my neighbors, my cell eyes and i saw, looked into it, my neighborhood, a child, 6 years old, 6 years old. his father died before 5 years. he's all he's along with his mother. he's in a side, he's home. he's playing with tablet or phone. well, it's out here what, what the child did. this was crying, innocent people, my message call to get into your that i mean, your quality of the policy that you really knew very

well in times of rising prices and uncertain supply ortiz new, show the cost of everything, games to keep you in the know and give a helping hand to catch christie, i guess next the oh, the us class. last last, it's imperial yet, but it is a way imperial power. it's raining, you read, you read different articles, different journals. so it's clear that they are aware that their power is waiting. they don't want to with

o. the global sports industry is worth over $500000000000.00 today. when north america leading the market and africa expected to be the fastest growing region, the olympics and fifo world cup are 2 major sporting events where countries can come together, as well as to show off their capabilities on the world stage. but how much does it actually costs to host $1.00 of these gigantic events that's going to be broadcasted to billions of people worldwide? i'm christy i and you're watching the cost of everything. and today we're going to be looking at the economic impact of global sporting events, like the world cup and the olympics, and how it really affects the host city with

the world cup is held every 4 years. and is the most popular international sporting competition washed by over 3500000000 people. that is even more than the super bowl or the olympics fans travel from all over the world to follow their favorite teams and a month long tournament. it was also one of the most lucrative sporting events in the world with the total revenue generated by the event estimated to be over $14000000000.00 through broadcasting right sponsorships, ticket sales, like the olympics. the world cup post is determined by a bidding process where host countries submit their plans on how they intend to run host and accommodate all the players and tourist. as it is such a high viewership that the for world cup has a significant economic impact for both the whole country and for the global economy

. during the tournament, the whole country gets a boost and tourism, which leads to an increase in local economic activities such as job creation. in addition, indirect economic benefits include increased media exposure, sponsorship deals, and the sale of merchandise and memorabilia. these factors can help to promote the host countries brand and attract further investment guitar, who host to the 2022 world cup is reported to spend over $220000000000.00 on the construction of a new metro system. roads. the new airport neighborhoods and even an entirely new city and 7 new stadium. for comparison stake, russia spent about $11000000000.00 in 2018 nice countries hosting a world cups. then tens of billions of preparations from building infrastructure, hotels, advertising campaign, ticket, sales, security,

etc. and much of that is often not recouped in terms of hard cash. instead, you get tv right, sold to broadcasters around the world, ticket sales, marketing rights, and an influx of tourism. over a 1000000 overseas visitors are expected during the month long torment, which increases sales for a hotel, a restaurant tours and over drivers. but these benefits are very short term and often do not outweigh the costs. hotel prices rise during the sell out event by wages of service workers do not necessarily go up by the same amount. this means the returns to capital are greater than those to labor. hosting a world cop is also an exercise in political capital and soft power. it gives the world a window into that country to show off how new its infrastructure is, how lucrative it is in order to attract future business. investments for our host

country is about pride and honor and publicity, more than it is about money. and while it welcomes foreign tourism, at the same time they get to spread its own cultural influence around the world to foreigners, to make them more aware of its traditions and customs. the hope and promise of hosting is that in the long run, the money spent on hosting build capacity for that country's economy to expand new roads and transport projects will also provide economic benefit. in terms of dollars, guitar has estimated that it will make $17000000000.00 in revenue after hosting the world cup accounting for $1200000.00 visitors and the sale of $3000000.00 tickets for matches. that is a far cry from the initial investment, but it hope that about 40000000 people will seek to visit the country in the future . after is heavy media exposure. so now a spring in victor matheson,

editor at the journal of sports, economic and professor at the college of the holy cross. so now is hosting the world cup rate for the whole country or the whole country when it comes to tourism . so it is actually generally pretty good for your tourism sector and your tourism sector only. so if you look something like a cutter cutter certainly had somewhere in the vicinity at least $500000.00 additional hotel room nights because of the world cup. probably a few more than that. we look back to things like rio, rio, had maybe 200000 addition, additional hotel room nights. we definitely see that again, the smaller events here in the us, like the super bowl, again, identifiable as big tourism events. the question is whether the tourism is enough to pay for all the other bills that come along with hosting these mega vents. now taxing businesses is a common way to raise funds to help pay for these fee for matches and these taxes

