What do you think?
Rate this book
Circus Maximus: The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting the Olympics and the World Cup
Beyond the headlines of the world's most beloved sporting events
Brazil hosted the 2016 men's World Cup at a cost of $15 billion to $20 billion, building large, new stadiums in cities that have little use for them anymore. The projected cost of Tokyo's 2020 Summer Olympic Games is estimated to be as high as $30 billion, much of it coming from the public trough. In the updated and expanded edition of his bestselling book, Circus The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting the Olympics and the World Cup, Andrew Zimbalist tackles the claim that cities chosen to host these high-profile sporting events experience an economic windfall. In this new edition he looks at upcoming summer and winter Olympic games, discusses the recent Women's World Cup, and the upcoming men's tournament in Qatar.
Circus Maximus focuses on major cities, like London, Rio, and Barcelona, that have previously hosted these sporting events, to provide context for future host cities that will bear the weight of exploding expenses, corruption, and protests. Zimbalist offers a sobering and candid look at the Olympics and the World Cup from outside the echo chamber.
Brazil hosted the 2016 men's World Cup at a cost of $15 billion to $20 billion, building large, new stadiums in cities that have little use for them anymore. The projected cost of Tokyo's 2020 Summer Olympic Games is estimated to be as high as $30 billion, much of it coming from the public trough. In the updated and expanded edition of his bestselling book, Circus The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting the Olympics and the World Cup, Andrew Zimbalist tackles the claim that cities chosen to host these high-profile sporting events experience an economic windfall. In this new edition he looks at upcoming summer and winter Olympic games, discusses the recent Women's World Cup, and the upcoming men's tournament in Qatar.
Circus Maximus focuses on major cities, like London, Rio, and Barcelona, that have previously hosted these sporting events, to provide context for future host cities that will bear the weight of exploding expenses, corruption, and protests. Zimbalist offers a sobering and candid look at the Olympics and the World Cup from outside the echo chamber.
257 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 13, 2015
46 people are currently reading
999 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
June 23, 2021
I thought I needed a little top-up of scepticism before the pandemic Olympics get underway in Tokyo next month. The individual stories and achievements of the athletes are captivating, but hosting either the Olympics or the World Cup is almost invariably not worth it and really problematic for host countries/cities. Zimbalist is an economist, and while somewhat dry, he is clear as he explains the short-term and legacy losses or at least lack of gains (and the difficulty of reproducing the few successes - in Barcelona and Los Angeles). If you’re a resident, a small business owner, someone who cares about public services or the environment - it sounds fair to say that if politicians start angling for your home city or country to make a bid, you should respond with a loud no. 3.5.
February 6, 2018
As of this writing, we are less than two weeks away from the opening of Winter Olympics No. 23 in PyeongChang.
The South Koreans are using the games as an opportunity to put PyeongChang on the map -- and you could say that they have already succeeded in that regard. "PyeongChang" technically did not exist until 2016 -- when the city of Pyongchang ever-so-slightly changed its name in the lead-up to the games in order to avoid confusion with another, more dubious city just under 300 kilometers to its north. In so doing, the hope is to avoid the travel (and personal) nightmare endured by a Kenyan gentleman in 2015, when he was mistakenly booked on a flight to Pyongyang ... the capital of North Korea.
Anyway, South Korea is just the latest in a very long line of countries and municipalities who have tried to leverage the unparalleled appeal of the world's two greatest sporting spectacles -- the Olympics and the World Cup -- in an effort to woo tourists, money, international prestige and investment, gentrification and other fabulous laurels. We've all heard the stories about bids versus hard costs, "white elephant" stadia and what-not. But does hosting one of these events pay off in the long run for the host city or country? That's what Andrew Zimbalist, an economics professor and noted sports economist tries to determine in "Circus Maximus: The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting The Olympics and World Cup," published in 2015.
The short answer is straight-forward: not "no," but "hell, no."
Let me pause and iterate that I am a good and normal citizen of both the United States and the world and love to watch both the Summer and Winter games, as well as the World Cup. From an athletics perspective, from a diplomatic perspective, from a human perspective, there's simply nothing that can match these events. Period. Got it? Not anti-Olympics or Cup.
I am, however, solidly against the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) -- two organizations so thoroughly, so exceptionally corrupt that it's hard for even the most nimble among us to wrap their minds around the audacity of their greed. I am solidly against spending hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars on athletic facilities that have a shorter lifespan than a carton of organic milk. I am solidly against authoritarian governments ... well, period. And I'm certainly against authoritarian governments using these games as both a tool of oppression against their own downtrodden citizens, and a public relations junket for the international community. Regardless of how you feel about the Olympics, you can come to no other conclusion than this: the games are great, and virtually everything else about them is a scandal.
In the modern history of the Summer Olympics, only two cities have been able to game (so to speak) the system and come out winners -- Los Angeles and Barcelona.
Los Angeles made out like a bandit in 1984, backing the IOC into a corner after two disastrous Summer Olympics in 1968 (Mexico City) and 1972 (Munich). With no one else in the bidding pool, L.A. stepped up and said they'd host BUT without spending public money and only if the IOC would cover any operating losses. Rather than building a cluster of soon-to-be-obsolete stadia, L.A. focused on sprucing up existing facilities. The result? Los Angeles wound up making money on the games. Of course, the balance of power has shifted back to the IOC since that time and the bidding wars have subsequently ramped up.
Barcelona didn't make money on the games, but they did remake their city in a net-positive way -- and they managed to unveil themselves to the rest of the world as a prime vacationland (a gift that keeps giving to this very day). How did they do it? They did not bid on the games and then create a plan for hosting, as most cities and countries do. Rather, they created a transformational 20-year plan for their city -- a plan they believed would put them into position to eventually host the Olympic games in the future, if they chose to do so. Therefore, transportation, housing and recreation projects were created with the future of the city -- rather than the needs of the IOC -- top of mind. That shift guaranteed that extemporaneous projects and facilities were not constructed, and cost overruns chalked up to pressure to complete delayed projects were not a factor. (It also happened that Barcelona had suffered in obscurity under Spain's authoritarian leadership during much of the 20th century and was more than ready for a coming-out-party by the time 1992 rolled around.)
