The economic crisis that most countries are experiencing is the largest since 1929. Like other recessions that have hit some countries (Japan's crisis of the 90s) or certain parts of the world (the crisis of communism after the fall of the Berlin Wall), the latest occurred in the US in 2007 that took over the world, affecting banks, corporations, households and even countries. Never has a president of the United States attended a meeting at IMF headquarters, yet in 2007, George W. Bush called for help during a G20 meeting by asking for their support. The former president of the US central bank, Alan Greenspan, regarded as the providential man of the American dream for allowing the right of property to every American citizen could not recognize his mistake, and he said that he was in a "state of shock," and open "disarray".
One would never have thought that Iceland, considered the fifth richest country in the world could go bankrupt, and yet, this country reported some months ago that its banks, its currency and its economy had collapsed. Iceland went bankrupt and became unable financially to revive its economy. In the one year since the collapse of one of the largest investment banks, Lehman Brothers, the economy has been shattered, causing the decline of many public and private institutions in its fall.
In this dismal economic climate, the events industry, including the organization of Mega Events has been hit hard too. Indeed, some candidates have talked of annoyance in organizing large scale events. The British minister in charge of games even ended by declaring: "I have often said that we had applied for 2012 in one economic situation, given that we are now in another. Had we known what we know now, would we have applied to host the Olympics? It is almost certainly no".
It is true that many people today question the real impact of these huge investments that could otherwise be applied to fund other causes, such as a recovery plan, and the decline in unemployment. It therefore seems natural to wonder about the real consequences of these investments. This thesis aims to look at the organization of mega events in times of crisis and the interest of the host cities in investing a lot of money in these difficult times. Thus, in the following pages it will analyze the following question: Why should (or should not) one invest in the organization of mega vents in times of crisis?
For many years, countries and cities are fighting for real organizers of major events, involving many sports personalities and politicians. Pushing their strategies and communication campaigns in the extreme, they will do everything to be organizers of an event that often lasted several days (15 days for the Olympics, one month for the World Cup).
An event is a combination of several different entities: the organizers, local authorities, as well as spectators or visitors. Based on these entities, the benefits and expectations of an event can not be the same whether one takes the level of the organizers of the public or the viewer.
Tags: organization of mega events; consequences of investments; global financial crisis;
[...] Indeed, the construction of “green” infrastructure takes time to have a real impact on the environment Social benefits These benefits are dependent on the success of the event and are therefore short term. However, in some specific cases where all the good elements are present, the impact will be a long-term one (as in the victory of France in World Cup 1998, which had an impact on consumption). The chart below will summarize these impacts in the short and long term. It is easy to see that an event creates an impact in the short, medium and long terms. These are impacts are diverse and are important to the area. [...]
[...] For example, according to Ampe (2002, p.52), Lille's bid for the Olympics in 2004 (eventually awarded to Athens) has allowed many people to learn about this city, giving it the opportunity to establish the image of a city that can accommodate large events. This new recognition has thus enabled it to become the European Capital of Culture in 2004. This image is often propagated by an institution: the media. Indeed, the media coverage of major events is fundamental to its success. The good relationship between journalists and the organizers is necessary for a good image. The image conveyed by the host city would have a real impact on the tourism. [...]
[...] Subsequently, as a direct result of the current crisis, the sponsors withdrew one after another. On 18 November, the weekly magazine Business Sports announced that the manufacturer of healthcare products Johnson & Johnson would not extend its sponsorship agreement with the IOC. The London Olympics were losing their fourth sponsor after Kodak, Manulife and Lenovo. On their part, the boss of British Airways acknowledged that their company would not have signed the same contract with London 2012 if it had known that the crisis was coming. [...]
[...] (2006) The economic impact analysis of culture. Paris. Websites • www.jo-2012.fr • www.france24.fr • www.grip.org.fr • www.alterinfo.net • www.larousse.fr • www.club-innovation.info • www.wikipedia.org Positive or negative for the event - Cost of manufacturing and infrastructure management -negative image -mass effects difficult to manage - Improvement of transport infrastructure Stock Image-positive Strong impact with respect to tourism -Attraction of businesses -Drop in unemployment Environmental effects-positive + + Costs Benefits Operating income: ticket sales, TV rights - Operating costs (organizational costs) -Cost Infrastructure - The price paid exceeds the proposed show Visiteur Costs Benefits - The price paid is less ]^_`acrstu¤¾Âk Š Ÿ ° ô ÿ -"013hôßôÌôÌôÌôÌô·ô¢ô·ôÌôŠôÌôÌwÌwÌwÌwÌwÌwÌlÌwÌwÌhíÝhò}ÄB* ph%híÝhò}ÄB* OJ[?]PJ[?]QJ[?]^J[?]ph/híÝh=å5?>* CJOJ[?]PJ[?]QJ[?]^J[?]ph)híÝh=å CJ0OJ[?]PJ[?]QJ[?]^J[?]ph)híÝh=åB* CJ$OJ[?]PJ[?]QJ[?]^J[?]ph%híÝh =åB* the show offered Costs Benefits Society Output Input Attracting non-local spectators Who are spending money in this area Who use them to subsidize the event That come directly or indirectly to the public or private authorities That gives rise to new money Local communities The people who pay taxes That benefits the residents Short-term impact - Infrastructure construction - Investment of money - Job creation perishability -Stimulation of the real estate market -Mass arrival of tourists -Social benefits Reutilization of infrastructure - Use of new facilities by local residents - Creation of sustainable jobs -Increase in tourism -Long-term social benefits (in some cases) environmental-impact Long-term impact EVENT Impairment of the U.S. [...]
[...] Among cultural events, the best example is that of the cultural exhibition in Lisbon in 1998. With significant financial support, the exhibition of 1998 allowed the decontamination of the river, the modernization of waste treatment and the removal of an oil refinery in another site. All these examples allow us to show that while at first glance, the big events are considered bad for the environment the host cities have become proactive in this area. Indeed, some countries do not hesitate to copy or move closer to the manufacturing techniques used in the construction of other infrastructure. [...]
using our reader.