Reuters Online last month invited readers to put their questions to Seb Coe and John Armitt about London’s staging of the 2012 Olympics.

We now have the answers from the two key men behind the preparation and running of the Games.

Costs associated with hosting London 2102 dominated the questions, but other subjects were raised such as the controversial logo and ticket sales.

The answers, below, were divided between Coe and Armitt. Coe heads the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (Locog), which is responsible for preparing and staging the 2012 Games, handing out most
of the contracts.

Armitt is chairman of the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA), responsible for the building of the new venues and their use after 2012.

Q: Timothy asked: Any chance of changing the hideous logo?

Coe:  We are proud of the logo and it’s here to stay.  We wanted something that was different, that works for our sponsors, that will connect with young people, works for our merchandise and will work digitally come 2012.  I said at the time that London isn’t bland, so there was no way we were going to create a logo that was bland.  You’ll see that it will evolve between now and 2012 - as we said it would - but the core shape of the logo is here to stay

Q: Richard Lorraine-Smith asked: Dear Sir. All new builds are VAT free so why has the Government tried to con the public into thinking it will cost more because they will have to pay VAT? Some parts of the project will attract VAT but not the construction. The Audit Commission should investigate this and make a statement to Parliament.

Armitt: VAT notices published by Revenue and Customs this year state that the construction of new buildings is subject to standard rates of VAT - the exemptions under this notice only relate to residential buildings so they are not relevant to construction work for London 2012.

Details about the amount of VAT payable were fully outlined in the 2012 budget announced in March this year and the Government and ourselves have continued to be open and transparent in the costs involved in this project.

Q: Mike asked: Is it in the builders’ contracts that, if actual costs exceed quoted costs, penalties are imposed? If not, why not?

Armitt: For the construction of major venues in the Olympic Park, we are using target cost contracts which encourage the client and contractor to work together to reduce costs - the lower the cost, the higher the profit for the contractor. Along with the incentives to reduce costs, these contracts also ensure that should costs be exceeded, the contractor shares any additional expense so there is a natural incentive to deliver within budget.

This is a standard approach for large and complex projects, and has been used successfully in projects such as Heathrow Terminal 5, High Speed 1, and the Emirates Stadium so we are confident it is the right approach.

Across the wider project, we have been given a realistic budget and prudent contingency which match our regeneration ambitions for the Olympic Park site so our focus remains firmly on delivering this huge project with the budget we have been given.

Q: Paul Szynkowski asked: When tickets finally go on sale for the 2012 Olympics, how are you going to make sure that they are not all bought up by various ticket touts, who then go on to sell them at ridiculous prices on internet auction sites? This happens with most music concerts and major sporting events (Rugby World Cup, for example) these days and no one seems to be doing anything about it!

How will you make sure that the true fans of the Olympics are able to buy tickets fairly without having to pay double/triple the face value?

Coe:  We are working on our ticketing strategy and we will of course look at how we can avoid tickets getting into the wrong hands.  Fairly priced tickets are absolutely part of the plan.  In addition of course, there are a number of events that will be free to see - for example road cycling, triathlon and the marathon.  These events will take place on the streets of London, where spectators can line the route.  In addition, we are working on having ‘Live Sites’ throughout the country - big screens that will show Games time action and provide a central meeting point for the cultural events that will be happening as part of the Cultural Olympiad. 

Q: Paul asked: Hi Seb. Are you able to give any indication on any ticket prices as yet for the different events?

Coe: We can’t give any indication just yet, as we are working on the plans at the moment but as I said in the previous question, they will be fairly priced.  We want to give as many people as possible the chance to attend the Games - and create a great atmosphere for all our events.  We look to Manchester for inspiration here - during the Commonwealth Games 90 percent of seats were sold. 

Q: Jojo asked: Why spend 500 million pounds on a once-off stadium when Wembley lies idle?

Armitt: Our plans for the 2012 Olympic Stadium are far from being a ‘once-off’ venue but a unique and innovative design that will evolve as we move from Games time into legacy.

Initially a stunning 80,000 seat Stadium as a flagship of the Games, the venue will then be converted into a 25,000 ‘living stadium’, with a comprehensive calendar of events on the field of play and a mix of sporting, social, community, health and education elements.

£500m is a significant amount of money but it is an investment not a cost and the Stadium will deliver benefits not just for the Games but for generations to come.

London already has an abundance of world-class stadia - Wembley, Twickenham, Emirates - and does not need another large scale stadium. Instead, the legacy Olympic Stadium has been designed to complement these other London venues by enhancing the sporting facilities the capital has to offer across a range of sports.

Far from lying idle, Wembley will also have a key role to play in 2012 by hosting the football events, including the final, during the Olympic Games.

Q: Paul Smith asked: I honestly think the village will be the biggest white elephant in British history.

Armitt: Previous Games have been blighted by poorly planned venues and infrastructure that offer little value after the Games have come and gone. That is why we are learning lessons from previous host cities by ensuring we plan Games and legacy together from the very beginning, before a brick has even been laid. Our goal is to deliver no white elephants at London 2012 and permanent venues and infrastructure will only be built if they have a clear use after the Games are over.

Rather than go down in history as a white elephant, the Olympic Park will be remembered as the biggest new park in Europe for 150 years, surrounded by thousands of new homes, sporting venues and community facilities served by world-class transport links - it will be a new heart for east London and help us kick-start the wider regeneration of the Lower Lea Valley.

Q: Barry asked: Seb - there was a lot of talk about re-invigorating athletics at club level. What exactly is planned ? What will the money be used for and how much will be involved ? Is it to go towards more coaches/better facilities or what ? Do clubs need to apply for extra funds?

As I see it any money will be hoovered up into the pockets of consultants doing surveys - rather than the creation of anything substantive.

On the ground I can see scant evidence of any changes at all - this is in the north east.

Coe:  Let’s be clear here.  Winning the bid was never going to mean that we have a magic wand we can wave over sport - be it athletics, gymnastics or basketball - and create funding.  The Games can provide inspiration, but Locog’s budget is for staging the Games not for funding sports clubs.  It’s up to the Government and bodies like Sport England to use the inspiration of the Games and make it count in London and across the UK.  The Games is an opportunity for everyone - for athletes to make a name for themselves, for the sports themselves to raise their profile and inspire future generations.