Other recent games have not been remotely as successful as the 1984 and 1992 Summer Olympics. The 1976 games in Montreal were so expensive that it took the city more than 30 years to pay them off. The 1980 Moscow games were boycotted by the United States and other nations. The 1996 Atlanta games were marred by domestic terrorism. The 2000 Sydney games were a ratings flop -- and Sydney actually saw a decline in tourism in the years following the event. The 2002 Salt Lake City games were almost destroyed by corruption (remember, it was Willard Mitt Romney who parachuted into the state and saved the day). The 2004 Athens games may have been the straw that broke -- in literal economic terms -- the country (and very nearly the European Union). The Beijing games in 2008 were noteworthy for their smogginess and the extraordinary waste of money and materials that went into constructing now-empty facilities. The 2012 London games had a net-negative effect on the economy and tourism in Europe's most-visited city for several years following. The 2014 Sochi games were perhaps the worst ever -- played in a part of the world that barely experiences winter weather at all and notable for both its price tag (a staggering $50 billion dollars -- of which up to half or more was alleged to have been stolen by allies of President Vladimir Putin and nefarious contractors) and also for housing facilities so poorly constructed that they may as well have been two-dimensional.
Then, there's Brazil, which hosted both the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Summer Olympics. The former was a foretaste of malfeasance to come, as entire neighborhoods of destitute people were hustled out of their homes, some at gun point, and essentially scattered to the wind and out of FIFA's hair, opening up prime land for construction. Unnecessary stadia were constructed in remote parts of the country, virtually inaccessible by mass audiences (because the money that was earmarked for transportation was instead spent on things other than transportation). The 2016 games were notable for similar abuses of the poor, environmental pollution and for being so far behind the readiness timeline as to send the IOC in a somewhat frightening, somewhat humorous, full-on freak-out.
So, what is the solution to these issues? Zimbalist offers several potential fixes. First, change the structure of the IOC and FIFA to ensure that power cannot be concentrated in the hands of a small group of people for years and years. Second, consider "permanent hosts." That is, Athens would be the permanent home of the Summer games, for instance -- eliminating the need to ready a new city every two years. Or, along the same lines, rotate among a fixed list of perpetually ready cities. Third, if idea No. 2 doesn't grab you, then both IOC and FIFA need to simply relax their standards for facilities. Allowing existing facilities to be utilized would drastically reduce the costs associated with building new buildings, which are often unnecessary and likely to be abandoned just weeks after the games wrap up.
Any or all of these ideas could directly contribute to cost control, transparency and overall logistical improvements for these events. One thing is for certain, whether you like these potential fixes or not: Something has to be done to ensure that these awe-inducing spectacles are not overshadowed by the dubious tactics of those who manage them.
The South Koreans are using the games as an opportunity to put PyeongChang on the map -- and you could say that they have already succeeded in that regard. "PyeongChang" technically did not exist until 2016 -- when the city of Pyongchang ever-so-slightly changed its name in the lead-up to the games in order to avoid confusion with another, more dubious city just under 300 kilometers to its north. In so doing, the hope is to avoid the travel (and personal) nightmare endured by a Kenyan gentleman in 2015, when he was mistakenly booked on a flight to Pyongyang ... the capital of North Korea.
Anyway, South Korea is just the latest in a very long line of countries and municipalities who have tried to leverage the unparalleled appeal of the world's two greatest sporting spectacles -- the Olympics and the World Cup -- in an effort to woo tourists, money, international prestige and investment, gentrification and other fabulous laurels. We've all heard the stories about bids versus hard costs, "white elephant" stadia and what-not. But does hosting one of these events pay off in the long run for the host city or country? That's what Andrew Zimbalist, an economics professor and noted sports economist tries to determine in "Circus Maximus: The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting The Olympics and World Cup," published in 2015.
The short answer is straight-forward: not "no," but "hell, no."
Let me pause and iterate that I am a good and normal citizen of both the United States and the world and love to watch both the Summer and Winter games, as well as the World Cup. From an athletics perspective, from a diplomatic perspective, from a human perspective, there's simply nothing that can match these events. Period. Got it? Not anti-Olympics or Cup.
I am, however, solidly against the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) -- two organizations so thoroughly, so exceptionally corrupt that it's hard for even the most nimble among us to wrap their minds around the audacity of their greed. I am solidly against spending hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars on athletic facilities that have a shorter lifespan than a carton of organic milk. I am solidly against authoritarian governments ... well, period. And I'm certainly against authoritarian governments using these games as both a tool of oppression against their own downtrodden citizens, and a public relations junket for the international community. Regardless of how you feel about the Olympics, you can come to no other conclusion than this: the games are great, and virtually everything else about them is a scandal.
In the modern history of the Summer Olympics, only two cities have been able to game (so to speak) the system and come out winners -- Los Angeles and Barcelona.
Los Angeles made out like a bandit in 1984, backing the IOC into a corner after two disastrous Summer Olympics in 1968 (Mexico City) and 1972 (Munich). With no one else in the bidding pool, L.A. stepped up and said they'd host BUT without spending public money and only if the IOC would cover any operating losses. Rather than building a cluster of soon-to-be-obsolete stadia, L.A. focused on sprucing up existing facilities. The result? Los Angeles wound up making money on the games. Of course, the balance of power has shifted back to the IOC since that time and the bidding wars have subsequently ramped up.
