Current location - Recipe Complete Network - Catering franchise - From the commercialization of sports to see the future direction of the Olympic Games
From the commercialization of sports to see the future direction of the Olympic Games
Once upon a time, the Olympic Games were seen as a "big cake", but suddenly there was an "economic crisis". Are the Olympics really "economic"?

The Olympic Games are unlimited business opportunities?

Organizing the Olympic Games has been sought after by many cities and even countries in recent years. In recent years, the host city of the Olympic Games and its host country, not only through the Olympic Games has won a "good reputation", often economic surplus. The huge business opportunities of the Olympic Games have made many countries, cities and companies "salivate".

The 1984 Los Angeles Olympics was the first Olympics to be privately organized by private citizens, and changed the history of the Olympic Games, which had a long history of losses. Originally planned to cost $500 million, the Olympics received $360 million from the sale of television broadcasting rights alone, and the practice of broadcasting sports for free on broadcast television was broken. Organizer Ueberroth raised nearly $100 million more by issuing 25 commemorative coins and 2,000 sponsorship vouchers. According to a Dec. 19, 1984, announcement by the Los Angeles organizing committee, the Games made a profit of $250 million.

The 1988 Seoul Olympics cost $4 billion, but the organizing committee made a profit of $300 million through corporate sponsorships and the sale of television rights (about $400 million), setting a record for the profitability of a government-run Olympics.

The total investment in the 1992 Barcelona Games was $9.6 billion, a figure that far exceeded that of the Seoul Games and fell short of even the Moscow Games, the most expensive in Olympic history. But the vast majority of those funds went to municipal construction. The Olympics earned $625 million from the sale of television rights, $516 million from entrepreneurial sponsorships and $5 million from tickets, coins and stocks, for a final profit of $5 million.

The 1996 Atlanta Olympics earned $10 million. The highly commercial Olympics cost more than $1.7 billion, mostly from the sale of television rights, sponsorships, and souvenirs, resulting in large-scale advertisements and merchandising throughout the competition venues, with every inch of downtown Atlanta priced out, and trademarks of Coca-Cola, IBM, Nike, and so on, visible everywhere.

The organizing committee for the 2000 Sydney Olympics earned $1.756 billion, 80 percent more than it expected when Sydney won the right to host the games seven years ago. Sydney's organizing committee initially projected $488 million from the sale of broadcasting rights, but actual revenues reached $798 million, a figure that exceeded the $568 million generated by the 1996 Atlanta Games. In addition, the international sponsorship program increased from $90 million to $221 million, while Australian sponsors provided $315 million in sponsorship, $108 million more than expected.

In addition to direct income, the hosting of the Olympic Games can promote related industries, such as communications, transportation, tourism, food and beverage industry development, thus generating a huge indirect economic benefits:

September 1984, the United States Economic Research Associates investigated the Los Angeles Olympic Games on the economic impact of the Southern California region found that the Olympic Games on the economy of the region The economic impact of the Olympic Games on the region was found to be $3.29 billion, far more than the 1962 World's Fair in Seattle and the 1982 World's Fair in Knoxville. The two expositions each lasted six months and had a total economic impact of $1 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively;

Barcelona's preparations for the 1992 Olympics came at a time when Spain was beginning to recover from the nationwide economic crisis of the 1980s. The organizing of the Olympics clearly accelerated the economic recovery;

The economic benefit to the United States of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics was approximately $5.1 billion over a six-year period (1991-1997);

Australia's Department of Tourism reported an 11-percent increase in visitors to the country in 2000, with Sydney seeing a 15-percent increase in September of the same year, and a 15-percent increase in the number of visitors to Sydney among the 110,000 people who came specifically for the Olympics. Of the 11 million international travelers who came for the Olympics, 88 percent will be repeat visitors, and Australia will see an additional 1.1 million visitors in the four years following the Games. Australia's export earnings increased by $56 million in 2001 as a result of the Games.

It can be said that the business opportunities of hosting the Olympic Games permeate every aspect of the economic and social life of the host country, and the income of hundreds of millions of dollars is to make the government and enterprises are eager to rush. The fact that Beijing won the right to host the 2008 Olympics has made many Chinese companies excited to get a piece of the action.

