6 ms·

It's a shame that the article doesn't provide any info on what percentage of USOC income ends up going to the athletes, especially since the author(s) probably

It's a shame that the article doesn't provide any info on what percentage of USOC income ends up going to the athletes, especially since the author(s) probably have that information. If it's 10%, then you could probably easily make an argument that they really are underpaid relative to the revenue of the organization as a whole. OTOH, if it's 90%, then you can't credibly claim they're significantly underpaid unless you can also show that the IOC and/or USOC could charge more, which you would think they would already be incentivized to do.

Fuxy 10y ago
That aside honestly I don't see why anyone would bother to even do it for such low pay. Being in the Olympics sound prestigious but I wouldn’t bother putting the effort for such low rewards.
- humanrebar 10y ago
  > That aside honestly I don't see why anyone would bother to even do it for such low pay. Aren't athletes routinely given room, board, gear, and free coaching from their governments? Aren't many events mainly for upper-class types anyway (events with horses or expensive winter gear, for example)? If making a living isn't a concern, prestige is a really nice job perk.
  - thrownblown 10y ago
    not in the US. the article states: "Unlike national Olympic committees in many other countries, Blackmun noted, the USOC receives no government support to help it pay athletes." the Olympic Training Center has some limited housing for athletes but you have to live in Colorado Springs.
- donkeyd 10y ago
  > such low rewards I think you have a different idea about what a reward is than athletes do. Being among the best athletes in the world, and being able to just perform their favorite sport is probably the reward to them, otherwise they wouldn't have made it there anyway.
- rburhum 10y ago
  "Reward" doesn't always equal money. Yes, of course, receiving money for what one does allows comfortable living, but there are plenty of professions and things people do that are not centered around accumulating money.
- goldenkey 10y ago
  Yeah its not like they are inventing or discovering new science to help humanity. Its just low brow entertainment plus a small benefit for almamacs if you spin it as record breaking. Im sure coaching / private lessons pay a lot more. Fuck the prestige, its just ego boosting with vampire scum sucker execs really winning anyhow.
- alistairSH 10y ago
  For the same reason a techie might work for a low bug bounty. Or go to a hack-a-thon. Neither pays well, relative to time invested, but the experience itself has value. And there is the prestige earned, which may translate into future earnings. For an athlete, those future earnings could come in the form of future coaching opportunities, etc. That, and world class athletes are just wired differently than you or me. In addition to the obvious physical gifts, they must share some of the personality traits with politicians and executives - incredible competitiveness, large ego, etc.
- throwaway_xx9 10y ago
  Brock Lesnar, a world-class wrestler, once said, "I saw my Olympic-training buddies scrape by to have a rusty car, and I decided that was not for me, and went pro (WWE and MMA.)"
dorfsmay 10y ago
What do you mean by "going to the athletes"? Isn't the Olympics reserved for amateurs (as in unpaid) athletes only? Are the athletes receiving any money at the Olympics?
- J_Darnley 10y ago
  Paying for travel to the games, maybe. Amateurs, except for the tennis players, the football players, and the bicycle riders. All of which are the big name stars who get paid to compete in other dedicated tournaments. I'm sure there are others too but those are the most promoted sports. I don't think the ones above get paid for the Olympics though.
  - ptaipale 10y ago
    There are lots of professionals in other Olympic sports. Track and field, volleyball, swimmers, basketball, sailing, handball, etc. Usain Bolt is definitely a professional athlete (a sprinter) and so is Marina Alabau (a sailor) or Zhang Jike (a table tennis player). Regarding compensation, it depends on the country, but I think many will get a bonus payment for medals or good performance. But anyway, the real money lies in advertising deals that athletes can get once they become big names (except for countries that have other types of compensation systems, e.g. North Korea).
    - J_Darnley 10y ago
      > There are lots of professionals in other Olympic sports. So then there is absolutely no point in watching. Well, not until they start the doping league. (Should we debate whether the current one is?)
      - ptaipale 10y ago
        Why so? The Olympic Games is the main event for professional track and field athletes, for instance, and if you're interested in professional sports - or any sports of absolutely leading edge competition, even when semi-amateur - then Olympics is the big event.
vmateixeira 10y ago
Some aren't sponsored at all [1] and may end up not even making it [2] (sorry for this one, it's in Portuguese). Basically athletes need to raise money by their own/crowdfunding.. Its sad news having in mind countries are being represented. [1] http://www.kshb.com/news/family-of-olympic-athlete-raises-money-for-trip-to-rio http://www.kshb.com/news/family-of-olympic-athlete-raises-mo... [2] http://www.revistaport.com/nadador-portugues-promove-crowdfunding-para-ir-aos-jogos-olimpicos/ http://www.revistaport.com/nadador-portugues-promove-crowdfu...
drzaiusapelord 10y ago
The Olympics is just a venue. Its not an employer. Its your home country that would pay you any salary. Often a base salary plus whatever bonus for getting a medal.
jdmichal 10y ago
From the article: In major American sports leagues — such as the NFL, Major League Baseball and the NBA — management typically shares about 50 percent of the revenue with the athletes. In promotional materials, the USOC advertises that more than 90 percent of its spending goes to “areas that support U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes.” That same 2012 study by former athletes found that just 6 percent of USOC spending actually goes to athletes as cash payments.
- howeyc 10y ago
  Is this really that crazy to believe both statements are true? Facilities, as one example, don't pop up out of thin air for free.
  - jdmichal 10y ago
    I was mostly quoting for the last sentence, which seems to directly answer the GP's question. I agree that training facilities and such should certainly be included in that number. However, from a couple paragraphs down, it seems like the USOC interpretation might be a bit broader still: > The reason there’s a large disparity between what the USOC says it spends on “areas that support athletes” and what the USOC actually pays athletes, Blackmun explained, is because the USOC includes the salaries of many of its employees who work with athletes or raise money for the organization in the larger figure.
  - Retric 10y ago
    Most athletes don't exactly need a lot in the way of individual infrastructure to train. A marathon takes a lot of space for the event, but training is just some place to run. Further, the host city's pay for the actual Olympic infrastructure. The real issue is each sport may have thousands of hopefuls and there is no way to support them all. However, if they did open the way for discrete individual branding that could go a long way to cover the most competitive athletes. As it stands you get the occasional Phelps who is set, and a lot of broke hopefuls.
    - onion2k 10y ago
neil1 10y ago
Yes, it does: "That same 2012 study by former athletes found that just 6 percent of USOC spending actually goes to athletes as cash payments."