Barcelona didn't make money on the games, but they did remake their city in a net-positive way -- and they managed to unveil themselves to the rest of the world as a prime vacationland (a gift that keeps giving to this very day). How did they do it? They did not bid on the games and then create a plan for hosting, as most cities and countries do. Rather, they created a transformational 20-year plan for their city -- a plan they believed would put them into position to eventually host the Olympic games in the future, if they chose to do so. Therefore, transportation, housing and recreation projects were created with the future of the city -- rather than the needs of the IOC -- top of mind. That shift guaranteed that extemporaneous projects and facilities were not constructed, and cost overruns chalked up to pressure to complete delayed projects were not a factor. (It also happened that Barcelona had suffered in obscurity under Spain's authoritarian leadership during much of the 20th century and was more than ready for a coming-out-party by the time 1992 rolled around.)
Other recent games have not been remotely as successful as the 1984 and 1992 Summer Olympics. The 1976 games in Montreal were so expensive that it took the city more than 30 years to pay them off. The 1980 Moscow games were boycotted by the United States and other nations. The 1996 Atlanta games were marred by domestic terrorism. The 2000 Sydney games were a ratings flop -- and Sydney actually saw a decline in tourism in the years following the event. The 2002 Salt Lake City games were almost destroyed by corruption (remember, it was Willard Mitt Romney who parachuted into the state and saved the day). The 2004 Athens games may have been the straw that broke -- in literal economic terms -- the country (and very nearly the European Union). The Beijing games in 2008 were noteworthy for their smogginess and the extraordinary waste of money and materials that went into constructing now-empty facilities. The 2012 London games had a net-negative effect on the economy and tourism in Europe's most-visited city for several years following. The 2014 Sochi games were perhaps the worst ever -- played in a part of the world that barely experiences winter weather at all and notable for both its price tag (a staggering $50 billion dollars -- of which up to half or more was alleged to have been stolen by allies of President Vladimir Putin and nefarious contractors) and also for housing facilities so poorly constructed that they may as well have been two-dimensional.
Then, there's Brazil, which hosted both the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Summer Olympics. The former was a foretaste of malfeasance to come, as entire neighborhoods of destitute people were hustled out of their homes, some at gun point, and essentially scattered to the wind and out of FIFA's hair, opening up prime land for construction. Unnecessary stadia were constructed in remote parts of the country, virtually inaccessible by mass audiences (because the money that was earmarked for transportation was instead spent on things other than transportation). The 2016 games were notable for similar abuses of the poor, environmental pollution and for being so far behind the readiness timeline as to send the IOC in a somewhat frightening, somewhat humorous, full-on freak-out.
So, what is the solution to these issues? Zimbalist offers several potential fixes. First, change the structure of the IOC and FIFA to ensure that power cannot be concentrated in the hands of a small group of people for years and years. Second, consider "permanent hosts." That is, Athens would be the permanent home of the Summer games, for instance -- eliminating the need to ready a new city every two years. Or, along the same lines, rotate among a fixed list of perpetually ready cities. Third, if idea No. 2 doesn't grab you, then both IOC and FIFA need to simply relax their standards for facilities. Allowing existing facilities to be utilized would drastically reduce the costs associated with building new buildings, which are often unnecessary and likely to be abandoned just weeks after the games wrap up.
Any or all of these ideas could directly contribute to cost control, transparency and overall logistical improvements for these events. One thing is for certain, whether you like these potential fixes or not: Something has to be done to ensure that these awe-inducing spectacles are not overshadowed by the dubious tactics of those who manage them.
July 19, 2015
With Boston's disastrous 2024 bid in the news almost daily it seemed the right time to read this book. Zimbalist lays out what is broken with the system of mega sporting events like the Olympics and World Cup. One need not be an economist to follow along as Zimbalist details corruption, cost overruns and other disasters that always follow the World Cup and Olympics. Zimbalist does a great job of breaking down the Los Angeles and Barcelona games that are often touted by Olympics backers as success stories and showing that the successes here have little to do with the games themselves and more to do with how they are exceptions to the normal situation the games occur in. If the Olympics are coming to your town prepare for major disruptions, damage to local business, abandoned stadiums and a hefty tax bill that will prevent investment in things that are truly necessary. This book should be mandatory reading for anyone in a city considering a bid for these events.
September 20, 2021
As a globalist I've long looked at world sports and the Olympics as among the many tools in the toolbox for taking down walls and advancing peace. In recent decades I've been baffled by protestors in various cities against the games. How can people be against an institution that's entire purpose is to spread peace? I still believe in the games but I have a better understanding of the protests.
We can all certainly see great value in marriage and family for society. We might believe that a wedding reception is of great value and adds to any given wedding. Yet, this does not mean that mortgaging decades of the family earnings for a few hour party is sound family economics. This is what the games have become. Zimbalist is clearly not against mega-events or even the Olympics. He is pointing out the various costs that have gone out of control and is offering sound suggestions to reduce those costs. I love the idea of keeping the games in Greece every 4 years. Love it.
This is not a 500-1000 page book by an Adam Smith or a Paul Krugman or a Thomas Piketty. This is an easy 150 page read that I recommend. But if you're not a fellow lover of economics and you want this book broken down to a visual one can Google "Abandoned Athens Olympic 2004 venues."
We can all certainly see great value in marriage and family for society. We might believe that a wedding reception is of great value and adds to any given wedding. Yet, this does not mean that mortgaging decades of the family earnings for a few hour party is sound family economics. This is what the games have become. Zimbalist is clearly not against mega-events or even the Olympics. He is pointing out the various costs that have gone out of control and is offering sound suggestions to reduce those costs. I love the idea of keeping the games in Greece every 4 years. Love it.
This is not a 500-1000 page book by an Adam Smith or a Paul Krugman or a Thomas Piketty. This is an easy 150 page read that I recommend. But if you're not a fellow lover of economics and you want this book broken down to a visual one can Google "Abandoned Athens Olympic 2004 venues."