On Aug. 4, the Beijing Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games and Air China signed a cooperation agreement. Air China became the fifth official partner of the Beijing Organizing Committee, following China Mobile, Bank of China, China Netcom and Volkswagen.

However, industry insiders have their own views on the move by companies to actively sponsor the Olympics. Chen Jian, secretary-general of the Beijing Olympic Economy Research Association, argued in an interview with the China Economic Times that sponsoring the Olympics is still risky for companies.

Chen Jian believes that the threshold of both the IOC's TOP sponsorship program and the Beijing Organizing Committee's sponsorship program is relatively high. For enterprises, they should consider their own affordability and make reasonable sponsorships or investments related to the Olympics.

Watch out for economic traps

Today, all cities get excited when the idea of bidding to host the Olympics comes up. But before the 1980s, few cities that hosted the Olympics were able to get out of the money-losing funk. One of the most notable is the 1976 Montreal Olympics, which saw a huge deficit of more than $1 billion, the 15-day Olympics put Montreal in debt for 20 years, known as the "Montreal Trap".

The city of Montreal has been bidding to host the Olympics since 1940, and finally won the right to host the 21st Olympics in 1970. In order to run this Olympic Games, the organizing committee opened the Olympic Center, built new large stadiums, swimming pools, velodrome, Olympic Village and other facilities, and used many high-tech achievements. But because of the Canadian economic depression, coupled with mismanagement, so that the cost of these projects again and again additional, the original plan of 2.8 billion U.S. dollars of the main stadium cost 5.8 billion U.S. dollars, the organization of the cost of 600 million U.S. dollars from the original plan up to the actual 7.3 billion U.S. dollars. This makes the Montreal Olympics debt, not only affects the economic development of Canada, but also the Olympic movement has been hit hard, seriously affecting the bid for the 1984 Olympic Games activities, so that the original preparation for bidding for the country have withdrawn.

Chen Jian told reporters, Montreal, the initial budget for the Games and the actual inputs are too big a difference -- almost 10 times the difference, resulting in the Olympic Games host city into an economic trap. And this also gives the future Olympic Games host city sounded the alarm, rational use of Olympic resources, to avoid blind investment is the host city must be considered clearly beforehand.

Chen Jian believes that the investment in the Athens Olympics is relatively high, and in the short term, it will certainly lose money. However, with the success of the Olympics and the economic growth it has brought, it is difficult to say whether it will pay off or make money in the long term.

The "Montreal Trap" is a real cause for alarm, but the success of the Olympics is not always determined by its profit or loss. Profit-making and over-commercialization have added to the Olympics, and the painful lessons of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bring us another extreme example.

Excessive commercialization seriously interfered with the normal operation of the Games and distorted and alienated the Olympic mission.

Like the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, the Atlanta Games were also organized by the private sector. As a result of the pursuit of commercial interests, the Olympic Games was jokingly called "the most commercial taste"; coupled with some of the hardware is not up to standard, the organization of the work of the chaos, a time to make a lot of complaints.

Atlanta is home to Coca-Cola. During the Olympics, the company set up a "city within a city" in the center of the city. Many of the world's largest companies have also set up shop in the Olympic Park and competition venues.

The city of Atlanta also sold temporary business licenses to vendors for $300,000 to $20,000, creating a dizzying array of booths and shouting in the streets. In addition to the major television networks broadcasting the games live, endless insertion of advertising, the Olympic Games has become an "island" in the commercial sea.

In order to save money, the weightlifting competition was held in an underground warehouse converted from a convention center, with only one bathroom for the audience to use. Between each snatch and jerk competition, the bathroom is always overcrowded, with a line more than 100 meters long in front of the door.

What is even more intolerable is the chaotic traffic of the conference. Because the vehicles traveling to and from the venue and the Olympic village were too few and in poor condition, and the drivers had not been carefully trained, many lines of transportation could not arrive on time, directly affecting the competition. Some sports teams had to rent cars out of their own pockets. The baseball game between Nicaragua and the United States was forced to be postponed for 45 minutes because of the traffic. This is extremely rare in such a top event as the Olympics.

