The fat “Bid Books” for the 2012 Summer Olympics are in the money-grubbing hands of the International Olympic Committee.

Finances, as always, will be a big issue. How much can the IOC shake down from the cities?

Stadiums, arenas and athletes’ villages are big items. Which cities will promise the most majestic vision to enhance the status of the self-perpetuating, self-indulgent Olympic Movement?

Security is critical. Who can be counted on to provide a zone of peace in a world that could be very different eight years from now?

Politics is the X-factor, a theme not touched on in the bids but not far from the minds of everyone in the process. Will President Bush’s re-election and diminished American popularity overseas hurt New York’s chances? Will France’s opposition to the Iraq war give Paris an edge?

“We don’t know which detail is most important for each person,” Paris bid leader Philippe Baudillon said Wednesday. “One person is perhaps upset by the war, but has historical links with one country. I am fully aware of such geopolitical questions. Individuals are going to vote according to different factors, including emotional factors.”

The volumes submitted by New York, Paris, London, Madrid and Moscow are stuffed with figures and sketches, hopes and dreams. They are the slick, pricey products of years of work. Four will get tossed in the garbage next summer. One will become the blueprint for seven years of hard work ahead when the winner is named on July 6, 2005.

Expect the usual glee by the winning city, and the usual groans by the losers. Yet it is never certain in this sort of competition whether the winner will turn out to be a loser, and vice versa.

“We call it the “winner’s curse,”‘ Evan Osborne, who teaches sports economics at Wright State University in Ohio, said as he watched costs soar in Athens. “The cities that win the bid for the Olympics are the cities that most overestimate what they are worth.”

Athens got another taste of sticker shock Thursday when Greece’s 2005 budget was submitted to parliament and the cost of last summer’s games was estimated at $14.6 billion.

That tally far exceeds the original estimate of $5.9 billion and made the games by far the most expensive in Olympic history. Sydney 2000 cost $1.5 billion; Atlanta 1996 cost $1.72 billion. Athens spent almost that much – $1.39 billion – on security alone.

Athens’ bill does not include the future cost (more than $100 million a year) of maintaining $2.83 billion worth of new or refurbished stadiums and arenas.

White elephants have been marching through the Olympics for years.

None of that deters the champions of bids for 2012. Dan Doctoroff, leading the charge for New York, says the city’s 600-page “Bid Book” meets or exceeds all IOC requirements.

He spoke of the energy, excitement and power of New York, and he expounded on the city’s “parallel values with the Olympic Movement” in bringing the world together in peaceful competition and the pursuit of individual dreams.

Doctoroff is no mere dreamer, himself. He’s the city’s deputy mayor, in charge of economic development and rebuilding, and the founder of NYC2012. He’s been pushing this Olympic bid from the start, saying it will spur growth in the city.

He might be right about that, but sports economists have doubts about whether mega-events like the Olympics and stadiums built on public funds ever make financial sense.

The Olympics at almost any cost might be worth it if they contribute to world peace. They might be justified by cities for the attention they bring to their culture. They surely enrich certain developers and unions. Whether the Games really boost the local economy and image in a meaningful, lasting way is doubtful.

None of the cities bidding for the 2012 Games needs the Olympics to establish, or even enhance, its image. New York will be no grander with or without the games, though a winning bid would accelerate development of a few underused areas. Paris will still be beautiful Paris, London will still be its stately, efficient self. Madrid will try to outshine Barcelona, which dumped a $20 million debt on the Spanish economy, but won’t essentially change. Moscow, a fringe choice, won’t suddenly turn into Miami.

Athens, though late in getting to work after winning the bid, was transformed into a more cosmopolitan European city. That will have, at the least, some benefit for tourism and business. How much and whether it was worth the billions is debatable.

Helen Lenskyj, a University of Toronto sociology professor who has studied Olympic costs, says cities that bid on the games look at all the costs and work in a funny way.

“The Olympics, for some reason, seems to throw rational thought out the window. I call it the “goose bump effect,”‘ she said. “The Olympics is built on this sentiment: “I had goose bumps being at the games, competing in the games and so on.’ It trumps all rational arguments.”

—

Steve Wilstein is a national sports columnist for The Associated Press. Write to him at swilstein(at)ap.org

AP-ES-11-18-04 1529EST