will still exist for years after fif was done. so what happens to the businesses after that? can they still survive? right, so it all depends on how much you've spent to do this, right. so cuts are, for example, spend somewhere in the vicinity of $200000000000.00 in preparations for this that's, that's more than not just any other mega event in history. that's more than every other world cup, for example, in history, all put together, it's more than 4 times what the most expensive olympic games ever cost. so this is, this is something that there's no way you can possibly get any sort of reasonable return out of this. on the other hand, the united states, canada, canada, and mexico are hosting the next one. and they're going to spend essentially nothing on new stadiums, at least. so when you keep your costs down, you have the possibility that these can be paid off with reasonable taxes over

a reasonable amount of time. but it's impossible when you're spending in the end, the billions of dollars like tokyo spent for the olympics like real spend for the world cup and the rest of brazil spent the world cup or in again in the hundreds of billions like cuts or spend for the last world cup. now it's really remarkable and unprecedented here. why would it guitar spend so much money on it? well, certainly for a country, this was a prestige project. nothing, nothing else. it was we have the money and we want to host this event. it's the same sort of thing of why would anyone spend $250000.00 on a gold plated custom lamborghini? well, because you can, there's no of, there's obviously no financial return on that for you. but it's all about showing off your country showing off your wealth more realistically, at least for some, some countries. it is an investment in,

in infrastructure and future tourism. it's a way to advertise your city or advertise your country. and in those cases, it's possible that it can work, but even most of those cases, it's a pretty big gamble. the van must have morphed into something different. i mean, since the country spend so much money, it must have been a completely different experience. yes, so i wasn't there for the event i was, i was in the country a few years before that in the, in the run up for this again. what's, what's astounding in cutters case is, this is a country that's roughly the size of the state of connecticut. and in the u. s, with about half the number of people is about the amount of infrastructure. so this was a country with literally one stadium in place when they are awarded the games that was up to the caliber that they needed for the world cup. they were bidding against the u. s. and when the u. s. put in their bid,

we have $79.00 different stadiums across the country that we said could be ready for a world class event. within 3 weeks. they had one stadium in the entire country to do this and the course had to build another 9 stadiums from scratch and, and again, when, when you're doing that sort of the spending on things that don't have a long run value for you, like stadium stadiums are not a good long run investment. again, there's just no way that you're doing this for any sort of plausible economic reason. and the economics of hosting things like fif on the olympics are so bad. then why do politicians play such significance on hosting and fight to have the right to host? well, so there's a couple different reasons, right? so 1st of all, just because it's a disaster or can be a disaster for a city of the whole or a countries a whole doesn't mean that there's not special interest within the city who could benefit from that. so for example, no, no better time to be a hotel owner. then during mega events,

so there's no doubt that certain sectors and of course, those are the sort of sectors that may have the year of the president or the mayor or the prime minister. the heavy construction industry loves these, right? because you have to build all those, those stadiums and those airports and those hotels. so they love this. so one thing you can, it can be a give away to the special interests just because it's not good for the country as a whole. doesn't mean that there's not influential people who can benefit. so that's number one. and of course the other reason here is it's just to show for ego, right? we've seen this again and again. china, when they hosted the summer olympics again, this was a way to project power, right? basically soft our were sports washing right when we have obviously guten, posting both at the winter olympics in sochi as well as the world cup in 2018. again, this is

a time for her to show off his political power and say, look how important russia is. we're hosting the world's most important sporting events. look at how strong a leader i am and i can bring these things to you. so certainly up front i'd as an important piece there as well. sometimes it's not always bad either. so for example, south africa, the 1st big sporting event they did when they, when they emerged from decades, carbide was hosting the rugby world cup. and that was actually a wildly successful in really bringing together whites and blacks in the country. as you know, to be able to refer something, not as a white south african, but as a south african. and the image of nelson mandela handing over the trophy to the white hampton francois cleaner is, is really a great image of, of the power and the, and the goodness of sport. unfortunately, others,

