Denver Post seeks Olympics-coverage sponsors

[MileHigh]

(Typing on my phone. Please forgive typos.)

That's correct. I did the booking for us that year and got sticker shock on lodging with our three folks sharing a unit in one of the cheaper areas.

I hope Mark gets to go. He always finds some good, unique stories when he's out there that tend to blow up online. (The halfpipe skier from the US who qualified for another country by doing no tricks and never falling, as an example.) And there are so many Colorado athletes, you want to tell their stories. At the same time, the overall audience return isn't what it used to be, and watching the Olympics has become more and more of a challenge every two years as streaming popularity grows while NBC still thinks we're in 1992 waiting each night to huddle around the TV to enjoy three hours of coverage. Even the limited live coverage NBC does provide reaches the Mountain time zone on a one-hour delay. And the event curation on the app is horrible. Perhaps that creates a bigger argument to go: Be the source for olympics info for your readers. At the same time (and maybe I'm just the old man yelling at the clouds here), I know my interest in the Olympics has waned considerably since I was in college, mainly as a direct result of NBC's coverage approach, and I can't help but think I'm in the majority here. If your audience is starting to evaporate, do you still spend $20,000+ to send two people when access isn't going to be great and China has the entire thing in a bubble you can't leave unless you want to be quarantined in a hotel room for a month? Corporate sponsorship there is probably needed.

(Enter stats about how 2021 was the most watched Olympics ever or something here to shut me up.)

All of this, though NBC did start moving out of the 20th century with Tokyo by showing live events coast to coast then doing its dreaded nightly package in prime time. But Tokyo was the least watched prime time Olympics -- summer or winter -- and these Games will be worse.

I hope Mark goes, but groveling for a corporate sponsor one month out -- yikes. And shows the state of the industry.

 

[Pilot]

(Typing on my phone. Please forgive typos.)

That's correct. I did the booking for us that year and got sticker shock on lodging with our three folks sharing a unit in one of the cheaper areas.

I hope Mark gets to go. He always finds some good, unique stories when he's out there that tend to blow up online. (The halfpipe skier from the US who qualified for another country by doing no tricks and never falling, as an example.) And there are so many Colorado athletes, you want to tell their stories. At the same time, the overall audience return isn't what it used to be, and watching the Olympics has become more and more of a challenge every two years as streaming popularity grows while NBC still thinks we're in 1992 waiting each night to huddle around the TV to enjoy three hours of coverage. Even the limited live coverage NBC does provide reaches the Mountain time zone on a one-hour delay. And the event curation on the app is horrible. Perhaps that creates a bigger argument to go: Be the source for olympics info for your readers. At the same time (and maybe I'm just the old man yelling at the clouds here), I know my interest in the Olympics has waned considerably since I was in college, mainly as a direct result of NBC's coverage approach, and I can't help but think I'm in the majority here. If your audience is starting to evaporate, do you still spend $20,000+ to send two people when access isn't going to be great and China has the entire thing in a bubble you can't leave unless you want to be quarantined in a hotel room for a month? Corporate sponsorship there is probably needed.

(Enter stats about how 2021 was the most watched Olympics ever or something here to shut me up.)

We did see really good traffic in 18, and between that and our preview special section I know we always felt it was a pretty good investment that largely paid for itself. But obviously it's a bit different model at a smaller paper.

Mark does a great job getting quirky things. The skier-who-can't-ski story was definitely a Blevins find, though!

 

[Matt Stephens]

We did see really good traffic in 18, and between that and our preview special section I know we always felt it was a pretty good investment that largely paid for itself. But obviously it's a bit different model at a smaller paper.

Mark does a great job getting quirky things. The skier-who-can't-ski story was definitely a Blevins find, though!

Doh! You are right. That was Jason. I feel so silly.

I actually miss that lead-up coverage to the Olympics in 18. Jason basically did a feature a Sunday for a couple of months, going to visit a Colorado Olympian who was about to head to South Korea. … Dammit, now I want Olympics coverage!

 

[LanceyHoward]

I don't know for certain, but when I left, it was my understanding they were going to go. But then again, they did not go to Tokyo.

And, yeah, Winter Olympics are a bigger deal here (especially since there was lots of chatter of a possible Denver bid that, rightly, wasn't pursued). The I-70 traffic this holiday weekend will be a debacle. heck, every winter weekend on I-70 is a debacle. Imagine trying to get from Denver to Vail for the downhill or Steamboat for the ski jump or Aspen for the snowboarding.

I promise to stop threadjacking after I post this. But when Coloradans voted out the 1972 Winter Olympics I think it was was done by passing a constitutional amendment. So Colorado State Constitution says no state funds can go towards holding an Olympics.

So when "A Let's Host the Winter Olympics" movement starts in Colorado it runs in to the obstacle that the Colorado Constitution would have to be amended. Holding the Olympics got crushed in 1972 the voters when Colorado was a solidly red state. Now that Colorado is a blue state such an amendment would likely do no better and hence is an insurmountable obstacle to a Colorado Olympics.

 

[Pilot]

I promise to stop threadjacking after I post this. But when Coloradans voted out the 1972 Winter Olympics I think it was was done by passing a constitutional amendment. So Colorado State Constitution says no state funds can go towards holding an Olympics.

So when "A Let's Host the Winter Olympics" movement starts in Colorado it runs in to the obstacle that the Colorado Constitution would have to be amended. Holding the Olympics got crushed in 1972 the voters when Colorado was a solidly red state. Now that Colorado is a blue state such an amendment would likely do no better and hence is an insurmountable obstacle to a Colorado Olympics.

