Thread: More proof that Olympic Games is about money above all

Seems like a genuine mistake.

Originally Posted by henners88

This is the same in whatever sport you watch. Sounds silly to us, but these guys are also paid an awful lot of money by certain sponsors who won't be too happy if a rival company is also being plugged.

The other week Ronaldinho walked into a press conference drinking a Pepsi. He's sponsored or was by their main competitor Coca Cola. He lost the sponsorship and thats unsurprising IMO.

Coca-Cola Cancels Ronaldinho Sponsorship over Pepsi, Articles | THISDAY LIVE

You're mistaking personal sponsorship with the olympic games sponsors. What applies for Ronadinho's case doesn't apply in Phelps' case as he didn't upset any of his own sponsors.
Why is there an IOC rule that prohibits an athlete from advertising a not olympic games company during the olympic games? Is the IOC protecting their own revenues at the expenses of the athletes? And to enforce it they threaten to strip them of their hard earned medals?
It's all about the money and nothing else, but then again all these so called sport governing bodies are just that money making machines no matter if you talk about the IOC, the UEFA, the FIA etc...

Originally Posted by Mark

Seems like a genuine mistake.

Most probably. Also the athlete is not really in control of who might leak information from such advertising campaign and I fail to see why the athlete shall be thus punished.
The rule itself is a joke that shouldn't have ever been written.

Originally Posted by ioan

Let's strip him of his medals earned in the pool because he dared to advertise for anyone else but the sponsors of the olympic games! WTF people?!
Is this the Olympic spirit?!

I guess you didn't read the article.

Nowhere does it even mention that Phelps is being investigated by the IOC for what seems to be a leak or simple error let alone lose his medals, but don't let that get in the way of a rant.

Originally Posted by Malbec

I guess you didn't read the article.

Nowhere does it even mention that Phelps is being investigated by the IOC for what seems to be a leak or simple error let alone lose his medals, but don't let that get in the way of a rant.

My beef is with that specific rule 40, but that shouldn't stop your rambling, eh?!

Originally Posted by ioan

As if needed more proof:

Michael Phelps could get in trouble for Louis Vuitton photos | Fourth-Place Medal - Yahoo! Sports

Let's strip him of his medals earned in the pool because he dared to advertise for anyone else but the sponsors of the olympic games! WTF people?!
Is this the Olympic spirit?!

People like Phelps make us watch the olympic games not the sponsors!

It is the same as Yohan Blake who i believe was in danger of being fined because he wore watch that was not
a watch made by the official London 2012 watch sponsor.

Jamaican sprinter Yohan Blake wore a custom $500,000 watch in the 100, and the IOC is not happy : Stltoday

also regarding money. 2012 might have been the last time SVT (Swedish equivalent of BBC) broadcasted an Olympic game.
for the 2014 and 2016 the commercial media company Viasat have bough the rights. Meaning that those who want to see it all have to pay up.
Some of it will be available in their public Tv-channels but far far from as much as with SVT.

Considering that the last Olympic host city that actually made money was Los Angeles then one can understand how the committees would want to protect their sponsors.

And

seeing that this is a Motorsports forum should it is bewildering that some have a hard time accepting the general rules behind sponsorship. I deal is sponsorship and when you are paying $$$ for an event or competitor it comes with a contract. You expect that contract to be honored.

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Considering that the last Olympic host city that actually made money was Los Angeles then one can understand how the committees would want to protect their sponsors.

And

seeing that this is a Motorsports forum should it is bewildering that some have a hard time accepting the general rules behind sponsorship. I deal is sponsorship and when you are paying $$$ for an event or competitor it comes with a contract. You expect that contract to be honored.

Agreed.

I don't see the problem with Olympics and sponsorship.

Perhaps some people would prefer if the IOC didn't involve itself in sponsorship in any way and lost out on a good revenue stream that could be used to either improve the games, reduce the costs for the hosting city or both.