Rowers from Britain, France and Ukraine were forced to stop a bus in the Olympic village because of a delayed shuttle bus, and police intervened regardless. The bus was supposed to be delivering field hockey players. "The result was chaos in the Olympic village.

Some people hit the nail on the head at the time when they said, "Americans are far more interested in making money than they are in the competitors."

With the intervention of the IOC, the Atlanta Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games urgently provided an additional $1.2 million to replace worn-out vehicles, adjust drivers and add thousands of shifts to ease the traffic chaos.

"Commercialization can and must work to grow sport. In making plans, however, we must not forget one thing: sport must have its own dignity and not be controlled by commercial interests." These words from Samaranch, then president of the International Olympic Committee, after the Atlanta Games, are a summary of the experience and a warning to Olympic members, and to later Olympic organizers.

Wei Jizhong said that no matter what, the Olympics is essentially the Games, and its main body should be the athletes, never anything else. But now in the Olympics, the athletes as subjects are being gradually marginalized, while those involved are becoming more and more like subjects.

The process of commercialization has on the one hand given an economic boost to the Olympics, while on the other hand it has diluted the original theme of the Games. How to find a balance between the sport itself and business, and keep the commercialization of the Olympics within a certain scale, is the key to keep the Olympics continue to develop.

Focus on long-term effects

The Olympics itself has a strong profitability, with TV broadcasting rights, ticket revenues, and sponsorship revenues being the main means of profitability for the Olympics.

The Olympic Games television broadcast originated from the 11th Olympic Games in 1936. With the start of global broadcasting of the Tokyo Olympics in 1964, TV broadcasting rights became the most important economic pillar of the Olympics.

The 1988 Seoul Olympics sold $403 million in television rights; that figure doubled to $895 million four years later in Atlanta; and the 2000 Sydney Olympics sold television rights for a record $1.32 billion.

Since 1995, the International Olympic Committee in order to avoid market price fluctuations, the change of a single session of the Olympic Games television broadcasting rights sporadic transfer for a number of "bundled" sale, and achieved a more substantial economic benefits. At that time, only the 2000 to 2008 period of three Summer Olympics and two Winter Olympics in the United States broadcasting rights, will sell 3.5 billion U.S. dollars high price.

The host sites for the 2010 Winter Olympics and 2012 Summer Olympics have yet to be determined, but last year, the IOC already sold the U.S. television rights for both Games for $2.2 billion, a price tag that exceeded previous prices by as much as 32 percent.

Tickets are also a major economic source of the Olympic Games, the price of high and low to take into account the host country's audience's ability to afford, so, in recent years, the Olympic Games ticket prices fluctuate. 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games, the average price of $ 32 per ticket, the total income of $ 123 million, accounting for the Olympic Games of all income of nearly 1/4; Barcelona Olympic Games in 1992, the tickets The average price fell to $ 20; Atlanta in 1996 and rose to $ 40, which the most expensive tickets for the opening ceremony for $ 600.

The 2000 Sydney Olympics, ticket sales hit the best level in Olympic history, the sale rate of 87%, the total revenue reached $ 356 million. The upcoming Athens Olympics, the organizing committee put forward the "civilian" idea, that is, to allow more Greeks to enter the Olympic Games, the average price of tickets for 35 euros, the Department of the Sydney Olympics 2 / 3; tickets are expected to total income of 180 million euros, accounting for the total income of the Olympic Games nearly 1 / 10.

The 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games to obtain sponsorship.

The success of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games in obtaining sponsorships has strengthened the IOC's reform ideas in the sale of sponsorship rights. 1985, the IOC began the implementation of the global partnership program (TOP program).

Just as the word TOP means "top of the line," the members of the program are the "best of the best" in the industry. They pay the most money, benefit the most, and their products with the Olympic logo can be sold worldwide; not just during the Olympics, but for a four-year cycle.

The program is based on an Olympic cycle of every four years, with 2004 to 2008 being the sixth period. the 1st TOP, from 1985 to 1988, saw all of the IOC's revenues of $95 million, with nine global sponsors. The benefits nearly doubled in each subsequent issue. By Issue 4, from 1997 to 2000, total revenues were $550.5 million; with 11 sponsors, the price tag had risen to $25 to $40 million each.