April 1, 2017
Should be required reading for any politician contemplating hosting bids for either the World Cup or the Olymppics, especially the latter. Also a very good introduction into how economics work and written in the most accessible of manners. Excellent
September 3, 2025
interesante desde el aspecto en cómo se monopoliza económicamente los grandes mega eventos
April 25, 2019
A deconstruction of the fantasy of hosting mega events that many claim beneficial to the host city and regional economy. It unveils the inequality and controversies that many are unaware of. Have we seen significant improvements in the quality of life in Rio’s favelas as a result of both sporting events? ... There you go!
April 30, 2016
The figures bandied about are astounding, yet so may be the claims about potential economic benefit. What is this about? The World Cup and the Olympics and how pumping in massive amounts of money might not be as advantageous, to the sport at least, as many involved parties will have you believe.
The author takes a hard look at these two landmark sporting events that seem to be tainted by money, bringing with it often scandal and horse-trading in the shadows. Even the most sports disinterested person must have seen news articles about FIFA and the difficulties some of its senior officials have faced and the intriguing allegations that stand behind them. The mainstream media has hardly been silent about the stratospheric costs involved to host the modern-day Olympics either. During the bidding stages many politicians and those with a vested interest make fine words about the economic benefits the event will bring and how it is clearly going to be a win-win for everyone. Unfortunately, it appears this is far from always true.
Throughout the book, the author provides a lot of interesting information to sustain his arguments and it really draws you in. It is astounding that some countries are spending over USD100 million on the bidding process alone for a major event. It is certainly a good payday for consultants and sadly, as reports show, some of the money has found itself falling either directly or indirectly into the pockets of some influencers along the way on many occasions. Some of the figures mentioned make it seem to be Monopoly money. The U.S.-hosted World Cup cost “several hundred” million dollars to host in 1994. By 2010 it jumped to USD5-6bn in South Africa and four years later in Brazil it came in at USD15-20 bn. Clearly the public can’t be trusted with a detailed figure, but it seems inconceivable that this amount of money can be spent on a sports event. Hold on to your hat! The author speculates that the Qatar 2022 World Cup, already steeped in controversy with many things such as the working conditions for those building the stadia, could break the budget with USD220bn or more. No, that is not a misprint. It is not USD22bn but USD220bn! The Olympic Games are no different: first there’s a call for bids from host countries and cities and at each stage various fees (USD150,000 here, USD500,000 there and so on) is paid to the IOC to whittle down the group. Lots of lobbying and representation is carried out that can be a profitable enterprise for some.
The author gives many examples of where the promised upturn in tourism due to a major sporting event has failed to materialise, often it goes the other way and by a quite sizeable figure. Each positive argument presented is knocked down by the author with apparent ease. Why is he a relatively lone voice, questioning the delights of the Emperor and his new clothes?
It is a very engaging book. Depressing in many ways such is the greed, avarice and wastefulness of the whole process for what is a game of sport at the end of the day. Read it and prepare to see your blood pressure rise and your jaw to drop in the process, even if you believe you know about the apparent waste already. There is a lot to read… not that it will change a few well-pampered souls from rushing to dip their head in a well-provisioned trough!
The author takes a hard look at these two landmark sporting events that seem to be tainted by money, bringing with it often scandal and horse-trading in the shadows. Even the most sports disinterested person must have seen news articles about FIFA and the difficulties some of its senior officials have faced and the intriguing allegations that stand behind them. The mainstream media has hardly been silent about the stratospheric costs involved to host the modern-day Olympics either. During the bidding stages many politicians and those with a vested interest make fine words about the economic benefits the event will bring and how it is clearly going to be a win-win for everyone. Unfortunately, it appears this is far from always true.
Throughout the book, the author provides a lot of interesting information to sustain his arguments and it really draws you in. It is astounding that some countries are spending over USD100 million on the bidding process alone for a major event. It is certainly a good payday for consultants and sadly, as reports show, some of the money has found itself falling either directly or indirectly into the pockets of some influencers along the way on many occasions. Some of the figures mentioned make it seem to be Monopoly money. The U.S.-hosted World Cup cost “several hundred” million dollars to host in 1994. By 2010 it jumped to USD5-6bn in South Africa and four years later in Brazil it came in at USD15-20 bn. Clearly the public can’t be trusted with a detailed figure, but it seems inconceivable that this amount of money can be spent on a sports event. Hold on to your hat! The author speculates that the Qatar 2022 World Cup, already steeped in controversy with many things such as the working conditions for those building the stadia, could break the budget with USD220bn or more. No, that is not a misprint. It is not USD22bn but USD220bn! The Olympic Games are no different: first there’s a call for bids from host countries and cities and at each stage various fees (USD150,000 here, USD500,000 there and so on) is paid to the IOC to whittle down the group. Lots of lobbying and representation is carried out that can be a profitable enterprise for some.
The author gives many examples of where the promised upturn in tourism due to a major sporting event has failed to materialise, often it goes the other way and by a quite sizeable figure. Each positive argument presented is knocked down by the author with apparent ease. Why is he a relatively lone voice, questioning the delights of the Emperor and his new clothes?
It is a very engaging book. Depressing in many ways such is the greed, avarice and wastefulness of the whole process for what is a game of sport at the end of the day. Read it and prepare to see your blood pressure rise and your jaw to drop in the process, even if you believe you know about the apparent waste already. There is a lot to read… not that it will change a few well-pampered souls from rushing to dip their head in a well-provisioned trough!
August 11, 2016
Who wants to host the Olympics? If you have any brains at all, you'll certainly decline the opportunity. But it's only recently that cities have begun pulling out of the mad race to host the Olympics. This despite the fact that the Olympics almost never give a positive return on investment.
The same can be said about the World Cup, which is the more famously corrupt of the two. Perhaps this just boils down to the IOC being less blatant about taking bribes than FIFA is, but any bidding process that requires interested cities to spend tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars simply for the honor of BEING CONSIDERED, can't be considered entirely sacrosanct.
