Olympic numbers don’t add up

Re: “Olympics could recoup some transfer-payment money,” column, Aug. 21 Please get a columnist that can give numbers about the Olympics that make financial sense. It is my understanding from the only figures released so far that the cost is $4.6 billion. However, I believe that based on the details in the report and considering inflation, additions for security and lowballing of estimates to get approval, and a historical record of past Olympic over-runs, that the cost can easily be 50 per cent more for a total of $6.9 billion.

But just based on the current figure of $4.6 billion, how does Licia Corbella come up with a federal government contribution of $2 billion to $3 billion?

The “current” budget assumed the IOC, sponsors and ticket sales would provide $1.84 billion, leaving us short $2.8 billion.

Reportedly this was to be funded one-third each by city, province and federal. Thus the federal government would be contributing less than $1 billion. If she has information to justify her figures, using the mid-point of $2.5 billion, this implies that the cost of the games will be three times $2.5 billion or $7.5 billion plus the costs expected to be recovered of $1.84 billion giving a total of $9.3 billion.

This column was a sales job using an unsupported proposal of getting a federal contribution triple what had been discussed before and is just one more example of people who support the Games giving glowing reports and optimistic benefits that have no financial justification.

Can you get a rebuttal column from someone with some financial and estimating knowledge?

Hugh Powell, Calgary