Beware the Athens effect!

From, of all things, the This is Dorset website today

BEWARE the fate of Athens 2004 - that's the warning Weymouth and Portland Olympics chiefs are being urged to take heed of.
A leading tourism lobbyist says Britain shouldn't rest on its 2012 Olympics laurels and assume the games will bring a large influx of visitors.
Regular tourists stayed away from Greece when Athens hosted the 2004 event because of fears of overcrowding and overpricing, Tourism Alliance policy director Kurt Janson said.
Greece's total tourism dropped by 15 per cent in 2004 as a result, he added.
Mr Janson warned the borough might struggle to attract regular visitors in 2012 who have little interest in sailing events.
He said: "If you are already a successful tourism destination there is a risk that your usual tourism flow will be disrupted by hosting the Olympics."
Mr Janson, writing in the industry journal Tourism, said UK Olympic hosting sites could avoid the fate of Athens by encouraging additional tourists without discouraging regular visitors.
This can be achieved by government and tourism industry experts working together to resolve long-standing tourism issues and create a targeted tourism strategy.
Weymouth and Portland can learn from the examples of successful Olympics like Barcelona (1992 Olympics) and Seoul (1988) where the Games left an enduring tourism legacy, Mr Janson said.
In Dorset, a Welcoming Our World (WOW) fund has been launched to raise the quality of the visitor experience in the county.
The fund, started up with a £400,000 grant, will go towards showcasing everything Dorset has to offer tourists.
Dorset 2012 legacy manager Gary Fooks said: "We want the wow factor, and people to realise that we have an absolutely fantastic county in terms of culture, arts, sport, natural beauty."
Coun Howard Legg, the borough council spokesman for corporate affairs and special projects, said the Olympic Games will open the area to an international tourism market it has never had access to before.
He added: "We intend to ensure that the long-term benefits of this will far outstrip any possible disruption to the regular market over the two-week period of the main sailing events themselves.
"The economic benefits of Weymouth and Portland's increased profile are already stacking up: an additional £400 million of external investment in the borough is already planned in the next four years.
"We are planning to take advantage of the Olympic sailing events as much as we are able and to mitigate against the few downside risks they may also bring with them."
But not everyone in Weymouth and Portland will be bewaring the fate of Athens. Local sailor Sarah Ayton will be hoping for a repeat performance of the Greek games, where she won gold in the Yngling class with team-mates Sarah Webb and Shirley Robertson.

20% chance of running over Budget?

OK, so today the government announced that there was a 20% chance that the cost of the Games would overrun Budget. Thank you Ms Jowell - let's be fair what Budget we are talking about - I enclose a copy of the one currently in use - please note the omittance of legacy costs and inflation amongst other things. Also note that this includes £2 billion (more than 25% of the stated costs) while the "extra" £1 billion of this fund has been ingnored. Perhaps that will quietly be expended (did I hear the words "slush fund"?).

I'll give odds of 3 to 1 that the Budget will over-run - if the government has the honesty to declare all the expenses involved in preparing the ground, constructing the venues and then ensuring that the items constructed are made available to the public after the Games are over.

As a retired accountant I would have been in serious trouble in my working life if, in preparing a budget, I announced that I would require a contingency fund of 25% and that it would probably be used - without explaining how and why it would be required. Is this the level of accuracy that Gordon Brown used to prepare his Annual Budget for the UK when he was Chancellor?

Cost Overrun?

Interesting to hear Seb Coe today say that the project is running to plan - or even slightly ahead. This carefully covered the fact that there is a fund to cover cost overruns - that is, in simple terms, errors made resulting in an underestimate of the costs. The amount set aside for this is £3 billion - and it was also announced today that all of this fund will be used. There are still five years to go, and much construction yet to undertaken. So how do we know that this £3 billion is the "bottom line"? And is the amount of this fund included in the overall budget? If not, the costs will clear £15 billion - and then the next target will be £20 billion....

Hold on to your hats - it's going to be a rough ride!