ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 10324|回复: 62

[阅读小分队] 【Native Speaker每日综合训练—36系列】【36-08】经管 Olympics

[精华]   [复制链接]
发表于 2014-5-9 20:09:55 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式


周五又来了~!
举办奥运会需要花费人力物力(似乎总是亏钱),但也会为举办国/城市带来很多好的影响。
这次的主题主要表现奥运会对不同举办国产生的经济方面的影响。大家应该特别熟悉所以也没有话痨的机会了。

Speaker选自npr,大家可以利用这个材料练一练如何在美音和英音之间切换……
Speed包含3篇文章。
第一篇由日本获得2020年奥运举办权引发对国家和城市为什么执着于申办奥运的思考。
第二篇与北京奥运有关,北京举办奥运会所花费的人力物力是否值得?评价挺犀利的。
第三篇将视线转向举办奥运会后的伦敦,奥运会是否为伦敦的经济复苏带来了强劲的推动力?
Obstacle的主角是前不久结束的索契冬奥会。主要从预测的角度看待冬奥会对索契和俄罗斯的经济产生的影响。

奥运会为国家/地区/城市带来的方方面面的影响不是奥运结束之后马上就能见分晓的,唯有时间能给出答案。

Enjoy~



Part I: Speaker


Did London Get An Economic Boost From The 2012 Olympics?


This cable car line in London, shown on Jan. 27, was built in time for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games in the city. It is taking 35 percent fewer visitors than predicted.
Matthew Lloyd/Getty Images

Source:npr
http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/02/03/270950685/did-london-get-an-economic-boost-from-the-2012-olympics


[Dialog, 7min 40sec]

本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
 楼主| 发表于 2014-5-9 20:09:56 | 显示全部楼层
Part II: Speed





The Economist explains
Why would anyone want to host the Olympics?
Sep 8th 2013, 18:30 by T.W.

[Time 2]

      TO TRIUMPHANT shouts of “banzai!” it was announced on September 7th that Tokyo would host the 2020 Olympic games. The city fended off not-especially-stiff competition from Madrid, whose chances were damaged by Spain’s sickly economy, and Istanbul, whose image was tarnished when its police spent the summer practising for the 100-metre baton-charge. It was not the strongest field of candidate cities in Olympic history. But the contest demonstrated the lengths that countries will go to for the privilege of hosting the world’s biggest sporting bash. Shinzo Abe (pictured above, third from right), Mariano Rajoy and Recep Tayyip Erdogan all flew to Buenos Aires, where the International Olympic Committee (IOC) was voting, to make the official case for their respective countries. Tokyo had previously bid unsuccessfully for the 2016 games; Madrid had bid for both 2016 and 2012. Poor Istanbul has now been rejected five times. Why are cities so keen to host the Olympics?

      On the face of it, throwing the world’s biggest party—and paying for it—is not especially appealing. The cost used to be fairly modest: London’s 1948 Olympics cost £732,268, or about £20m ($30m) in today’s money. Nowadays hosting the games is a different business. The 2008 Beijing games, the priciest ever, are reckoned to have cost about $40 billion. That is likely to be eclipsed next year by the Sochi winter games, which are on course to cost $50 billion. Tourism may help to offset the expense, but a spike in arrivals is not guaranteed: Beijing saw a drop in hotel bookings during its Olympic summer. And the chance to spruce up a city sometimes ends up creating eyesores instead. Some of Greece’s costly stadiums now look as run-down as the Parthenon (and have fewer visitors).


[307 words]


[Time 3]

      The main reason cities want to host the Olympics is that, perhaps against the odds, they are wildly popular with the voters who foot the bill. The IOC found that public support for hosting the games was around 70% in Tokyo, 76% in Madrid and 83% in Istanbul. Londoners, sometimes a cynical bunch, were in favour of the 2012 games, in spite of dissent from some quarters (including this newspaper, which recommended leaving it to Paris). At the end of last year, with the crowds departed, eight out of ten said it was worth the extraordinary cost, even as cuts to public services began to bite. Popularity aside, Olympic bids often have other agendas. The Beijing games were intended to show off China’s spending and organisational power. London’s games were a means of bringing back to life a poor part of the capital at a speed that defied normal budgets and planning regulations. Tokyo hopes the 2020 games can gee up Japan’s lacklustre economy.

