VER the current Olympic cycle, the IOC will generate more than $7.6bn (€7bn) in income with up to half of that set to come from its 15 headline sponsors, and a suite of 70 commercial and operational partners.
Despite such extraordinary income and growing value through each Games period — this figure is set to rise by $1bn (€920m) come 2028 — the Committee continues to operate an almost pulverising marketing stranglehold over its key assets, the athletes.
For a great many of the almost 3,000 Olympians, an enormous burden of responsibility is placed on their shoulders about how they are marketed and celebrated by their own suite of sponsors, with infringements strictly imposed by the IOC on athletes who fall foul of the law.
Welcome to ‘Rule 40’ — a commercial statute that controls, monitors and polices the commercial activities of the athlete, with even the use of Olympic intellectual properties banned.
The IOC law prevents the use of official Olympic logos and crests by athlete’s sponsors, and limits the amount of social media posts recognising their sponsors, even going as far as preventing the boosting of those activations.
As one commentator put it: “The first rule of Olympics is you do not talk about Olympics.”
Athletes are strictly limited on what they can and cannot say in thanking their sponsors, putting themselves in a vulnerable position, caught between the IOC, the National Olympic Council (NOC), and their generous supporters.
Such commercial responsibility is not unique to Olympic participants. At major Uefa and Fifa football championships, players and national associations are limited in their commercial activities, particularly around tournament matchdays.
However, they are fully professional and well-paid athletes, who earn significant bonuses and payments through participation at international championships — in the Olympic sports, there are rarely such bonus incentives.
In Tokyo, ‘Rule 40’ threatened to overshadow the commercial side of the games when 20 Team UK athletes, led by sprinter Adam Gemili, initiated legal action to challenge “unjust and unlawful” sponsorship rules.
That case eventually reached agreement with the British Olympic Association, resulting in more freedom for Olympians to acknowledge those who have supported their commercial cause.
But the contentious Rule 40 issue is still with us, despite the extraordinary wealth and income of the IOC. And many athletics sponsors see it as a controlling and unnecessary imposition which adds stress and toll on Olympians.
However, in a remarkable development, Team Ireland athletes are set to benefit from a unique and innovative interpretation of Rule 40, removing all commercial pressures from the athetes.
For Ireland’s 133 Paris participants, the move allows them fully focus on performance and wipes away the unnecessary stress about what might be happening in their name outside of the sporting arena.
Initiated by Kevin Keane, the marketing and commercial manager with the Olympic Federation of Ireland, and based loosely on how Team USA support their athletes commercially, the move is a masterstroke by the OFI.
Before flying out to Paris last week OFI CEO Peter Sherrard explained how the Irish body operates Rule 40.
“It’s important we get it right because ultimately we’re an organisation which really does want to be ‘athletes first’,” he said.
“A lot of the feedback from the athletes, the teams and the sports (bodies) has been extremely positive. They have seen that level of change and I suppose us being open about what we’re doing and why we’re doing it.
“With Rule 40, we put in quite a bit of work around the Tokyo cycle to try to take the emphasis off the athletes having to shoulder all of the responsibility.
“In the past what might have happened is you would have an athlete who might have a personal sponsor and it was more than likely they would have been told ‘you can’t activate during the games, period’ — whereas, we’ve completely changed that.”
The balance for Sherrard, Kevin Keane and the OFI’s commercial director Catherine Tiernan is also to appeal to and manage the relationship with the Federation’s own sponsors in “making sure they’re recognised and their contributions which are very significant”.
reported last week that these contributions by official Federation sponsors now sit at €6.1m, so there’s a lot at stake for the senior executive team.
For Irish athletes, unlike the majority of their global counterparts, the only involvement they have with Rule 40 is to register their commercial partnerships, whereby the sponsors then sign a ‘personal sponsor commitment’ abiding by Rule 40.
This puts all of the responsibility on the sponsor, with none on the athlete.
But what of mischief-makers and any corporate partners that may skirt the rules for a quick commercial gain?
“By and large, although there are a few bad actors, corporates do not want to break the rules, and when the rules are explained to them, it’s absolutely fine,” adds Sherrard.
That personal sponsor commitment holds them directly responsible during the Games commercial period and it also provides visibility on actions planned.
“The principle is that an athlete’s personal sponsor, without using Olympic properties, can activate during the games period.”
While balancing the issues of OFI and OCI sponsors, with the necessary activations and marketing by the athlete’s partners, Sherrard and Keane appear to have achieved success so far in Paris.
But the Federation will come down hard on any athlete sponsor who deliberately breaches or even misinterprets what they have agreed to.
“Ultimately the right of authorisation falls with our Federation, and the possibility of legal action around infringements, which we would take, absolutely.
“But obviously you don’t want to get to that point and there’s a lot of education needed so many people are working hard on.”
A compelling name has entered the mix for the position of chief executive at the FAI – Robert Watt.
In the coming days an appointment committee will conduct a second round of interviews for the job, vacated earlier this year by Jonathan Hill, and previously occupied by John Delaney.
While the process has been completely locked down, with all senior sources within the association kept in the dark about the candidates remaining, a number of insiders have speculated strongly that Robert Watt is the leading candidate.
We don’t know if the FAI Board Member has yet been interviewed for the post, which would return about around €258k of his current €297k salary at Department of Health where he is Secretary General.
We do know that Watt would be a tantalising candidate, given his charge of deeply challenged organisations, but particularly for his skills within financial management.
He was previously Secretary General at the Department of Public Expenditure NFP Delivery & Reform, Director at the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) as well as Asst Sec Gen at the Department of Finance.
While Watt would be the most qualified for the role, given his additional experience on the FAI Board, whether a career civil servant would take the job is another matter.
Qatar Airways has been announced as the Series Title Partner and Official Airline for the 2025 Lions Tour to Australia.
The airline has been announced almost one year before next summer’s series which kicks off at Brisbane’s Suncorp Stadium, an eagerly anticipated Tour which follows the fraught trip to South Africa in 2021, with no crowds due to the pandemic.
Ben Calveley, CEO of The British and Irish Lions said: “The three-way partnership beween the Lions, Rugby Australia and Qatar Airways will play an important part in delivering the Lions Tour in 2025.”
Phil Waugh, CEO of Rugby Australia added that the partnership “represents another substantial boost to what promises to be a memorable occasion across Australia next year”.