If they're going to be taking money from sponsors then they need to do it properly, set out contracts and honour them. Olympians are perfectly free not to agree with any aspect of the Olympic games and not turn up.

BTW how many stadia, tube stations and athletes' flats have been built on Olympic spirit? As a London taxpayer I'm glad bluechip companies were prepared to stump up so much money and reduce our tax bill.

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Considering that the last Olympic host city that actually made money was Los Angeles then one can understand how the committees would want to protect their sponsors.

And

seeing that this is a Motorsports forum should it is bewildering that some have a hard time accepting the general rules behind sponsorship. I deal is sponsorship and when you are paying $$$ for an event or competitor it comes with a contract. You expect that contract to be honored.

I generally agree with you, though I believe companies should be less sensitive about breaches, parodies, etc.

Originally Posted by ioan

My beef is with that specific rule 40, but that shouldn't stop your rambling, eh?!

If that post was your definition of 'rambling' — well, words fail me.

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I generally agree with you, though I believe companies should be less sensitive about breaches, parodies, etc.

Sure. Why not? It isn't your money after all.

Breaches are very important. One of the reasons that Olympic sponsorship is so expensive is that you are paying for EXCLUSIVE rights. To violate it is equal to theft.

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Sure. Why not? It isn't your money after all.

Breaches are very important. One of the reasons that Olympic sponsorship is so expensive is that you are paying for EXCLUSIVE rights. To violate it is equal to theft.

You hold freedom of speech very dear, no? In that case, why do you feel it can be restricted in exchange for large sums of money? This is, in effect, what you're arguing.

I'm so happy we are a small country and have no chance of hosting Olympics. At least we are spared that meaningless hysteria. Of all the Olympics I've seen Barcelona was the last example of a half-decent balance between sports and commerce. Ever since we've seen nothing but a thinly disguised commerce. In London it was all commerce and no sports.

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

In London it was all commerce and no sports.

?

Once inside the events I have to say the commercial aspect was largely invisible except for the odd ad here and there during breaks, and certainly far less intrusive than other sports events I've been to.

As has already been mentioned its odd that fans of such a sponsorship intensive sport should take exception to sponsorship...

Originally Posted by Malbec

As has already been mentioned its odd that fans of such a sponsorship intensive sport should take exception to sponsorship...

I have no objections to sponsorship, but I do have serious problems with the reverence that now has to be demonstrated towards those that provide it.

Originally Posted by BDunnell

You hold freedom of speech very dear, no? In that case, why do you feel it can be restricted in exchange for large sums of money? This is, in effect, what you're arguing.

The Olympics are a PRIVATE event. Any athlete who competes agrees to knowing full well what the rules are. By competing and signing the agreement you have legally agreed to those terms.
Don't like it? Do compete in the Olympics and sign whichever sponsor you wish.

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I have no objections to sponsorship, but I do have serious problems with the reverence that now has to be demonstrated towards those that provide it.

Don't like it? Don't go.

If you think the Olympics would be anywhere as big and impressive as it is now without the massive infusion of sponsorship $$$ and the actions it brings then I want to show you a bridge I have in Brooklyn that I can let you have for a song.

Anybody else notice how that bastion of Marxist Leninism that calls itself the The Democratic People's Republic of Korea but we known it as North Korea was wearing an undecidely non-socialist sponsor logo on some of their uniforms?

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

The Olympics are a PRIVATE event. Any athlete who competes agrees to knowing full well what the rules are. By competing and signing the agreement you have legally agreed to those terms.
Don't like it? Do compete in the Olympics and sign whichever sponsor you wish.

Of course Vop in his usual extremely short and one sided way forgets that the Olympics while a private organisation, always depend on enormous trainloads of public money--that's TAXPAYER--subsidies, and costs like Police and Army AA sites, and traffic control etc...
All the people taxed and all the business and travel disrupted, they didn't sign contracts, and they didn't benefit from the millions exchanging hands..

But since when does reality impinge on Mr Vop?