      It is a high-risk game. Rio’s hosting of the 2016 games had strong local support during the bidding process, but has since become a focus of those protesting against government waste (they also rage against the World Cup, which Brazil will host next year). Politicians can be left looking ridiculous, or worse: Mexico’s 1968 Olympics are remembered as much for the massacre of student protesters ten days before the games as for the sporting events themselves. Even if it goes well, the seven-year gap between bidding for the games and staging them means that the politicians who shepherd the bid through are seldom around when the fun begins. The Labour government and Labour mayor of London who helped to win the bid for Britain were long gone by 2012. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is no longer Brazil’s president (though some wonder if he might just try to make a comeback). Shinzo Abe faces no term limits as Japan’s prime minister, so could, in theory, still be around to open the Tokyo games in 2020. More likely, though, someone else will be there to take the credit—or the blame.


[369 words]

Source:The Economist
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/09/economist-explains-0





Notes:
déjà vu--法语单词,似曾相识的。



Beijing Olympics 5 Years On – So Did the Games Really Happen?
Jul 17, 2013 By Elaine Pang

[Warm Up]

      The Beijing Olympics were the most talked-about event leading up to 2008. The Games were undoubtedly a vehicle to show that China had arrived. And indeed she had, as China showed that she could do it faster, higher and stronger. Outside China, the international community harbored hopes or skepticism that Beijing’s hosting the Olympics would pave the way for a more open China. But five years on, there is nary a whisper about the Beijing Olympics in China. After all the crowds have gone home, it certainly seems like it is "business as usual" in China. Hosting the Olympics almost never makes economic sense, but China, like other host countries, hoped for prestige, increased tourism and business investment. Can five years of time tell if it was all worth it in the end for China or was it just a lavish show of “face”?

[149 words]


[Time 4]

Dollars and sense of Olympic proportions

      In a typical Chinese show of “face”, China certainly pulled out all the stops to wow the world. Official estimates put spending on the Games at 2.2bn USD, in addition to an unprecedented 40bn USD expended on infrastructure starting from 2001, the year Beijing won the bid. According to an assessment by the U.N. Environment Programme, most went into creating green space, expanding the public transport network and pumping up the sewage system. At least $2bn was splashed on 37 stadiums and facilities.


      Obviously, the Olympics are not exactly a cheap party to host, so what kinds of returns on investment can be expected? Probably the best possible scenario was that of Barcelona, which saw a tripling of tourism for the three years after the 1992 Games. However, for China, increased tourist arrivals during the Games wasn’t immediately possible because of tightened visa requirements. Tourist arrivals also continued to fall the year following the Games.

      In any case, all hosts countries experience a surge in GDP in the years leading up to the event, due to the requisite massive capital investments. But figures go back to normal right after the Games. Besides, recouping this capital outlay is another matter altogether. Purpose-built stadiums do have a tendency to morph into white elephants. Case in point: the Beijing National Stadium went from a $480 million Bird’s Nest into a (mostly) empty nest. Tourists did flock there immediately following the Games but after the halo wore off, attempts failed to turn it into a money-making venue, one that included a snow theme park. The nearby Beijing National Aquatics Center, or Water Cube, may have been spared from this fate by becoming a water theme park, albeit at a loss of $1 million a year. For the amount spent on sprucing up Beijing infrastructure, leaders argued that the capital expenditure was what a growing economy would have undertaken anyway. Small change for a country capable of constructing entire “ghost towns”.


[342 words]


[Time 5]

Take a deep breath

      One facet of Beijing that warranted immediate attention was air quality, a nagging problem that still plagues the capital today. Concerns of the effects of chronic pollution on the performance and even health of athletes led the capital to implement measures ranging from factory closures, reduction in coal consumption and aggressive restrictions on car numbers. During the Games, reporting on air quality and cloud seeding measures were practically silenced. Air quality in Beijing improved markedly, only to return to previous levels after controls were relaxed. While it may never be known if the 2008 Olympics served as a catalyst for unexpected air quality data disclosures last year, it certainly does invoke a sense of déjà vu. But one leftover from the 2008 Games is continued restrictions on car use by the last digit on number plates, which took 2 million cars off the road.