The entire process is so corrupt and the provided benefits so very few that it's a wonder FIFA and the IOC have been able to run their little scam for so long. But, as Andrew Zimbalist points out, bidding for the Olympics has long been a non-partisan issue. Politicians from both sides of the aisle - all sides with regards to our more democratic friends in Europe - have gotten their hands dirty trying to bribe, bedazzle, and seduce the IOC and FIFA voters who are, in the meantime, busy stuffing their own pockets.
The term "Circus Maximus" refers to the Ancient Roman custom of throwing huge, lavish spectacles to entertain - and in many cases, distract - the Roman populace. Think gladiator games in the Colosseum. And a Circus Maximus is exactly what the World Cup and Olympics have become - two grotesque, criminally expensive enterprises that exploit workers for pitiful wages and leave economic and environmental devastation in their wake.
Politicians in the Western World have started to wake up to this, on account that their more democratic systems allow citizens to hold them immediately accountable. This is why Oslo withdrew from the race to hold the 2022 Olympics. Hard to spend billions to host something that over half of your citizens are against and manage to later survive their fury at the ballot box. But Oslo was in fact the fourth city to withdraw, leaving twin pillars of democracy China and Kazakhstan to battle it out (spoiler: Beijing won). This seems to reflect the new reality of these spectacles, in which the games themselves merely serve as the backdrop for what is, in fact, a coming out party for the despots of the third world.
The only way for that to change and for the Olympics and World Cup to become respectable again is if their governing committees radically alter the way they currently do business.
"Circus Maximus" is a devastating critique that should finally put the myth - that hosting one of these spectacles is good for country and business - to rest.
The same can be said about the World Cup, which is the more famously corrupt of the two. Perhaps this just boils down to the IOC being less blatant about taking bribes than FIFA is, but any bidding process that requires interested cities to spend tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars simply for the honor of BEING CONSIDERED, can't be considered entirely sacrosanct.
The entire process is so corrupt and the provided benefits so very few that it's a wonder FIFA and the IOC have been able to run their little scam for so long. But, as Andrew Zimbalist points out, bidding for the Olympics has long been a non-partisan issue. Politicians from both sides of the aisle - all sides with regards to our more democratic friends in Europe - have gotten their hands dirty trying to bribe, bedazzle, and seduce the IOC and FIFA voters who are, in the meantime, busy stuffing their own pockets.
The term "Circus Maximus" refers to the Ancient Roman custom of throwing huge, lavish spectacles to entertain - and in many cases, distract - the Roman populace. Think gladiator games in the Colosseum. And a Circus Maximus is exactly what the World Cup and Olympics have become - two grotesque, criminally expensive enterprises that exploit workers for pitiful wages and leave economic and environmental devastation in their wake.
Politicians in the Western World have started to wake up to this, on account that their more democratic systems allow citizens to hold them immediately accountable. This is why Oslo withdrew from the race to hold the 2022 Olympics. Hard to spend billions to host something that over half of your citizens are against and manage to later survive their fury at the ballot box. But Oslo was in fact the fourth city to withdraw, leaving twin pillars of democracy China and Kazakhstan to battle it out (spoiler: Beijing won). This seems to reflect the new reality of these spectacles, in which the games themselves merely serve as the backdrop for what is, in fact, a coming out party for the despots of the third world.
The only way for that to change and for the Olympics and World Cup to become respectable again is if their governing committees radically alter the way they currently do business.
"Circus Maximus" is a devastating critique that should finally put the myth - that hosting one of these spectacles is good for country and business - to rest.
February 19, 2015
Good blend of economics and sports. I have been following the selection process for mega events for many years and find the economics fascinating.
April 2, 2015
Well researched and very interesting. The book is definitively one sided, but it's up front and unapologetic about it.
August 16, 2020
Having read some of Zimbalist's studies/articles on the costs and benefits of public financing of professional sports stadiums, I was interested to read this more in depth study of the financing of the Olympics and World Cup. Bottom line - both are almost certainly net negatives from an economic impact on the cities and countries that host them. The author looks at both short and long term benefits purported by the IOC and FIFA and effectively demolishes any case that results in a positive outcome. He does offer some prescriptions on how to improve the bidding process and economic results from hosting these tournaments, but the corruption endemic at IOC and FIFA are unlikely to make the necessary changes. Cities spend your limited funds on more impactful things such as infrastructure, education, etc. A must read for any politician behind such a bid or any citizen voting on a referendum on hosting such an event.
December 15, 2016
I'll admit it. I picked this one to zip through one more book before year's end. And I got what I deserved. A just-ok book by an academic on how bad an economic deal hosting the Olympics and World Cup is. It's all of 160 pages but you still feel like every key fact is repeated three times by that point. His research and findings seem sound and true, but it goes on far too long and he lacks the storyteller's touch that would fill it out with context. Instead, he just repeats facts and that gets wearisome. He also had the unfortunate issue of writing this in 2014 before the Sepp Blatter fiasco and other things blew up which all corroborated his thesis but all he could do was hastily add a postscript and then edit around the edges of some chapters to point to the postscript, which only added to the feeling of being repetitive.
February 17, 2022
The subject is fascinating, for sure, but I found Zimbalist’s writing to be not only dry, but often convoluted, as well.
That said, I only knew of some of this information tangentially, so reading about it was enlightening, but also frustrating at times. Of course, the frustration is likely rooted in somewhat of a “hindsight is 2020” mindset. It was interesting, though, reading the commentary toward the end of the book where Zimbalist discusses “future” Games (“future” then, but they’re “past” now, as they have since come and gone) including candidate and bid cities, and of course: the actual host cities themselves.
As at least one other commenter on here already stated, I’d be curious about all the shifts that have happened due to the pandemic. This, as with any deep dive into economics especially nowadays, is an ever-evolving conversation to be had.
That said, I only knew of some of this information tangentially, so reading about it was enlightening, but also frustrating at times. Of course, the frustration is likely rooted in somewhat of a “hindsight is 2020” mindset. It was interesting, though, reading the commentary toward the end of the book where Zimbalist discusses “future” Games (“future” then, but they’re “past” now, as they have since come and gone) including candidate and bid cities, and of course: the actual host cities themselves.
