Comments by "Simon Hool" (@simonhool3073) on "Business Insider" channel.

  1. Shouting at a submarine, really effective that is...
    664
  2. Look at London, all Olympic venues are still in heavy use by the public 5 years on. They aren’t expense to use either for the public. An investment such as the Olympic isn’t primarily designed to make instant profit in the first place.
    177
  3. Americans are not good as the Europeans at car reviews.
    18
  4. Diego Hurtado to make money
    6
  5. Richard J Samuelson Won’t make a difference considering this is at sea...
    4
  6. MATIX Not a fully submersible vessel.
    3
  7. Raj Dehoo No they don’t.
    3
  8. Matthew Marcum Not really because the submarine didn’t stop or respond
    3
  9. Danny Morgan Any evidence to prove what I said is “Gibberish and delusion...”? Leaving the EU or not our economy won’t disappear as you say, it may shrink or increase either way but it won’t disappear as you say even those who voted to remain know our economy won’t disappear. Seems odd to lash back with no evidence or facts or even correct grammar.
    3
  10. Alex 1218 It’s not stealing, it’s tax. Hundreds of thousands of people, who aren’t in the Royal Family, wear fancy clothes everyday. What’s your point?
    2
  11. Isaac Gecas This aircraft carrier isn’t named after the Queen, do your research before you comment a load of bollocks.
    2
  12. OMGz1122 Becaus it’s not a full submersible. They knew the crew Hispanic through questioning and origin and navigation of the vessel.
    2
  13. Pet Prove it
    2
  14. Raf Abd Not all, more from the Crown State.
    2
  15. Nomad 64 Do you know that it has paid itself back from the initial investment and the Royal Family contribute more than they cost.
    2
  16. Nomad 64 Given back to the taxpayer by increasing the strength of the economy, increasing our global position and influence.
    2
  17. Nomad 64 No we couldn’t, they contribute more than cost. That is fact.
    2
  18. If a country isn’t going to make use of the Olympic development, like London has, then why should they host it again. Waste of money then.
    1
  19. Zenn Lozanno You’re so funny...
    1
  20. Benefitted the London and British economy, as well as the local economy.
    1
  21. SoyLeroy2003 Because Greece can afford that.
    1
  22. John Ikot They don’t always.
    1
  23. markman63 Explain London then.
    1
  24. 100 subs without videos sub now Evidence?
    1
  25. sanket Kumar Explain London
    1
  26. sanket Kumar LA has made a profit from both Olympic Games and London’s games have seen vast improvements in the local community. If a country invests right they can make it viable.
    1
  27. sanket Kumar Rio had the opportunity and the money to continue the infrastructure so it can be used by all but they left it and instead increased division but pushing poor people away when they could have benefitted.
    1
  28.  @sanketkumar8040  Rio could afford it, VOX did a video how they had enough money bu instead used it for the wrong reasons. In London and LA which are both wealthy, the infrastructure was used afterwards and is still today including the accommodation for all incomes. Jut research Rio and you'll see.
    1
  29. freen greg Explain London then.
    1
  30. freen greg Poor analogy, Rio had the opportunity to thrive after the Olympics but instead the interests were towards the rich people government officials who segregated poor people nearby instead of investing the money that they had for the areas to remain open. If you know you can’t support the games afterwards don’t bother bidding.
    1
  31. Jiang Cheung Like your English.
    1
  32. The God It isn’t the olympics or feeding people. There is enough other money to solve that, it’s down to government. The olympics role isn’t to sort that.
    1
  33. KendrickMan They weren’t conned, they didn’t spend any money on the venues afterwards. A video from VOX points this out,
    1
  34. Crazytastie There is already enough money available for research, intact the olympics is a large area for research. It isn’t the olympics or research.
    1
  35. Crazytastie Explain why counties bid to host it then?
    1
  36. Crazytastie Rio had the opportunity to thrive after the olympics but threw it away but not investing any more and segregating poorer people when they could have benefited from the transport and better housing.
    1
  37. Trickster Mixer The ship isn’t named after the queen, google it.
    1
  38. steve ed Ha, how out of date are you?
    1
  39. Alex Any evidence to back that up?
    1
  40. Love Story Damming opinion there...
    1
  41. Jtv6 Yo need to look at the definition of corrupt first, corrupt vs high cut.
    1
  42. Dee B Often, like London, more houses are built helping poorer people
    1
  43. Because Greece have the money for that.
    1
  44. Slartibartfast Because that isn’t cheap and easy to maintain and secure.
    1
  45. Eli Egbert The Olympics isn’t 99% adverts.
    1
  46. Bill Whitman Olympics costs more and more each year so wouldn’t work.
    1
  47. Midnight Cravings Thanks for your opinion...
    1
  48. Anthony Olmo The costs would be astronomical to build then maintain it every 4 years.
    1
  49. D C You know you’re loosing the argument when you go off topic about the history of the monarchy, which has no bearing on the topic of conversation being cost.
    1
  50. Kenny McCormick IOC isn’t a corporation.
    1