Spirit of the Games

      Unfortunately today, events like the Olympics have been downgraded from their lofty ideals to become political carrots. Proponents like former British Prime Minister Tony Blair believed that the Games would herald a “new epoch”, with greater openness and less “ignorance and fear”. But in other quarters, the controversial move of awarding the right to host the Games to what many deemed as a repressive regime was met with skepticism and even hostility. Predictably, the impeccably choreographed opening ceremony coincided with protests in countries overseas. Despite China’s promises to improve its worldwide image regarding certain controversial topics, nothing much has changed in the years following the Olympics.

So was it all worth it in the end?

      So hosting the Olympics makes no economic sense. Then why is there no shortage of bids every four years? Like athletes competing in the track, hosting an event of this magnitude in the global arena does seem a glorious avenue to push oneself to the limits. And undeniably, China had achieved that. Yet from the experience of one residing in China in the years surrounding the Beijing Olympics, the Games seem to be a distant memory in everyday life. The past glory is never brought up in conversations of the average person on the street, on a steady diet of more immediate concerns on Weibo. From an organizational standpoint, China executed a flawless Olympics to silence detractors, who picked on pollution, food safety, traffic and anything and everything else. But that’s all that seemed to be achieved. To the authorities, for whom face seemingly means everything, perhaps that is enough.

[427 words]


Source:eChinacitites
http://www.echinacities.com/expat-corner/Beijing-Olympics-5-Years-On-So-Did-the-Games-Really-Happen





Tourism and the economy
Easy come, easy go
Booming post-Olympics tourism won’t boost the economy as much as hoped
Sep 28th 2013 | From the print edition

[Time 6]

      BRITONS have had some good economic news to celebrate over the past few months. Unemployment is falling, house prices in England hit a record high in July and economic output appears to be growing at its fastest pace since 2010.

      At first glance Britain’s tourism industry appears to be contributing to the economic bounce. Data released this month by the Office for National Statistics suggest that there has been a big increase in foreign tourists visiting Britain since London hosted the Olympics last year. In the first seven months of 2013, foreign visitor numbers rose by 4%, compared with the same period in 2012, and spending was up 12%. In July 2013 foreign visitors spent 30% more than in July 2012, setting a new record.


      Hotels and attractions nationwide say they are benefiting from the unexpected boost in the tourist trade. According to data produced by STRGlobal, a consultancy, hotel-occupancy rates rose in nearly every English region in the first half of 2013. London, in particular, has seen a surge in foreign tourists since the Olympics ended: hotel-occupancy rates in the capital jumped by seven percentage points to 89% in June compared with a year earlier.


      The government has been quick to attribute the tourism boom to the Olympics, in an effort to justify some of the £8.9 billion ($14.3 billion) spent staging them. There may be some truth in this. Visits from countries keen on the Olympics increased the most: up by 24% from Latin America and 11% from China, compared with growth of 1% from Europe and a fall of 4% in visitors from North America, according to VisitBritain, a tourism quango.




      Will this post-Olympics surge in visitors attracted to Britain contribute much to its economic recovery? The net impact of tourism on output depends not only on how much cash foreign visitors spend, but also on what Britons spend abroad. And although record amounts are being spent in Britain by foreign tourists, Britons have upped their spending on foreign holidays by a similar amount. So far for 2013, the gap between what Britain earns and spends on tourism has remained around the same since the summer of 2011 (see chart). The average monthly tourism deficit for January to July 2013 was £1.125 billion, only £7m less than the previous two years’ average. And in spite of the influx of tourist cash this year, the tourism deficit this summer is still higher than during the Olympics.

      Trading what Britain has lots of—rain and heritage—for reliable sunshine, which it lacks, may be no bad thing for most Britons. But tourism will have less to offer the economic recovery unless more Britons can be persuaded to holiday at home rather than overseas. Alas, selling rainy Britain abroad may prove easier than selling it to Britons themselves.