Not long ago, Lenovo Group joined the 6th TOP program, with Coca-Cola, General Electric, Kodak, McDonald's, Panasonic, Samsung and other 10 globally renowned companies for the company, becoming the first Chinese company in the history of the program. According to experts' estimation, the price tag of the 6th TOP program sponsors is between 65 million and 100 million US dollars. That means Lenovo's sponsorship will be no less than $65 million.

However, despite the fact that the Olympics have many profit-making channels and a strong ability to make money, many people still believe the Games should not be used to make money.

Wei Jizhong believes that the Olympics can be profitable, but it should never be a tool for making money. The profits from the Olympics should only be used for the daily expenses of the IOC and the organizing committee of the host city, while the excess should be used for the sport itself.

Wei made it clear that using the Olympics to make a profit and using the Games for economic development are two very different concepts. Revenues from tickets, TV rights sales or sponsorships are only short-term and cannot have a long-term impact on the host city's economy. Only through the market development of the Olympic Games, stimulate production and demand, can have a long-term, long-term impact on the economy.

The 1988 Seoul Olympics was a comprehensive demonstration of the host country's open-door strategy. South Korea used the Olympics as an opportunity to cross over into the ranks of newly industrialized nations.

The slogan of the Seoul Olympics was "The World Goes to Seoul, Seoul Goes to the World," and when sports officials and athletes from more than 160 countries converged on Korea, the impact of the Games far exceeded the publicity Korea had been doing for many years through diplomacy, the press and other means, especially when billions of people around the world saw the reality of Korea's development on television, and Korea gained a lot of publicity. The spiritual benefits Korea gained from the reality of Korea's development cannot be calculated in terms of money or numbers.

The Seoul Olympics became the best advertising platform for Korean companies. For the Seoul Olympics,*** 90 companies made commercial sponsorships, 13 of which were major Korean corporations. Savvy businessmen saw the Olympics as a once-in-a-lifetime publicity opportunity to advertise their products.

Commercial sponsorship not only for the Seoul Olympics raised a large sum of money, but also for the Korean products to enter the international market opened a new channel. According to statistics, the Olympics brought nearly 7 billion dollars in production and sales to South Korea. Korea's exports expanded and bilateral and multilateral trade with other countries increased rapidly.

At the same time, the Seoul Olympics created jobs for 3.4 million people, especially in the manufacturing, construction and service sectors.

The most important thing that Beijing can learn from the Seoul Olympics is what it achieved in terms of urban development: bisected by the Han River, Seoul was extremely unbalanced in terms of development between the north and the south before the Games. By placing the Olympic events on the north bank of the Han River, which is not well developed, the development of the two areas was balanced. Before the Olympics, Seoul had only two bridges over the Han River, while after the Olympics, more than 20 bridges spanned the Han River. The balance of the urban structure had an immeasurable effect on the economic development that followed.

Government-led

The huge success of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, organized by businessman Ueberroth, is still fresh in the minds of many. As a result, some have floated the idea that the Olympics should be hosted by private forces such as individuals or businesses.

Wei Jizhong argues that it is impossible to run the Olympics without relying on the government at all, and that safety and security issues, for example, must be handled by the government.

All of the previous Olympics have been government-led except for the two more developed ones in Los Angeles and Atlanta. And the Seoul Games, a major economic and political success, were run entirely by the South Korean government.

Wei Jizhong believes there are two points that must be brought to the attention of all concerned regarding the Beijing Olympics:

First, the functions of the government and the organizing committee must be separated. Although the Beijing Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games is also staffed by government personnel, it cannot be a government and cannot perform government functions. Belonging to the investment and public **** construction must be made by the government to make decisions, the organizing committee can only put forward the requirements; and the organizing committee's task is to organize the Olympic Games, held well, its work does not need too much government intervention. Handle this relationship clearly, many problems and contradictions in the preparation of the Olympic Games will be solved.

