Posted On: Nov. 9, 2017
Sports discussion Olympic Games. In 2008, Beijing was the host city for the Summer Olympics at a bid of $24.7 million (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). Then the actual cost of games themselves was in the neighborhood of $43 billion (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). The Beijing Games were fortunate enough to turn a profit, unlike the Winter Games in Turin two years earlier which lost $32.4 million (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). There are many factors that make these games so costly to organize and manage. First is the bid of course, but then you have the planning phase which includes the building of facilities, not only for events, but for athletes, media, officials, and tourists. Really, the only way for host cities to come out on top is for these facilities to be able to host events for the foreseeable future once the games are over with. There is also the cost of transportation, financing, and security (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). Like the NCAA, the Olympics build on the “amateurism” of their athletes. We know this isn’t case. Olympic basketball and hockey use multi-million dollar professionals. In fact, boxing is the only sport that doesn’t allow professionals (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). Looking at how athletes are financed, the Olympics have allowed them to earn money through endorsements and trust funds that provide expenses for athletes (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). The Olympic Games themselves, like most sports, rely on television contracts, sponsorships, advertising, and ticket sales. One would think the economic impact of the Olympic Games would be tremendous for the host city, but this isn’t always the case. A review of the Olympic Games revealed there is relatively little evidence that hosting the Games produces significant economic benefits for the host city or region (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). Tourists will always have some economic impact, but use of land for facilities and the how the city maximizes the use of the facilities. Unsuccessful Games seldom use the land for anything else, and successful Games do, or in the case of the LA Games in ’84, use existing facilities (Rosner & Shropshire, 2011). Rosner, S., & Shropshire, K., (2011) The Business of Sports (2nd Ed) Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. The general belief is that hosting the Games produces significant economic benefits for the host city or region where they are held. It all depends on the use of land for facilities and the how the city maximizes the use of the facilities. Agreed the city spends a whole lot of money in bidding and then in building infrastructure. However it is important that the organizing committee of Olympic games of a particular country plan their activities in such a way that the facilities built before the events, are put to good use, not only during the games but also thereafter. In addition to that, there are several opportunities available to promote other events that may be related to the games, directly or indirectly. By carefully negotiating the TV broadcasting rights, it is possible to gain additional monetary advantage. However, has this always been true in the case of games held at all the locations? That is the moot question to be answered by experts.