In the article,” Predicting the Costs and Benefits of Mega-Sporting Events: Misjudgment of Olympic Proportions” by Jonathan Barclay, discusses how the economic benefits of hosting mega-sporting events are often exaggerated. When it comes for a country to host the Olympics, the process is very difficult when selecting the right country to host the Olympics. For many countries, the economic perspective poses the question of whether it will either be an economic pay-off or pay-out? According to the article,” There are a variety of reasons why cities may wish to host these events, the most compelling being the promise of a vast economic windfall forecasted by economic impact studies. Given these forecasts, an increasing number of developing economies …show more content…
It is also evident that cities that host these events must commit a significant investment into sports stadia and other miscellaneous infrastructure. Therefore, the question is whether the economic benefit compensates for and outweighs the vast costs and substantial risks incurred. Are the games ‘fool’s gold’ (Baade and Matheson, 2002) or a lottery jackpot (Preuss, 2006, p.183)? For all the risks and the infrastructure needed to host such event, nonetheless, is it honestly worth it for a hosting city to host the Olympics? Nevertheless, in the article, also highlights why the Olympic Games are becoming an increasingly expensive affair, especially for host cities that see it not only as an “opportunity to construct new sports stadia, but also to improve other infrastructure such as communication systems, housing facilities and traffic networks.” For instance, it addressed that during the Atlanta (1996) Olympics, that the city built relatively few sports arenas to complement existing infrastructure for its Olympic Games, cost an estimated $600 million (Baade and Matheson, 2004). The theory placed behind the Olympic Games is for tourism and to generate money or a profit when putting