Here's the study. Not that fudging the facts.figures and impact of big games on tourism are fudged to the point it is SOP.
On 6th July 2006, ETOA, the European Tour Operators Association, released a discussion paper on the Olympic Games and its effect on tourism in the host nation. The study looked at sporting events and tourism, the television audience and the impact of hosting Olympic Games on a city'stourism infrastructure. It ended with case studies of Barcelona and Sydney - cities that have had ostensibly "good" games for tourism. The study found that there is no strong link between hosting sporting events and increased tourism. The audiences regularly cited for such events as the Olympics are exaggerated. Attendees at the Games displace normal visitors and scare tourists away for some time. Both Sydney and Barcelona had "excellent" Olympic Games, but their tourism industries have not significantly benefited. Thus there appears to be little evidence of any benefit to tourism of hosting an Olympic Games, and considerable evidence of damage. For ETOA, it is vital that the problems experienced by the host cities of past Games be acknowledged and addressed in order to avoid them reoccurring.
In the meantime, VisitBritain issued a response to this report, according to which benefits of hosting Olympic Games include a long-term investment in the future of Britain's visitor economy. The UK inbound visitor economy is forecast (precisely this kind of pre-event forecasts are actually criticised by ETOA) to benefit by almost GBP 2 billion over the period 2008-2017, the majority of this economic benefit will not come during the six weeks of the Games themselves, but in the window of opportunity that will be created before and after the Olympics. For VisitBritain, realising the tangible tourism benefits of the Olympics will require a properly researched strategy and investment and work on this has already started
http://www.iru.org/index/en_eu_newsletter/id.4Bruce D
< replied-to message removed by QT >
