The Rich Get Richer Under IOC Payment Plan

For an organization that purports to help coaches and athletes in developing countries, the International Olympic Committee sometimes spends its money in unexpected ways.

The IOC paid the United States $523,200 as a bonus for bringing a large contingent of athletes to the 1996 Atlanta Games. Peru, a relatively poor country, received only $20,000.

The disparity occurred because of special payments that have nothing to do with need. After Atlanta, the IOC compensated all of the Olympic nations $800 for each athlete brought to the Games. Bigger, wealthier countries received more money simply because they could afford to train and field bigger teams.

This case of the rich getting richer illustrates the balance that the IOC believes it must strike, ministering to the disadvantaged while placating powerful nations.

“The big national Olympic committees, they generate income [for the IOC], that’s for sure,” said Pere Miro, executive director of the IOC’s Olympic Solidarity program. “They deserve some of the money.”

The IOC began sending funds to poor Asian and African nations in 1961. This effort became the Solidarity program.

But in the 1980s, the focus of IOC aid shifted. Instead of sending money only to needy countries, the IOC also sought to reward those nations that contributed to the success of the Games.

The bonuses for Sydney will be even larger than in Atlanta--$1,200 for each athlete. In all, the IOC plans to distribute $21.3 million in bonuses and logistical support. The organization also distributes bonuses after each Winter Games.

Small nations aren’t complaining. Some officials apparently do not realize the magnitude of the disparity. Others understand that the money itself comes from broadcast contracts in powerful countries.

“Television is interested in [U.S. track star] Michael Johnson,” said Pamela Vipond, Solidarity’s deputy director. “TV is not interested in some guy from Burkina Faso.”