I should spell out my points more literally than inferentially. Inferential writing can create ambiguity.
I agree with much of what you write. That was my point. Let me say it another way: To give them the games in the next Olympic year (ie 2018) would neither be fair nor wise because that would simply be a repeat occurrence of what happened this year, ie zero attendance.
However, if you are inferring that that kind of dismal attendance in Taipei (looking at the shorts, the arena was basically empty . . . we are talking rock bottom attendance here . . . basically zero attendance) could not have been bettered somewhere else THIS YEAR, I beg to differ. (It certainly could not have been worse.) And as you asked me a question (What did you expect?), yes what happened is what I expected and what anyone and everyone should have expected and probably did expect. (As your question is rhetorical, you too expected it, I gather.)
Taipei came through and met everyone's expectation, but no one should be proud of the accomplishment, especially the ISU who orchestrated it. And no one should blame Tapei for what happened. It is the ISU's fault for the way, the place and the time that it was set up.
Would it not have been better this year to put the event in a place where there was less chance of total failure rather than a place where total failure (in attendance and interest) was a total certainty? It may not have been possible, but hopefully the lesson has been learned by ISU and they work out matters (regarding location, participation and timing) so that it will not happen again.
Really, the ISU needs to work out something better in an Olympic year so that failure is not so inevitable. At least one aspect of that (and there are several) is the location of the event. A location in a place like Tapei for 4CC a few weeks before the Olympics only adds to the perfection of the perfect storm for failure.