Its funny because you are quoting something you obviously have no understanding of.SinisterSpade|LH| said:You say the city isn't paying a dime? Then how come:
"Vancouver-This city's debt rating has been put on watch by Standard and Poor's after the city's mayor said another injection of $458 million needs to be put into the floundering Olympic athletes' village.
In a statement issued yesterday, Standard and Poor's downgraded the city's credit rating from stable to credit watch, a term to indicate the ratings agency is concerned about Vancouver's increased debt load."
And that's just one of the expenses Vancouver is taking on itself.
You lose, good game.
Vancouver has risked (this was actually a few months back)that after the games they will be able to sell these houses at a profit. And Considering a 2b2b condo is going for 700,000, right now in Vancouver, I will not be surprised that they do sell for a profit.
Because of this risk S&P put them on the Credit Watch.
So umm a no brainer money maker for the city of Vancouver, a bad thing? I dont think so. So how does this show Vancouver in a huge amount of debt????
Also please before replying to me tell me how financing of the games have changed from Montreal to now. If you cant anwser that I am just not going to keep arguing with you.
The reason it took me so long to say this as I thought you had a modicom of intelligence to understand this without me needing to explain it.
So to reiterate...
Vancouver is risking they will make profit on selling housing that they built for cheap. Yeah totaly bad business decision...... right