those sort of images are far too rare and far too often it's, it's just money give away. and looking back to the guitar world cup again, including the thousands of migrant workers who are exploited, was there a quantifiable benefit that justify this tremendous cost. so, so no or close, so that being said, they are going to be left with some things that are, that are fairly useful, right? so they're going to be it, they're going to be left with a much expanded transportation that works so much that are international airport. now monday, it's an international airport that's built to handle the sort of crowds you get during the world cup. ah, not during regular regular business. right now, they're gonna have a nice hotel sector that significantly improve the over there old hotel sector about again, that's again a going to be a sector that's rarely used to capacity. and at least in the united states, you need to fill up a hotel room about 70 percent of all nights to make the make it so that that hotel

can stay in business. it's unlikely that a bunch of these hotels are going to be having. busy ongoing business sits enough to fill up those hotel rooms night after night after night, which is what you need to actually have these things makes sense from an economic standpoint. again, additional additional roads, additional mass transit. it again, additional towards facilities. they're going to be left with a bunch of things, but almost almost certainly of much of it is going to be way out sized or the for the economy itself. and a cutter has been put on the map in a way that wasn't in the past. busy although again, that's not necessarily good either because a lot of what people know about carter is that it is a very, very conservative society, repressive towards women. no alcohol was i had serious issues with migrant workers during the building phases. so again,

some people say there's no such thing as bad publicity, but it's not entirely clear that that's true. thank you so much back there. make their matheson will stick around with us because after the break we will analyze how costly it is to organize and execute the winter and summer 11. don't go away. ah, ah, look forward to talking to you. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order to conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about personal intelligence. the point obviously is to place trust rather than a various job with artificial intelligence. real,

somebody with a robot must protect its own existence with oh ah

ah, the term strategic autonomy sounds good. the word strategic conjures up a sense of importance and autonomy presents a sense of independence. but when you consider the french president using this term, we are forced to wonder if he is a serious person after all, europe is no longer strategic or economist ah, welcome back to the cost of everything. while the olympic games have become the biggest sporting event in the world, attracting thousands of athletes to come together and compete and win pride for their home country. these games have come under immense criticism over the last decade. for much of the 20th century, the olympics was just a manageable burden for their host countries. games were publicly funded with the

advanced countries, better position to bear the cost due to their larger economies. however, once there was a jump in viewership and television broadcasting revenue hosting cities began to grow more ambitious, creating more expensive plans to demonstrate their progress on the world stage. host cities organizing the events need to invest millions into creating specialized sports facilities. you limping village and venue large enough to host the opening and closing ceremonies. infrastructure cost range anywhere from hundreds of millions of dollars to tens of billions of dollars depending on what infrastructure needed to be upgrade or built out. operational costs make up a smaller but still significant chunk of the host, the limpid budget, which includes security. and what is problematic are the so called white elephants or expensive facilities that because of their specialized nature, have limited post olympic. you need often impose cost for years to come,

such as the birds and stadium in from the beijing olympics, which was the $500000000.00 crown jewel center piece of the event that now stands empty. aside from hosting a few cultural exhibitions and the occasional concert, much of the time this beautiful venue stand empty. maybe up to the games. china husband, $43000000000.00 on the 2008 olympics at the time. more than 3 times more than any other olympic other venues go unused and will likely be demolished. many of the residential developments that were built up to house the extra corps and crowds are also standing empty. now, the building had almost 0 economic long term benefit. pulse olympic financial problems are common for host cities as spending billions to host a 2 week event almost never makes a profit. the city usually spends years paying off its olympic debt,

and it's often left with unused venue and white elephant main stadiums. athens also when billions over its plan budget of $1600000000.00 for the 2004 summer olympics and the greek citizens were left to pay for everything. in the aftermath, after tourism died down, there just wasn't any use for most of the building stadiums. and course it's these huge abandoned investments have been especially painful as they all contributed to greece's financial crisis. gang wong, south korea, which was responsible for the 2018 games is expected to incur $8500000.00 of annual deficits due to the upkeep of unused facilities. and now we're going to welcome back victor matheson. thank you so much for coming back selector, how many countries had netted an actual profit from hosting the olympics? and one of the benefits are there to be gain from hosting?