As at least one other commenter on here already stated, I’d be curious about all the shifts that have happened due to the pandemic. This, as with any deep dive into economics especially nowadays, is an ever-evolving conversation to be had.
June 26, 2018
A damning indictment of the supposed benefits of hosting Olympics, World Cups, and other mega sporting events, written by an economist who lays out all the dollar figures, and the more intangible outcomes, in a straightforward manner. I never realized just how expensive (or how corrupt) the IOC and FIFA bidding processes can be (100 million $+ for a failed bid!).
The "economic gamble" mentioned in the book's title is a poor bet indeed: in the past 40 years, there was only one host city (Barcelona) which can be said to have drawn positive benefit from hosting the Olympics. With odds like that, you're better off putting your billions elsewhere.
The "economic gamble" mentioned in the book's title is a poor bet indeed: in the past 40 years, there was only one host city (Barcelona) which can be said to have drawn positive benefit from hosting the Olympics. With odds like that, you're better off putting your billions elsewhere.
April 3, 2023
I read this book for class and enjoyed it more than I thought I would. I do study sports, so my opinion should be understood with that in mind. I enjoyed learning about the way messaging about the Olympics can be misleading and more realities behind hosting international sporting events. My one complaint is that a book like this should be written in a way that makes the topic more accessible if the goal is to educate a large mass of people. The author could have done a better job explaining some language that is specific to sports for people who read the book who may not have much of a background in the topic area. Save the sophistication for a research journal.
October 15, 2025
Important but boring
Read the 3rd edition, which should soon give way to a 4th. Lots of stats, no compelling narrative. The story is pretty much that Barcelona and LA are outliers when it comes to positive hosting experiences; otherwise, the Olympics and the World Cup bring nothing but financial negatives to host cities, all the while making the Olympic and World Cup governing bodies (and their cronies) rich. The end.
Read the 3rd edition, which should soon give way to a 4th. Lots of stats, no compelling narrative. The story is pretty much that Barcelona and LA are outliers when it comes to positive hosting experiences; otherwise, the Olympics and the World Cup bring nothing but financial negatives to host cities, all the while making the Olympic and World Cup governing bodies (and their cronies) rich. The end.
January 8, 2025
i think sports and the amazing things that humans can accomplish are cool, i also think not displacing people and actually allocating bidding/hosting funds to things that will enhance the lives of those in host cities is even cooler
academic writing style that, while well-researched and soundly-argued, is often redundant
3.75 and dreading LA28
academic writing style that, while well-researched and soundly-argued, is often redundant
3.75 and dreading LA28
August 22, 2018
An in-depth look at the economics, politics, and myths surrounding the much-hyped and sought-after Olympic games and World Cup. Will really make you reconsider putting your support behind your city/country's bid. The corruption and waste surrounding these events is more than you realize.
July 8, 2018
Very interesting!
March 21, 2020
Interesting and concise. Nice and short for a slightly heavy subject.
Wished it had discussed the bribery more as a key reason to why cities are chosen as clearly prevalent
Wished it had discussed the bribery more as a key reason to why cities are chosen as clearly prevalent
April 1, 2024
If you are sceptical about the 2026 World Cup in Toronto this book will confirm those worries.
May 4, 2022
A useful, if slightly dated study of the business of the two biggest international sporting organisations and their franchises, the International Olympic Committee and FIFA, 'Circus Maximus' hammers home the most controversial aspect of the Olympics and the World Cup Finals, i.e. their incredible cost to the hosting cities and countries. Whilst it has been abundantly clear for many a decade, arguably at least since Montreal 1976, that these mega-events are a huge drain on the funds and resources of the hosting economy it has only been in the last decade or so that the rise in opposition to the events has had an impact on the hosting process. Zimbalist focuses on the experiences and problems experienced in hosting cities and countries such as Barcelona, Athens, Beijing, South Africa, London and Brazil and as a result he confirms what most opponents of the Olympics and the World Cup believe; they are a huge drain on public resources with little economic benefit and they invariably service the interests of the rich and powerful.
Zimbalist applies a persuasive and well supported series of arguments to counter the 'boosters' who make great claims for the benefits of hosting an Olympics or World Cup, including most importantly the IOC and FIFA themeselves. He doesn't delve too much into the politics of the bid processes for either organisation, or for that matter the domestic political landscape in the bidding or hosting cities and countries. Instead, and this is both the strongest and weakest aspect of this book, he places almost all his emphasis on the cost benefit of the mega-events. The economic data he uses to help inform his propositions are almost all very telling. Whether one considers tourism income, employment figures, public debt or revenue sharing between hosting organisation and FIFA or the IOC the impact is almost always negative for those footing the bill.
That the author spends so much of the book dealing with the economic aspects of the World Cup and the Olympics is appropriate as that is effectively the remit of the text and his field of expertise. However if one is looking to find a more comprehensive analysis of the costs (and potential benefits) of these events, how the business model has operated and how it might be changed to make it more equitable and sustainable Zimbalist needed to include more on the relevant political dynamics. He makes some pertinent points regarding the manner in which Russia and Brazil went about hosting their respective Olympics and World Cups, including some reflection on the manner in which both countries' political elite exploited the events for their own economic gain and expansion of influence. However Zimbalist does not do enough to examine the political nature of the IOC or FIFA, and as they are the monopolists in their respective sporting markets it would have been wise for him to do more in this avenue.
As stated above this is a dated book and does not take into account what has transpired since the hosting of the 2016 Rio Olympics. There have been some significant changes since then, whether they be forced upon hosting cities such as Tokyo and Beijing for their respective Olympics due to the COVID pandemic, or necessitated through the policies of the IOC or FIFA, such as the selection of Brisbane as the 2032 host city 11 years before time and without an open bidding contest. Some of the trends and issues that Zimbalist has identified and discussed in 'Circus Maximus' are still relevant, others have become less relevant or supplanted by new ones. Be that as it may this book is still highly relevant because it underscores the dilemma faced by the Olympic and world football movements; what will happen when no one wants to host their global parties anymore because it costs too much?
