DThe Olympics is over and should once again make billions of spectators around the world happy. However, their dazzling image masks the athletes’ unfavorable and sometimes unstable working and living conditions. Their stories and top-notch performances are the International Olympic Committee (International Olympic Committee) Generate billions of sales.
Use F+ to access all articles on FAZ.NET for 30 days for free.
Life before participating in the Olympics was marked by discipline and abstinence. The athletes put their bodies on the line and endured psychological pressure. Family and friends withdrew, and career ambitions were postponed. In many countries, the state has jumped into violations as a funder of top sports. Athletes made a decisive contribution to the multi-billion dollar marketing of the Olympics, and they did not receive fair wages.
Because: By protecting the exclusivity of sponsors, the Olympic Movement protects its sales from the influence of athletes to a large extent, and at the expense of athletes. This is good for the International Olympic Committee, but bad for the athletes. Article 40 of the Olympic Charter makes this possible. It prohibits athletes from conducting their own advertising activities during the “freeze period” before, during and shortly after the game. During this period, it is almost impossible for them to advertise with their sponsors, whether it is with the car dealer in their hometown. Speaking of boldness is hard to beat: at the peak of their careers, the protagonist of the game was excluded from the billion-dollar advertising and image rights market.
Relax advertising restrictions
Over the years, the International Olympic Committee has transformed into a for-profit organization operated by multinational companies: from 2014 to 2019, annual sales exceeded 1.4 billion U.S. dollars, and annual sales increased by 140 million U.S. dollars. Only about 4% of the funds go directly to athletes, for example in the form of scholarships. At best, they indirectly benefit from the shameful and opaque funds flowing back into the international and national sports systems, which often cause concern due to corruption and waste of money. Therefore, it is very questionable how much of the income of the International Olympic Committee (90% of which goes to sports) actually goes to athletes.
The Olympic business model has a stifling effect on the economic participation rights of athletes and conflicts with anti-monopoly and human rights. After receiving complaints from German athletes, individual athletes and the sporting goods industry, the Federal Cartel Office made it clear to the monopolist DOSB and the International Olympic Committee in 2019 that Rule 40 represents an abuse of a dominant position and is therefore anti-competitive. For German athletes, advertising restrictions have therefore been relaxed.
For example, since the Tokyo Olympics, it is easier for them to use social media channels to advertise or thank sponsors. Nevertheless, only a small part of the German Olympic team advertised on Instagram for non-Olympic sponsors. After Germany made the decision, other countries have also loosened supervision, but to different degrees.
