Originally Posted by IDEXAN
OK there's that, but even though Rio de Janeiro also has severe criminal activity to include drug cartels they are scheduled to have both the next World Cup & the next Olympics. It's the 21st century that we are now in and we've learned how to meet all kinds of logistical and security challenges for these international events attended by large crowds. And don't forget, London also has had some extreme security challenges: remember the Islamic terrorist attacks there in 2005 ? To my knowledge Mexico city has yet to have any such problems ?
On the plus side Mexico City has so much going for it as it's this continents largest city, only a bit over 2 hours flying time from Houston and not much farther from LA, and it's CST.
I'm not arguing for London at all, but some of those points don't stand up.
Do we not let the Giants and Jets have New York as a base because of 9/11? Should Dallas have a football team after JFK? Security issues on a week to week basis would be infinately easier to deal with in London, which on any given Saturday deals with up to 150,000 soccer fans descending on the city. Getting a city like Rio togethrt for a month, whilst throwing billions of dollars at a problem is easy compared to having the tried and tested infrastructure of a city like London.
Completely with you on flying time. That is why I think Toronto makes much more sense.