[474 words]

Source:The Economist
http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21586885-booming-post-olympics-tourism-wont-boost-economy-much-hoped-easy-come-easy-go



本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
 楼主| 发表于 2014-5-9 20:09:57 | 显示全部楼层
Part III: Obstacle




ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE 2014 SOCHI WINTER OLYMPICS
The Sochi Olympic Games may boost the local economy but their impact on Russia’s national economy will be limited
05 February 2014
By Olga Ponomarenko and Alexander Plekhanov

[Paraphrase 7]

      Sochi, a fashionable seaside city in Russia’s Krasnodar region, will be hosting the Winter Olympic Games from 7 to 23 February 2014. It is a major event in the world calendar: 60 foreign leaders are expected to be among the 40,000 spectators attending the opening ceremony.

      But will it boost the economy – at the time when Russia’s growth slowed down to only 1.3 per cent last year?

      Finding an answer in history is not easy. Hosting Olympic Games and other major sports events has until recently been a prerogative of advanced economies. They hosted all but four Olympics of the 20th century, the exceptions being the 1968 Olympics in Mexico, the 1980 Olympics in Moscow, the 1984 Winter Olympics in Sarajevo and the 1988 Olympics in Seoul.

      Breaking with this trend, the Olympics of the 21st century are increasingly held in emerging markets: by 2016, they will have been hosted in China, Russia and Brazil, while South Africa hosted the FIFA World Cup in 2010 and Ukraine co-hosted the Euro Cup two years later.

      Emerging markets typically face higher costs of staging such events – both because their existing stock of general and sports infrastructure is lower and because emerging market firms contributing to the preparation of the event may lack the technologies and management expertise available to their counterparts in advanced economies.


      Yet the benefits may also be higher: from improved investor and consumer confidence to higher economic returns on the much-needed infrastructure.

      Like good parties, Olympics almost never make money in pure accounting terms: revenue from ticket sales, sale of broadcasting rights and sponsorship do not cover the costs (Chart 1).

      Sochi will be no exception. In fact, the accounting loss will probably be one of the highest on record, as average official ticket prices are generally lower than at comparable recent events while costs may be the highest in the history of the games (estimates have been revised multiple times since 2007, to reach around US$ 50 billion but are yet to be confirmed).

Chart 1. Costs and direct revenues of selected Olympic Games


Sources: International Olympic Committee (IOC), Preliminary estimates of costs only for the 2014 Games.

      Even though the estimated costs may seem enormous, they represent a relatively modest 2.4 per cent of Russia’s annual GDP (which now exceeds US$ 2 trillion a year). For comparison, the Greek Olympics of 2004 cost around 7 per cent of country’s annual GDP. They will not per se have a significant effect on government finances or Russia’s debt.


      Olympics also create jobs, typically 50,000 to 300,000 (Chart 2). However, most of such jobs are temporary: in construction, event management and tourism industries. Many of them may crowd out other jobs: of the 48,000 jobs created by the London Olympics in 2012 only around 10 per cent are estimated to have been filled by previously unemployed people.


      Russia’s low unemployment rate and a tight labour market suggest a limited scope for creation of new employment and any demand for labour may have just pushed up labour costs – another factor that may have contributed to rising costs of the event.


      Construction spending and employment creation span a number of years. Only a modest part of this effect is reflected in economic growth at the time of the event itself while a major part would have made a contribution to economic growth in the preceding years.


Chart 2. Number of jobs created



Sources: IOC estimates.

      While the impact of any individual sports event on a large economy like Russia’s (or Britain’s, or China’s or Brazil’s) may ultimately be fairly limited, the Olympic Games and other major events do have a large impact on the regional economies. The 2012 Olympics gave a major boost to the regeneration of East London as well as arguably helped to improve the reliability of London’s public transport network.

      There is some basis for comparison. For example in Russia the preparations for the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit held in Vladivostok in September 2012 had a major impact on the economy of Primorsky Region, where Vladivostok is located.


      The results of the latest round of the Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey conducted by the EBRD and the World Bank show that infrastructure no longer features among top obstacles to doing business in the region, in stark contrast with the results of the 2008-09 survey, while managers in the neighbouring Khabarovsk region still see infrastructure as the key obstacle to growth of their businesses.


      Similarly, out of 235 Olympic projects undertaken in the run-up to the Sochi Games, 37 are road projects in and around Sochi, alongside other infrastructure projects such as the railways and airport upgrades, as well as new hotels, restaurants and so on.