Fuxy 10y ago

That aside honestly I don't see why anyone would bother to even do it for such low pay. Being in the Olympics sound prestigious but I wouldn’t bother putting the effort for such low rewards.

humanrebar 10y ago
> That aside honestly I don't see why anyone would bother to even do it for such low pay. Aren't athletes routinely given room, board, gear, and free coaching from their governments? Aren't many events mainly for upper-class types anyway (events with horses or expensive winter gear, for example)? If making a living isn't a concern, prestige is a really nice job perk.
- thrownblown 10y ago
  not in the US. the article states: "Unlike national Olympic committees in many other countries, Blackmun noted, the USOC receives no government support to help it pay athletes." the Olympic Training Center has some limited housing for athletes but you have to live in Colorado Springs.
donkeyd 10y ago
> such low rewards I think you have a different idea about what a reward is than athletes do. Being among the best athletes in the world, and being able to just perform their favorite sport is probably the reward to them, otherwise they wouldn't have made it there anyway.
rburhum 10y ago
"Reward" doesn't always equal money. Yes, of course, receiving money for what one does allows comfortable living, but there are plenty of professions and things people do that are not centered around accumulating money.
goldenkey 10y ago
Yeah its not like they are inventing or discovering new science to help humanity. Its just low brow entertainment plus a small benefit for almamacs if you spin it as record breaking. Im sure coaching / private lessons pay a lot more. Fuck the prestige, its just ego boosting with vampire scum sucker execs really winning anyhow.
alistairSH 10y ago
For the same reason a techie might work for a low bug bounty. Or go to a hack-a-thon. Neither pays well, relative to time invested, but the experience itself has value. And there is the prestige earned, which may translate into future earnings. For an athlete, those future earnings could come in the form of future coaching opportunities, etc. That, and world class athletes are just wired differently than you or me. In addition to the obvious physical gifts, they must share some of the personality traits with politicians and executives - incredible competitiveness, large ego, etc.
throwaway_xx9 10y ago
Brock Lesnar, a world-class wrestler, once said, "I saw my Olympic-training buddies scrape by to have a rusty car, and I decided that was not for me, and went pro (WWE and MMA.)"

dorfsmay 10y ago

What do you mean by "going to the athletes"? Isn't the Olympics reserved for amateurs (as in unpaid) athletes only? Are the athletes receiving any money at the Olympics?