yeah, so uh the united states is them very well several times when we hosted the world cup and $994.00. i was still to this day the most successful world cup in terms of average attendance. we didn't build any new stadiums. we spent a little bit of money up putting a new coat of paint on, on a couple stadiums. we installed grass in the, in the indoor silver dome in detroit, a. but again, we spent almost nothing on this and yet attracted a tens of thousands of visitors from across the country. i, the, the organizers ended up with a big profit fif, ended up with a bunch of money. the money that of the united states netted on profit from selling tickets is still part of the u. s. soccer foundation been billed soccer fields in disadvantaged neighborhoods. so that's great. and again, is because the united states was able to host an event without having to spend billions tens of billions or again, hundreds of billions of dollars on new infrastructure. same thing happened in 1984

in an los angeles. when we hosted the summer olympics there, what was very unique about that games is that when it came time to ward the a vent to a ho city was angels was the only city that was willing to be the host in 1084. and therefore, it could dictate the terms of the event to the i o. c rather than the other way around. and they said, hey, we're not building any new stuff. we're going to use the roseville. we're gonna use the coliseum stadiums that were had that had been used 50 years earlier at the, at the last time the out with that los angeles had hosted the games. ah, they didn't build new dorm side any in any athlete. village they built the handed right over to you, c, l, a and u u. s. c. so they ended up having with the entire cost of the games was only about $1500000000.00 in today's dollars. that may seem a lot, but in, you know,

in comparison just the stadium for the tokyo olympics that never got to code it. might you but just the stadium costs over $1500000000.00. so the entire, her $984.00 summer olympics cost less the host than just building the national stadium for the tokyo games. and when you can keep costs down like that, it's possible to make a profit. and in reality, los angeles actually did come away with a healthy profit in the hundreds of millions of dollars. but that only was the case because they didn't spend multiple multiple billions or tens of billions putting the events on. now how does the government recoup the extra costs from spending on the olympics or the citizens on the hook for it? and do taxes usually go up leading up to these events like the olympics? yes, so the i o c. and certainly people as well require some sort of backed up. so even as a private entity says that they're going to put on the olympics, it requires

a public backstop that says if there any overruns that the government guarantees that this will go on. in all cases we have huge over runs and, and we have billions of dollars that cannot possibly be recovered just through things like hotel rentals and ticket sales and merchandise and things like this. so that does mean that the countries are on the hook for that. for example, montreal, which hosted in, in 1976. ah, they took them 30 years to pay off the debts from their stadium building projects. and of course they were going to use their olympic stadium for baseball team. by the time they actually got done paying for the stadium, that baseball team, the montreal expos had already moved out of town and is now the washington methods . which event has been the most wasteful? it seems like today, every country just keeps on trying to top each other,

building the biggest, the biggest that just to show off interest. and there limbeck has been wayne, one another on the street can get together in the especially if you've got to build a bunch of stadiums. there's no way you're going to make your money back on this. thank you so much, victor, for your time and insight today. it's been a pleasure. so our host, these cities, the winners or losers in the sporting scheme. i mean on the one hand, the city gets a temporary boost in tours and recognition. it gets to exports culture out and the city will undergo a major investment to build up the public transport and hotels to house the expected inflow of tourism. but on the other hand, many cities are left with abandon stadiums and arena's afterwards that were a complete waste of taxpayer money. the city is left with debt and once a temporary booth and tourism is gone, it's like nothing ever changed. in fact,

researchers have found the impact of tourism is mixed as the security crowding and higher prices that the olympic spring dissuade. many visitors, sidney vancouver and barcelona also flight increases and tourism. after they hosted paging london and salt lake city, all saw decreases and tourism. after years after the olympics, ultimately there is little evidence for an overall positive economic impact with no long term impact on the hosting countries g d p. so now a consensus has grown amman, economists that the olympic games need reforms to make them more affordable. and also less corrupt. i'm christy, i thanks for watching and we'll see you back here next time on the cost of everything. ah, ah ah,

ah ah choose. ah, overnighted, hillary strikes by ukrainian troops lead to civilians dead on 2 other wounded in rushes, 3 quarter according to local officials. also ahead i genuinely feel the biggest financial better in the world. but you have all the ages. riches banker has some choice words for america's currency, saying the dollar pulls too much power and damage is the global economy. with industry such if the weak tricky is 1st nuclear power plant built by a russian company proceed. so he'll state it off the 2 companies leaders take part

in that collaboration ceremony via with.