      The Conference Board of Canada estimates that the Vancouver Olympics lifted local economic growth by 0.8 per cent. In Krasnodar region the growth premium is likely to be higher. Since 2007, the start of the Sochi project, Krasnodar region has been growing much faster than the average Russian region, while between 1998-2007 it grew in line with the average (Chart 3).


Chart 3. Index of real gross regional product (2006=100)



Sources: Rosstat and authors’ calculations. Weighted average of all Russian regions.

      A greater challenge is to leverage the local legacy of Olympics, such as sports centres, the Olympic village, hotels and convention centres to boost a region’s longer-term development prospects. In many cases, these objects remain idle or underutilised but a number of cities have been successful in putting them to good use.


      
For instance, many cities converted Olympic villages into affordable housing. Atlanta, already a business hub and home to the US’s busiest airport, managed to attract additional 280 international companies over 10 years following the 1994 Olympics, thanks possibly to improved business infrastructure.

      Sochi might be in a position to further leverage its position as Russia’s leading sea resort – and perhaps have a shot at becoming a regional business hub in the South of Russia.


[998 words]

Source:European Bank
http://www.ebrd.com/pages/news/press/2014/140205.shtml



本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
发表于 2014-5-9 20:18:57 | 显示全部楼层
沙发~~~~~~~~~~~~~~·

Speaker:Whether the investment in Olympic games worth it is always a question.Completely all economists think that the olympic does not worth the investment.The benefit brougtht by investment and tourism can not cover the cost.But a recent analysis about London Olympic said that the city has already recoup its investment.Some people think that this report was funded by the government to say the positive result.And an economist said that the modeling may be the main factor which lead to the conclusion.But no people have seen this model.Now it is still too soon to know the outcome of London Olympic.We need to wait for years to see the result.

01:39
Tokyo succeeded in hosting 2020 Olympic games by beating Madrid and Istanbul.Many countres want to host Olympoic and think that the tourism will benefit the city.But the truth seems to be opposite.

01:53
The main reson is that voters want to host Olympic.And it also has some other agendas for a nation.But this is also a risk game.People who support during the bid may protest after it.And the politicans who lead the bid may not at that position several years later.

02:02
Beijing spent more thant 2 billion dollars on its facilities and more than 40 billion dollars total on Olympics.The tourism fall after the game partly due to the visa policy.The facilities left behind failed to become a money-making venue and lost money every years.It seems to be hard to recoup the investment.

02:23
The air quality is a big problem in Beijing.Although restriction during Olympic makes it better than before.It soon comes back expect the car number declines.The Olympic is more like an political things now,especially for china.But it seems to have no change after it.Although the Olympic can not make moeny,it has other good effect on China.

02:16
The tourism of British is booming after the Olympic.But the economic recovery can not be attributed to Olympic.Because at the same time,more britain spent holiday outside the British.The new tourism does not increase.

06:45
Main Idea:the economic impact of Sochi Winter Olympics
In 20th century,Olympics are most held by advanced countries.But in 21st century,more emerging markets will hold the Olympics.These nations may need to spend more money on hosting the Olympics.Because their existing infrastructures are low and they lack technologies and mamagementexpertise.But the Olympic can bring benefits.It can improve the investor and consumer confidence to higher economic returns on the much-needed infrastructure.Olympic's benefit is never in pure accouting terms.
As in Sochi,the money spent on Olympics is modest to Russia's GDP.It also creat jobs for Sochi,thought most of them are temporary and will push up labor cost.Construction spending and employment creation will improve the economy before the game.And to a large country as China and Russia,the economy benefit is regional.The constructions and facilities will highly improve the regional economy in the future.
The great challenges to all host countries of Olympics is to leverage the local legacy.Luckily,there are some good examples before.
 楼主| 发表于 2014-5-9 20:29:48 | 显示全部楼层
自己发个作业吧……


