Lessons from Rio - Why India should not bid for Olympics until at least 2040

The 2020 Olympics as well happening in Asia (Tokyo) must have been a factor, but it appeared commonsense had definitely saved the day for India. However, the 'danger' has not yet passed and clamor for India to host will come up every four years from now on.

Doomsday predictions abound every time the Olympics are near. Reports show semi-finished pictures of stadiums, real-life stories of distressed locals, and tales of mistreated migrant laborers give us a view of the dark side of the moon. But the Games have come and gone. Nothing majorly untoward has happened, and each one has been better than the previous and everyone has had a blast! So what's the problem?

The 1970s marked a watershed in the economic history of the Olympics. Until then, the events were held by cities that had the requisite infrastructure and did not need to rob the Central bank to build stadiums. The 1976 Olympics were held in Montreal. "The Olympics can no more lose money than a man can have a baby," bragged Montreal Mayor Jean Drapeau before the Games. But the events which were originally projected to cost US$124 million eventually ran up a bill of US$2.4 billion, of 2,100%! To put the idiocy in perspective, that 2,100% would be how much Donald Trump would over-run his projected costs for the wall at the Mexican border if he ever became President of the US and got to it.

The 2004 Olympics in Athens were so expensive that they hold a big part of the blame in the country's economic downturn. The stadiums now reportedly are homes for squatters and the financially derelict.

In fact, in Los Angeles have been the only Olympics in recent history to ever not go into the red. Every other Olympics has been a drain on the resources with no discernible and long-lasting benefits.

The Rio Olympics promised to bring down the costs after the sky-high costs of Beijing at US$45 billion and the US$8 billion of the 2012 London Olympics (given London's already-existing infrastructure). The initial bid by the city to the IOC stood at US$2.88 billion. But of course, they had flouted the IOC norms and not included the infrastructure costs that were necessary to make the city ready for the Games – that is like failing to factor in the dowry in a fat Indian wedding. The cost estimates currently stand at US$20 billion and are only expected to go upwards.

Additionally, the country's sports bodies are a story unto themselves. While half the bodies are run by corrupt politicians and industrialists, the other half just do not exist. India's boxers were until last month fighting under neutral banners and not under the national flag because the federation had been suspended due to rigged elections. It has required a Supreme Court intervention through the Lodha Committee to even attempt the clean-up of the nation's most popular sport. Stories emerge of financial irregularities in the Delhi Cricket Association, right in the middle of the national capital, and allegedly under the administration of the nation's current Finance Minister. We certainly have not developed the class of sports administrators who can carry this off.

Hard to digest, but we should face the facts when they stare us in the eye – India is not ready to host an international event of any size, let alone the Olympics. Not now, not later, not in the next decade, and probably not in the decade after that as well. And when the time does come, it must be a decision based on sound economic models rather than a jingoistic celebration of the nation's big-boy status. Until then, we would be best served if our attention and finances were channeled into developing sport at the grass-roots level. Sports facilities we develop at every city should, from now on, be built with the professionalism and vision that will allow them to be readily available, if and when India decides to host the Olympics. Until then, the Olympics can take care of itself.