J_Darnley 10y ago
Paying for travel to the games, maybe. Amateurs, except for the tennis players, the football players, and the bicycle riders. All of which are the big name stars who get paid to compete in other dedicated tournaments. I'm sure there are others too but those are the most promoted sports. I don't think the ones above get paid for the Olympics though.
- ptaipale 10y ago
  There are lots of professionals in other Olympic sports. Track and field, volleyball, swimmers, basketball, sailing, handball, etc. Usain Bolt is definitely a professional athlete (a sprinter) and so is Marina Alabau (a sailor) or Zhang Jike (a table tennis player). Regarding compensation, it depends on the country, but I think many will get a bonus payment for medals or good performance. But anyway, the real money lies in advertising deals that athletes can get once they become big names (except for countries that have other types of compensation systems, e.g. North Korea).
  - J_Darnley 10y ago
    > There are lots of professionals in other Olympic sports. So then there is absolutely no point in watching. Well, not until they start the doping league. (Should we debate whether the current one is?)
    - ptaipale 10y ago
      Why so? The Olympic Games is the main event for professional track and field athletes, for instance, and if you're interested in professional sports - or any sports of absolutely leading edge competition, even when semi-amateur - then Olympics is the big event.

vmateixeira 10y ago

Some aren't sponsored at all [1] and may end up not even making it [2] (sorry for this one, it's in Portuguese). Basically athletes need to raise money by their own/crowdfunding.. Its sad news having in mind countries are being represented. [1] http://www.kshb.com/news/family-of-olympic-athlete-raises-money-for-trip-to-rio http://www.kshb.com/news/family-of-olympic-athlete-raises-mo... [2] http://www.revistaport.com/nadador-portugues-promove-crowdfunding-para-ir-aos-jogos-olimpicos/ http://www.revistaport.com/nadador-portugues-promove-crowdfu...

drzaiusapelord 10y ago

The Olympics is just a venue. Its not an employer. Its your home country that would pay you any salary. Often a base salary plus whatever bonus for getting a medal.

jdmichal 10y ago

From the article: In major American sports leagues — such as the NFL, Major League Baseball and the NBA — management typically shares about 50 percent of the revenue with the athletes. In promotional materials, the USOC advertises that more than 90 percent of its spending goes to “areas that support U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes.” That same 2012 study by former athletes found that just 6 percent of USOC spending actually goes to athletes as cash payments.

howeyc 10y ago
Is this really that crazy to believe both statements are true? Facilities, as one example, don't pop up out of thin air for free.
- jdmichal 10y ago
  I was mostly quoting for the last sentence, which seems to directly answer the GP's question. I agree that training facilities and such should certainly be included in that number. However, from a couple paragraphs down, it seems like the USOC interpretation might be a bit broader still: > The reason there’s a large disparity between what the USOC says it spends on “areas that support athletes” and what the USOC actually pays athletes, Blackmun explained, is because the USOC includes the salaries of many of its employees who work with athletes or raise money for the organization in the larger figure.
- Retric 10y ago
  Most athletes don't exactly need a lot in the way of individual infrastructure to train. A marathon takes a lot of space for the event, but training is just some place to run. Further, the host city's pay for the actual Olympic infrastructure. The real issue is each sport may have thousands of hopefuls and there is no way to support them all. However, if they did open the way for discrete individual branding that could go a long way to cover the most competitive athletes. As it stands you get the occasional Phelps who is set, and a lot of broke hopefuls.
  - onion2k 10y ago

neil1 10y ago

Yes, it does: "That same 2012 study by former athletes found that just 6 percent of USOC spending actually goes to athletes as cash payments."