'Circus Maximus' will be a useful study for anyone interested in global sport and the economics of the Olympics and World Cup. It won't convert those who aren't already at least somewhat partial to the idea that these events are hugely problematic economically. It will strengthen the argument for those who wonder why public funds need to be invested in ephemeral events that divert much needed money away from useful and equitable infrastructure. If or when a new edition is published it should be made mandatory reading for anyone involved with or living near future Olympic Games or World Cup Finals. It is a most effective study of a fascinating subject.
Zimbalist applies a persuasive and well supported series of arguments to counter the 'boosters' who make great claims for the benefits of hosting an Olympics or World Cup, including most importantly the IOC and FIFA themeselves. He doesn't delve too much into the politics of the bid processes for either organisation, or for that matter the domestic political landscape in the bidding or hosting cities and countries. Instead, and this is both the strongest and weakest aspect of this book, he places almost all his emphasis on the cost benefit of the mega-events. The economic data he uses to help inform his propositions are almost all very telling. Whether one considers tourism income, employment figures, public debt or revenue sharing between hosting organisation and FIFA or the IOC the impact is almost always negative for those footing the bill.
That the author spends so much of the book dealing with the economic aspects of the World Cup and the Olympics is appropriate as that is effectively the remit of the text and his field of expertise. However if one is looking to find a more comprehensive analysis of the costs (and potential benefits) of these events, how the business model has operated and how it might be changed to make it more equitable and sustainable Zimbalist needed to include more on the relevant political dynamics. He makes some pertinent points regarding the manner in which Russia and Brazil went about hosting their respective Olympics and World Cups, including some reflection on the manner in which both countries' political elite exploited the events for their own economic gain and expansion of influence. However Zimbalist does not do enough to examine the political nature of the IOC or FIFA, and as they are the monopolists in their respective sporting markets it would have been wise for him to do more in this avenue.
As stated above this is a dated book and does not take into account what has transpired since the hosting of the 2016 Rio Olympics. There have been some significant changes since then, whether they be forced upon hosting cities such as Tokyo and Beijing for their respective Olympics due to the COVID pandemic, or necessitated through the policies of the IOC or FIFA, such as the selection of Brisbane as the 2032 host city 11 years before time and without an open bidding contest. Some of the trends and issues that Zimbalist has identified and discussed in 'Circus Maximus' are still relevant, others have become less relevant or supplanted by new ones. Be that as it may this book is still highly relevant because it underscores the dilemma faced by the Olympic and world football movements; what will happen when no one wants to host their global parties anymore because it costs too much?
'Circus Maximus' will be a useful study for anyone interested in global sport and the economics of the Olympics and World Cup. It won't convert those who aren't already at least somewhat partial to the idea that these events are hugely problematic economically. It will strengthen the argument for those who wonder why public funds need to be invested in ephemeral events that divert much needed money away from useful and equitable infrastructure. If or when a new edition is published it should be made mandatory reading for anyone involved with or living near future Olympic Games or World Cup Finals. It is a most effective study of a fascinating subject.
March 20, 2022
DANG!!! These mega platforms for sports are messed up! I recall prior to reading this book that there were plenty of instances where facilities fell into disrepair after not getting repurposed. My thought is have the
March 1, 2015
In this book, Smith College economist Andrew Zimbalist surveys the literature on the impacts of hosting the Olympics and the World Cup Finals on the local economy. Zimbalist is an expert on how the business and economics of sports such as baseball; here he branches out to provide context for the two to four week massive events.
The book offers a combination of reviews of the academic literature, detailed discussions of individual and noteworthy events (Barcelona and Sochi Olympics and the Brazil World Cup Finals), economic inefficiencies related to the bidding process, and some examples summarizing how cities and countries get themselves into the bidding process.
While cost overruns averaging 270% are eye-rolling but widely known, Zimbalist shows how just bidding for the Olympics can often run $100 million or more -- and is nearly always done by private businesses looking after their own interests, not the long-term public benefit.
He provides compelling and detailed evidence that the local economic activity during the events themselves are nowhere near to making up the costs of hosting the events -- only around 10-20% with very generous assumptions. The conclusion is clear: any economic benefits of hosting the Olympics or World Cup Finals can only be a result of long-term impacts, such as improved region-wide infrastructure, housing, or tourism.
The book is timely given that Boston has been selected by the U.S. Olympic Committee to bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic Games. In many places, however, the book appears to have been rushed to publication and could benefit from a strong editorial cleanup. Some of Zimbalist's points are made repeatedly with virtually identical language in multiple places in the book. Economics arguments about (im)perfect information and the principal agent model are introduced in the last chapter, given little context, and out of character with the popular tone of the rest of the book.
The book is nonetheless enjoyable and informative. It should be required reading for any potential host community.
The book offers a combination of reviews of the academic literature, detailed discussions of individual and noteworthy events (Barcelona and Sochi Olympics and the Brazil World Cup Finals), economic inefficiencies related to the bidding process, and some examples summarizing how cities and countries get themselves into the bidding process.
While cost overruns averaging 270% are eye-rolling but widely known, Zimbalist shows how just bidding for the Olympics can often run $100 million or more -- and is nearly always done by private businesses looking after their own interests, not the long-term public benefit.
He provides compelling and detailed evidence that the local economic activity during the events themselves are nowhere near to making up the costs of hosting the events -- only around 10-20% with very generous assumptions. The conclusion is clear: any economic benefits of hosting the Olympics or World Cup Finals can only be a result of long-term impacts, such as improved region-wide infrastructure, housing, or tourism.