time:
Tokyo won the host right of 2020 Olympic Games.Candidates all want to host this game.The reason?
Negtive--Cost--very high(Beijing and Sochi).
Positive--Tourism--compensation?may not,actually may even drop(Beijing).
__________________
time:
Positive--People's support--high support rate.popular in voters who foot the bill.
Positive--Other reasons--Beijing/show China;London/capital become better;Tokyo/for better economy.
Negtive--politicians may seem silly,the gap between getting the right to host and actually staging the game,support may turn to resist.politicians may not have the chance to stay in their position long enough to see the game open.
_________________
time:
Beijing hosted the 2008 Olympics.But its economic sense seems not very good.Is it worth?
_______________
time:
The cost of this Olympic Game.High.Details(used in many parts).
Tourism didn't benifit from this Game(because of tight Visa).
GDP surged in the year due to large government investment but then droped to the normal level.
Stadiums built for the game became almost empty buildings and loss money every year.
________________
time:
The air pollusion problem in Beijing--good during Olympics,back after controls became relaxed.
Olympics may become political carrots.China didn't appear changes after Olympics.
Today 2008 Olympics Beijing is becoming a topic that far away from people's daily life.Worth or not?For authorities that focus on face,this Olympics got achivement.
_________________
time:
England's economy has good performance recently.
Its tourism is booming.The number of visitors overseas become higher than usual.
But tourism will not boost the economy recovery much.
Reason--Britons spend comparable money on overseas trips.So the deficit has few change.
__________________
time:
Sochi Olympics may boost regional economy,but will not have big positive influence on Russia's whole economy.
More and more emerging markets host Olympics these years.
(For the whole economy)
Negtive part--costs are high,because infrastructure in these regions are lower than their advanced counterparts.
Positive part--significant infrastructure improvement.
For accounting terms--always loss and not benifits:
1 Sochi's costs estimation(high).
2 this will only take 2% of Russia's GDP.not a big deal(compared with Greece).
For employment rate--Olympics boost jobs:
1 job opportunities become more and more.
2 employment's increase is temporate.
3 considering the situation of these countries' economy(London and Russia),many of the chances are taken by already unemployed groups.
For construction spending and other costs--span in many years,the results and influneces will appear later.
(For regional economy)
Olympics will boost regional economy.Examples.Regional improvements.Other events' benifits.The region where the event wil take place improve faster than average rate.
Challenges--leverage the legacy of Olymics.how to use the stadiums after the game.(successful case of Atlanta)
Prediction--Sochi may become a center of South Russia.

发表于 2014-5-9 20:36:36 | 显示全部楼层

[Speaker1]
Economics of hosting the Olympics
1-Fact:Some people think it not worth, but British government thinks it a very considerable benefit.
2- key detail: modeling
3- Opposte
sports economist: this report provided a bullish view
gov did some changes based on his feedback
4- Support
other economists: it's just too soon to know whether the London Olympics were worth the investment.
[Time 2]-[Time 3]
Question: Why are cities so keen to host the Olymplics?
1-Bad effect: cost a lot and creat eyesores instead the host cities
2-The main reason: They are wildly popular with the voters who foot the bill and the host cites have their own agendas about economics.
3-Risk:
people protest against government waste
The politicians who shepherd the bid through are seldom around when the fun begins, thus, leaving someone else to take the credit or blame.
[Time4]-[Time5]
Question: Can five years of time tell if it was all worth it in the end for China or was it just a lavish show of “face”?
1- Returns:
Tourist arrivals also continued to fall the year following the Games.
Stadiums still loss money.
The air quality problem still plagues the capital,although the restrictions on car use still continue.
Despite China’s promises to improve its worldwide image regarding certain controversial topics, nothing much has changed in the years following the Olympics.
2- Was it all worth?
China just achieved some memory left and no economic sense.

chronic:慢性的,习惯的
[Time6]
1-Factata suggest that there has been a big increase in foreign tourists visiting Britain since London hosted the Olympics last year.
2-Question: Will this sruge contribute to economic recovery?
Tourism will have less to offer the economic recovery unless more Britons can be persuaded to holiday at home rather than overseas.

[Obstacle]
Question: Will the Sochi Olympics boost the economy?
1-Never make money in pure accounting terms.
2-Creating jobs which are temporary.
3-Economic growth: lifted local economic growth by 0.8 per cent.
4-Challenge: leverage the local legacy of Olympics
5- Hope: Sochi might be Russia's leading sea resort or regional business hub in the future.

交作业啦!自习室没网吃饭完跑回来读完了,准备回自习室模考。杀G倒计时:DAY4
发表于 2014-5-9 20:41:47 | 显示全部楼层
好早!!
--------------
谢谢楼主!~

speaker:
the Sochi Winter Olympics Games is the most expensive one ever
the analysis of the British Olympics Games says that British has gain the cost back and will profit more in the future
the report is independent
some people criticize the model the government use
they want the model to be practical not academic
a professor said the report is bullish and ignore any negative aspects of the game
some correction based on the feedback of the professor
it is just to soon to know whether London gain benefit or profit from the game
notorious声名狼藉的

time2:
Japan won the hosting of the 2020 Olympic games
the expense of Olympic games is growing but there are still many counties or cities eager to hold the game
even through the game will boost the tourism of the country or the city, after the game, many stadiums built for the game may not be used well

time3:
the country which bids for the host of the games want to use the game to bring a change to their society or economy
some change or sacrifice the country made to win the bid
but there is still some group of people against the government to waste the money to bid the game

warm up:
how is China doing 5 years after the Olympic games

time4:
the tourism of China does not perform well due to the tightened visa requirements
there were a surge in GDP, but after the games, GDP comes back to its normal level
the facilities built for the games do not work as expected

time5:
in order to host the games, Beijing need to deal with the air pollution
political carrot?
some proponents believe the Olympic games need to face some changes
was it worthy for China to host the games?
it seems China has achieved all the goals and games do bring some benefit for the country

time6:
Britain’s tourism industry performs better than the same period of last year
the government contributes the increase to the host of Olympic games, however the tourism boom does not result in an economic recovery
the net impact of tourism on output depends not only on how much cash foreign visitors spend, but also on what Britons spend abroad
Britons have spent more abroad and balanced the increase of its own tourism
the government need to persuade its citizens to spend their holiday at home rather than overseas

time7:
in the history, most of the winter olympic games are hosted in Russia
Olympics almost never make money in pure accounting terms: revenue from normal ways never cover the cost
Olympics will create some jobs but most of the position are temporary
Russia’s low unemployment rate and a tight labour market suggest a limited scope for creation of new employment
the undertaken projects in preparation of the Olympics
country should use the objects in a good way to create more profit rather than let them idle or underutilized
发表于 2014-5-9 21:06:21 | 显示全部楼层
shouye thanks TaoRs

Obstacle : 5’45’’
The economics effect of olympic games
Holding big event game costs a lot of money on infustucture
But at the same time it can boost the economy and provide more job opportunities but most of the jobs are temporary such as tourist
The olympics of 21 century are increasing held in emerging markets
Challenge--how to leverage the local legacy of Olympics, such as studium,olympic village
Time 2 2’01’’
Why so many countries want to host olympics?
Tokyo would host 2020 olympic games by beating M and Istanbul
Throwing a big party is not ao appealing because the money spent on it can not offset by return such as tourism
Plus the chance to spruce up a city sometimes ends up creating eyesores
Time3 2’15’’
Throwing the world big party will help the politicians win the bill because most of the people support for hosting the games
It is a high risk game cuz hosting the game make the countries focused on things besides the game but government waste or other stuff

Time4 2’35’’
Chinese government spent a lot of money toprepare the Beijing Olympic Game
The returns on investment—tourist, but thetight visa requirements stopped a lot of tourist.
How to recoup this capital—bird’s nest turnedto a empty nest and water cube became a water theme park. The infrastructureexpenditure did contribution to the GDP
Time5 2’55’’
Several acts to control air pollution in beijingto guarantee a good air quality during Olympic game
发表于 2014-5-9 21:15:36 | 显示全部楼层
Timer2 2:50
Japan won the organised privilege of 2020 Olympics, which was usually paid by the organizing  country .the concerns have been aroused that whether the big input that the organizing country invest is worthy its value.   
Timer3 2:30
every country who host the Olympics has its own purpose of their development. But during the processing of bidding for the Olympics and building the Olympics construction , there may be many problems . examples : the party against government ;students are against government.
发表于 2014-5-9 22:37:39 | 显示全部楼层
一到周末事情就多到飞起好心塞
------------------------

【Speaker】
time2 00:02:34
time3 00:02:18
time4 00:03:10
time5 00:03:01
time6 00:02:36

【Obstacle】
00:06:13
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-3-29 15:49
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部