The budget requested by the IOC is very clear about the relationship between the two. The IOC does not intervene in the government's investment in capital construction, while the funds the IOC gives to the city's organizing committee are not allowed to be used for infrastructure construction, but only for the operation of the conference.

Secondly, it is important to clarify whether the Olympics are subservient to the overall urban planning, or whether urban planning is subservient to the Olympics. The Olympics will obviously not bring any benefits to the people, and all it will bring is a short-term profit. But the people can get benefits from the development of the whole city, from such a point of view, the Olympic Games must be included in the development of the whole city planning. If, on the other hand, the city's construction is subordinate to the Olympic Games, to meet the special requirements of the Olympic Games, it will cause a lot of unnecessary waste.

Olympic financing: an inescapable financial innovation

"Olympic Games to raise the Olympic Games", rely on commercial fund-raising, the use of modern financial means to raise funds, not only is the spirit of the modern Olympic Games commercialization and financial innovation, but also the 2008 Beijing founding of the "Green Olympics" and "Science and Technology Olympics" call.

The 2008 Beijing Olympic Games should not just "wait, rely and ask", rely too much on the financial support of the central government, and ignore the innovation of modern financial financing means; moreover, it should not be turned into a governmental "image project" that "earns profit by losing money", and should not put the financing focus on state-owned enterprises and state-owned commercial banks. And should make full use of and absorb private capital, international capital investment in the Olympic Games, make full use of modern financial innovation and financial products to raise funds for the Olympic Games, to reduce the government's financial pressure and financial risk.

Call for private capital to invest in the Olympic Games

Recently, China Economic Times interviewed He Xiaofeng, head of the "financial support project for Beijing to host the Olympic Games" of the Capital Development Research Institute of Peking University and vice president of the Capital Development Research Institute of Peking University. He has repeatedly called for: 2008 Beijing's "Olympic Finance" do not rely on the existing system and the laws of the rules and regulations to constrain, to seize this once-in-a-century Olympic opportunity to implement the financial system innovation and financial product innovation.

He Xiaofeng said, the 2000 Sydney Olympics is the best example, through the financing not only improve the financial system, but also greatly promote the city's construction, improve the ecological environment, and promote the development of transportation, tourism, real estate and other related industries, and a series of commercial operation and financial innovation has won the "best of the Olympic Games," said. The Sydney Olympics increased Australia's GNP by $6.5 billion.

The Sydney Olympics provided a lot of experience for the 2008 Beijing Olympics, especially in the participation of private capital. The premise of allowing private capital to enter is to create a smooth financing channel and issue financial products with operability.

"Olympic finance" baptized the traditional view of financing?

The projects in which DAB capital has been involved include toll roads, schools, Olympic venues, etc. In particular, the Olympic Stadium, which is the main venue, has been built, owned, operated, transferred or handed over in a way that the franchise is for 30 years. The construction of the Olympic Stadium was initiated by two companies, the main construction unit was called the Australian Stadium Trust (AST), which carried out a public fundraising campaign, which started with an investment by the promoters, and then a commercial investor, which then carried out an IPO, but the investment in the IPO was divided into several pieces, not only the establishment of the Industrial Investment Trust, but also investment in the fund management companies, clubs in stadiums, clubhouses and so on.

In the IPO, the AST issued two varieties of securities: one was a gilt-edged portfolio, issued in a single lot of 2,000 shares in the management company plus 2,000 units of trust certificates, which entitles subscribers to two preferred seats and 30-year memberships to the Australian Stadium clubhouse. The other is the Silver Edge Portfolio, issued in lots of 1,000 shares plus 1,000 units of trust certificates, and entitles the subscriber to one guaranteed seat at any venue during the Games and a 30-year membership to the Australian Stadium Club. Through the issuance of securities and a variety of innovative combinations to realize the Olympic Games financing, no doubt to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games financial innovation provides a reference.

But He Xiaofeng said, at present, we have a serious division of power among various government departments in China, and enterprises must have the support of three years of profitable performance and multiple hurdles to go public for financing and securitization, plus a long application process, which will undoubtedly delay the timing. He believes that the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games project should take special measures, the implementation of a certain degree of exemption, in order to achieve the purpose of securitization and financing, the financial capital market should realize the innovation of the system and regulations, and should be early to take advantage of the opportunity of the Olympic Games to break the traditional, backward financing system and administrative constraints.