The book is timely given that Boston has been selected by the U.S. Olympic Committee to bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic Games. In many places, however, the book appears to have been rushed to publication and could benefit from a strong editorial cleanup. Some of Zimbalist's points are made repeatedly with virtually identical language in multiple places in the book. Economics arguments about (im)perfect information and the principal agent model are introduced in the last chapter, given little context, and out of character with the popular tone of the rest of the book.
The book is nonetheless enjoyable and informative. It should be required reading for any potential host community.
May 29, 2017
Книга для чтения по четным годам, когда большинство населения планеты (согласно заверениям Томаса Баха, президента МОК) бросает все и садится смотреть Олимпиаду или чемпионат мира по футболу. После нее ваш взгляд на самые большие шоу на земле неминуемо поменяется. Автор — специалист в области экономики спорта, консультант нескольких спортивных ассоциаций, компаний, лиг и команд, бывший сотрудник United Nations Development Program и US Agency for International Development. Первый вариант Circus Maximus вышел в 2015 году, быстро стал бестселлером, и через год Brooking Institution Press выпустил второе, обновленное и расширенное издание. Коммерциализация спорта высших достижений ни для кого давно не секрет, однако этапы и детали отхода от принципов де Кубертена и сдачи одного за другим высоких идеалов остаются в основном за кадром. Что, впрочем, неудивительно: как еще можно превратить мероприятие, за право проведения которого в 1984 году боролся лишь один город — Лос-Анджелес, в престижнейший трофей, на который спустя 20 лет претендовало уже 11 стран? Cегодня Международный олимпийский комитет и ФИФА являются единоличными хозяевами Олимпиады и Кубка мира по футболу соответственно. Когда имеешь дело с монополистами, то неизбежно переплачиваешь. Чтобы поток заявок на проведение и спонсорство не иссякал, МОК и ФИФА регулярно перетрясают игровое поле — например, первая организация разводит зимние и летние Игры, а вторая отменяет принцип ротации континентов проведения чемпионатов. Эндрю Зимбалист утверждает, что играть по таким правилам могут только те, кому не надо отчитываться за потраченное. Так оргкомитет Игр в Нагано просто сжег всю бухгалтерскую документацию, а сочинские Игры побили все рекорды расходов (свыше $50 млрд). Чемпионат мира по футболу 2022 года в Катаре, по предварительным подсчетам, обойдется в $200 млрд — в 10 раз дороже, чем бразильский World Cup 2015. Особенно шокирующим является анализ эффектов от мегасоревнований: после сеульской Олимпиады 1988 года практически ни одно из заявленных оргкомитетами ожиданий не воплотилось в жизнь.
February 18, 2017
A bit too major event-sceptic but contains useful datasets and historical information about the subject.
February 1, 2015
A short book, but a dense, well-researched one.
Zimbalist offers a compelling case for why mega-sporting events are bad economic deals for the host cities. He explains the reasons for notable exceptions like Barcelona ("a central feature of the Barcelona experience is that the plan preceded the games, and hence the games were put at the service of the preexisting plan, rather than the typical pattern of the city development plan being up at the service of the games") and Los Angeles ("“Following the political debacle in Mexico City, the horrific terrorist acts in Munich, the financial catastrophe in Montreal, and the extensive boycott of Moscow, the Olympic brand was markedly diminished. The only candidate to host the 1984 Summer Games was Los Angeles").
He shows how hosting the Olympics does not increase tourism as often expected and exacerbates the upward redistribution of wealth (particularly with regard to gentrification of neighborhoods). He explains the flaws of the ex ante job growth forecasts, noting the many flawed assumptions they make.
He ends the book with suggested reforms for both FIFA and the IOC.
The last line of the book is a resonant end: "In most cases, the electorate has been willing to settle for circuses, and the promise of bread. When the electorate demands bread itself, as it has in Brazil, then politicians will be forced to take notice." Here's to that!
Zimbalist offers a compelling case for why mega-sporting events are bad economic deals for the host cities. He explains the reasons for notable exceptions like Barcelona ("a central feature of the Barcelona experience is that the plan preceded the games, and hence the games were put at the service of the preexisting plan, rather than the typical pattern of the city development plan being up at the service of the games") and Los Angeles ("“Following the political debacle in Mexico City, the horrific terrorist acts in Munich, the financial catastrophe in Montreal, and the extensive boycott of Moscow, the Olympic brand was markedly diminished. The only candidate to host the 1984 Summer Games was Los Angeles").
He shows how hosting the Olympics does not increase tourism as often expected and exacerbates the upward redistribution of wealth (particularly with regard to gentrification of neighborhoods). He explains the flaws of the ex ante job growth forecasts, noting the many flawed assumptions they make.
He ends the book with suggested reforms for both FIFA and the IOC.
The last line of the book is a resonant end: "In most cases, the electorate has been willing to settle for circuses, and the promise of bread. When the electorate demands bread itself, as it has in Brazil, then politicians will be forced to take notice." Here's to that!
June 23, 2015
No to Boston 2024! I was already against my city, Boston, bidding for and potentially hosting the 2024 Summer Olympics but this book strengthened my rage against the mega-event. Nothing good can come of it. This book is an excellent analysis of Olympic and World Cup events throughout history with in-depth case studies of a few examples of best and worst case scenarios. The author's personal views never come into the writing, it is a very careful look backed by hard evidence of the ways in which mega-events can be damaging to a city physically, financially, and environmentally and the purported short and long term benefits generally do not come to fruition. Anyone interested in learning more about the Olympics and World Cup events which are increasingly becoming more corrupt and more harmful to a city and its residents should read this short but thorough economics survey. The writing though at times technical is easy to understand and found myself quoting unbelievable statistics from it out loud to my partner as I read it. A must-read for all Boston residents in 2015 and any city leaders throughout the world considering hosting a mega-event. At the end of the book Zimbalist suggests reforms for FIFA and the IOC which are quite reasonable and a nice touch that these events need not be abolished but do need a serious overall.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews