On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 18:14:48 -0700 (PDT), demorising@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>On Apr 9, 5:01 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 07:09:02 -0700 (PDT), xi <xieu.l...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> ><its likely a rich Asian will be more than happy to pick up the
>> >slack.><China, India, Japan?,
>> >Malaysia, Singa****e>
>>
>> >I am not so sure. To associate a brand to the Olympic brand is a
>> >billionaire decission that ust be done 4 years in advance. Who knows
>> >what can happen in 4 years.
>>
>> It is tied to my prediction that few if any G7 countries will want to
>> have that expensive an Olympics security headache. So an Asian
>> country bids for it, or perhaps a much reduced Olympics may induce a
>> G7 country to host it after all. Canada looks like the best
>> possibility. But with the 2010 Winter Olympics under its belt its
>> very chancy. The main point is the size and cost of hosting future
>> Olympics after London will be a lot more modest. That won't attract
>> the current US and G7 gflobal brands. The lower cost may attract the
>> up and coming Asian cor****ations. Its an advertisers market for
>> consumer products. So it won't be SINOPEC types but an excellent one
>> for Tata or Chinese cars, computers, white goods (not food products -
>> that will invite sneers of toxic foods). Yep. The Beijing Olympics
>> will be the last extravaganza for a long time to come.
>
>Summary of PaPaPeng: Holding the Olympics in Beijing will have the
>effect of ruining the Olympics "for a long time to come."
Explain? I don't get your point.
|
