Originally Posted by photolitherland
That stadium is kinda boring, the Beijing main stadium was way more kick ass than that.
Think for two seconds before you post the obvious
1. This stadium was designed to be 2/3rds temporary. Everything above the first tier was deisgned to be taken down after the Games to leave a 25k seat athletics stadium. Unlike Bejing's monolith which has hosted ONE sporting event since 2008 this is a demountable stadium built with post-Games use in mind. It mightn't be as flashy but it's a much better model for future hosts than the one Beijing provided.
2. A Birds Nest would cost probably £2bn to construct in London given the relative costs of building in Britain and China. Perhaps you could justify that kind of stadium spend in Texas if the Olympics ever came your way (though I'd doubt it), but we can't here, and neither could Chicago when they proposed a very similar stadium to London's in their excellent, albeit unsuccessful, plan to host the Games.
In short, it'll be a long time before we see another Birds Nest so don't hold your breath. Rio's athletics stadium for 2016 isn't particularly amazing and the early favourites for 2020 aren't proposing flashy new-builds that'd cost billions either. Don't judge future hosts by China's extreme extravegance because most countries, including your own I suspect, would never be able to justify building what they built for an Olympics.