for most of the expenses. Same as the Expo in Seville which was also in '92.
Indeed. Many didn't (and still don't) realize how fractured the Spanish state was, going into recent times (i.e. post Franco ~1975).
Somewhat related...it was interesting to learn how Spain's triumph at the 2010 World Cup became a unifying, transcendent event for the country, politically.
'The cost of the Barcelona Summer Olympics was USD11.4 billion (in 2009 dollars). The cost overrun was 417 percent in real terms. This compares with an average cost of USD5.7 billion (in 2009 dollars) for other summer Olympics over the past 50 years for which data are available and an average cost overrun for these Games of 252 per cent. Cost here includes only sports-related costs and thus does not include other public costs, such as road, rail, or airport infrastructure, or private costs, such as hotel upgrades or other business investments incurred in preparation of the Games, which are typically substantial but which vary drastically from city to city and are difficult to compare consistently.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Summer_Olympics#Cost_and_...