@MileHigh or others will probably know better than me, but I was in a meeting about this recent campaign and I think they'd come up with some fairy tale private funding plan that avoided the pitfalls of the previous effort. Needless to say I'm not shocked it didn't work out.

I don't remember anything about an amendment but that could be.

 

[MileHigh]

I promise to stop threadjacking after I post this. But when Coloradans voted out the 1972 Winter Olympics I think it was was done by passing a constitutional amendment. So Colorado State Constitution says no state funds can go towards holding an Olympics.

So when "A Let's Host the Winter Olympics" movement starts in Colorado it runs in to the obstacle that the Colorado Constitution would have to be amended. Holding the Olympics got crushed in 1972 the voters when Colorado was a solidly red state. Now that Colorado is a blue state such an amendment would likely do no better and hence is an insurmountable obstacle to a Colorado Olympics.

@MileHigh or others will probably know better than me, but I was in a meeting about this recent campaign and I think they'd come up with some fairy tale private funding plan that avoided the pitfalls of the previous effort. Needless to say I'm not shocked it didn't work out.

I don't remember anything about an amendment but that could be.

It was a push by Hickenlooper (and Hancock), but Polis, before he came into the governor's office, was against it, saying it would be "fun for millionaires" and would only support it if someone else paid for it.

But the USOPC chose Salt Lake City over Denver for the U.S. bid on 2030 so it's moot. I don't remember any chatter of an amendment, but I'll defer to Lancey on that one.

But, yeah, it was a pie-in-the-sky, no-public-money approach to host the "least expensive" Olympics (they always say that and it never happens, except China and Russia).

 

[LanceyHoward]

It was a push by Hickenlooper (and Hancock), but Polis, before he came into the governor's office, was against it, saying it would be "fun for millionaires" and would only support it if someone else paid for it.

But the USOPC chose Salt Lake City over Denver for the U.S. bid on 2030 so it's moot. I don't remember any chatter of an amendment, but I'll defer to Lancey on that one.

But, yeah, it was a pie-in-the-sky, no-public-money approach to host the "least expensive" Olympics (they always say that and it never happens, except China and Russia).

I stopped being lazy and used Google.

Colorado did pass a constitutional amendment amendment prohibiting the use of public funds 1972 Olympics. I had forgotten the City of Denver separately passed a similar measure.

The Deseret News - Google News Archive Search

I thought that the language to prohibit the Olympics in the amendment was not limited to the 1972 Olympics. And maybe the Denver charter amendment is the document that permanently prohibits public funding.
Salt Lake City is a better place for the Winter Olympics. When Denver got the Olympics they promised to hold the Alpine events just west of Denver near Evergreen. Even in the 1970's there was not enough snow in Evergreen to support a big downhill event. But the organizing committee was worried they would not get the Olympics if they admitted that the Alpine events would have to go to a higher altitude further from the city. Even if the Alpine events were held at Copper Mountain that would still be 75 miles from Denver and a logistical nightmare if a blizzard blew in.

I have never been to SLC but my understanding is that the ski resorts are held much closer to that city and there are not the logistical problems that exist in Colorado.

 

[MileHigh]

I stopped being lazy and used Google.

Colorado did pass a constitutional amendment amendment prohibiting the use of public funds 1972 Olympics. I had forgotten the City of Denver separately passed a similar measure.

The Deseret News - Google News Archive Search

I thought that the language to prohibit the Olympics in the amendment was not limited to the 1972 Olympics. And maybe the Denver charter amendment is the document that permanently prohibits public funding.
Salt Lake City is a better place for the Winter Olympics. When Denver got the Olympics they promised to hold the Alpine events just west of Denver near Evergreen. Even in the 1970's there was not enough snow in Evergreen to support a big downhill event. But the organizing committee was worried they would not get the Olympics if they admitted that the Alpine events would have to go to a higher altitude further from the city. Even if the Alpine events were held at Copper Mountain that would still be 75 miles from Denver and a logistical nightmare if a blizzard blew in.

I have never been to SLC but my understanding is that the ski resorts are held much closer to that city and there are not the logistical problems that exist in Colorado.

Blizzards are rare here, as you know. And probably even more so in the 1970s. Though any kind of snow event back then would make getting on I-70 a disaster. Today? Not so much. CDOT has things down pretty good.

And the resorts -- Vail, Copper, Breck, Steamboat, Aspen -- could accommodate athletes, officials, fans, etc. and not base them in Denver. It really could work, but at what cost? Not worth it, to me.

 

[LanceyHoward]

Blizzards are rare here, as you know. And probably even more so in the 1970s. Though any kind of snow event back then would make getting on I-70 a disaster. Today? Not so much. CDOT has things down pretty good.

And the resorts -- Vail, Copper, Breck, Steamboat, Aspen -- could accommodate athletes, officials, fans, etc. and not base them in Denver. It really could work, but at what cost? Not worth it, to me.

I know blizzards are rare in Colorado. But if one hit at the wrong time it can still create a traffic disaster. I used to play on a pretty good trivia bowl team at CU in early April. I could not get out of Castle Rock to Boulder for two days during the competition. My mom paid off a neighbor with a four wheel drive to get me to Aurora. Oddly enough conditions in Aurora was OK so I borrowed her car and drove to Boulder.

And I do think that many of the destination resorts in Colroado could serve as a second Olympic site. But the IOC has seemed to be resistant to slitting sites.

 

[HanSenSE]

Update: Salt Lake Tribune is sending a reporter to Beijing.

 

[MileHigh]

Olympics Coverage and Mark Kiszla's Tweet-for-Sponsors Fail

 

[studthug12]

To me a feature on the athlete leading up to the Olympics and telling their story of hardship is far better for print than the actual event and performance of say a skier's run. The journey is far more interesting to me and can do that without going to Beijing obviously.