The Olympic Games, with their roots stretching back to ancient Greece, have long been a symbol of human achievement and international unity. However, as the modern iteration of this historic event about to unfold in Paris this month will demonstrate, the scale and cost is barely justified for the host city. Surely there is a compelling argument for hosting the Olympics in a single, permanent location? writes David Little, a partner in our Corporate and Commercial department who increasingly handles Sports Law cases, too.
The ancient Olympic Games were held in Olympia, Greece, beginning in 776 BC. These games were a religious festival dedicated to Zeus, featuring athletic competitions among representatives from various Greek city-states. The event was held every four years, a tradition known as an Olympiad.
The modern Olympic Games, revived in 1896 by French educator Pierre de Coubertin, sought to resurrect this spirit of competition and international camaraderie. The first modern Olympics were held in Athens and have since rotated among cities worldwide. This rotation was intended to spread the benefits of the Games and promote global unity. But now we have TV and 24/7 digital media, is that necessary?
Today, the Olympic Games are funded through a combination of sponsorships, ticket sales, and, most significantly, television rights. Broadcasting deals generate billions of pounds providing the financial backbone of the Olympics. For example, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) secured £5 billion in U.S. broadcast rights alone from NBC/Universal for the period of 2021-2032.
Despite this lucrative income, the cost of hosting the Olympics has skyrocketed. Cities like Sochi and Rio de Janeiro faced expenditures exceeding £40 billion and £15 billion, respectively. These costs often burden host cities with debt and underused infrastructure post-Games.
Hosting the Olympics in a permanent location would eliminate the need for repeated massive investments in infrastructure. A single, well-maintained venue would allow for long-term planning and cost control. As a result, the financial burden on host cities and nations would be significantly reduced, avoiding the economic pitfalls seen in recent Games.
A permanent Olympic site could be designed with sustainability in mind, utilizing renewable energy sources, eco-friendly materials, and efficient transportation systems. This approach would minimize the environmental impact of the Games and set a standard for sustainability in large-scale events.
A fixed location would streamline security measures and logistical planning. Host cities currently face immense pressure to develop and implement security protocols every four years. A permanent venue would allow for consistent, refined security operations, reducing risks and enhancing safety for athletes and spectators alike.
The bidding process itself is very costly and wasteful, and the expenditure required to build all the necessary infrastructure is enormous. The endless search for new hosts is unsustainable. The Commonwealth Games have found similar difficulties to find a host city, with the Malaysian government declining to host them, following the withdrawal of the Australian state of Victoria last year.
A permanent site, possibly in Greece to honour the origins of the Games, would allow for the creation of facilities that are used continuously and sustainably.
A permanent site would alleviate many of these financial burdens. My proof that we care so little for who hosts the games is that I bet you can’t name the next host cities after Paris?
(Milan the 2026 Winter Olympics, Los Angeles for the 2028 Summer Olympics, and Brisbane for the 2032 Summer Olympics).
Contact our Sports Law and Corporate & Commercial expert:
David Little is a Partner at Bishop & Sewell in our expert Corporate & Commercial team. If you would like to contact him, please quote Ref CB486 on either 07968 027343 or, 020 7631 4141 or email: company@bishopandsewell.co.uk.
The above is accurate as at 24 July 2024. The information above may be subject to change.
The content of this note should not be considered legal advice and each matter should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