In our country to start a large project, traditionally through the state-owned commercial banks of long-term loans, always rely on this single financing model to raise funds, ultimately leading to a large number of non-performing assets of the state-owned commercial banks, the financial market financing is not good "vicious circle", therefore, some experts suggest that the construction of the 2008 Beijing funds should be taken in a new way of raising funds should not continue to use this traditional financing method for the state-owned commercial banks to finance the Olympic Games. This traditional way of financing for the state-owned commercial banks to carry the weight, should break the old concept of financing, encourage financial innovation.

Use "financing marketization" to ease the financial pressure

He Xiaofeng said, Peking University Capital Development Research Institute, "Beijing to host the Olympic Games financial support project" group after several years of research that: Olympic financing must be market-oriented, can not rely on the central government to use the finance to promote direct, and can not rely on certain departments of the "black-box operation", which led to the country's non-performing assets, the use of market-based financing, the use of market-based financing, the use of financial resources to promote the development of the Beijing Olympics, the use of market-oriented financial support projects. The re-aggravation of the use of market-oriented means of financing will make the Olympic funds in an open, transparent environment, and to achieve profitability, but the premise is to let the Olympic real estate securitization.

He said that through the Sydney Olympics we can see some experience, the significance of the participation of private capital is that these reputable domestic and foreign companies bear part of the risk originally borne by the government. Stadium Australia raised money from the capital markets in the form of equity and bonds. Private owners and operators took on the task of building and operating major sports venues and Olympic infrastructure. Olympic legacy facilities, avoiding a heavy public burden.

Establishment of the Olympic Industry Investment Fund

Olympic Industry Investment Fund, currently in China industrial investment fund is a blank, industrial investment fund law has not yet been introduced. Experts suggest that, if the Chinese mainland is not established in the Olympic industry investment fund, you can seek to develop such an investment fund overseas, and then invested in the Olympic Games-related projects.

For the Olympic investment fund group also put forward some new ideas: China's industrial investment fund can be realized through the first experiment, it is necessary to produce a western construction investment fund, from the perspective of the national strategy to consider the construction of support for the development of the west. Or in the transformation of the old industrial base in the northeast to engage in an investment fund experiment, the same Olympic Games project should engage in such an industrial investment fund. Because the huge investment in the Beijing Olympic Games means a huge demand for capital, and actively use the capital market to attract as many companies and individuals to invest in the success of the Olympic Games is of great significance, should be the top priority in the financial support project.

Applying a variety of innovative forms of financing to form a pattern of diversification of investment subjects and financing channels can, on the one hand, solve the financing problems of the Olympic Games. At the same time, it will be the best breakthrough for China to seek financial innovation.

Non-commercial operation "money" way to worry

Recently the media reported the upcoming opening of the Athens Olympic Games adhere to the non-commercial operation of the situation. The Olympic Games returned to its hometown after a hundred years, as the hometown of the Olympic Games, the Greek government hopes that the current Olympic Games into a unique, the true meaning of the Olympic Games, can maximize the return of the Olympic spirit, firmly opposed to the commercialization of the Olympic Games.

While the Olympic has three guidelines: non-commercial, non-professional, non-political. But the use of commercialization to open up a variety of sources of funding, the use of a variety of financing means for Olympic financing, has been an important issue that each Olympic organizer needs to address. As the Athens Olympics overly emphasized non-commercialization, it blocked many channels of reasonable access to funds, directly affecting the government's financial situation. Since its official listing, the Athens Olympic Organizing Committee has been operating as an independent company. Initially, the financing plan included financing from the private sector, but the plan was opposed by other political parties, and then the last Socialist government in Greece decided to finance the Athens Olympics entirely from the public **** investment budget. This mode of operation of the Olympic economy led to a shortage of funds for the Games and a significant delay in bidding for related projects.

It is claimed that the construction preparations and funding for this Athens Olympics increased construction costs due to the front loosening and then tightening. After more than three years of chaotic intra-governmental wrangling and bureaucratic "best efforts," organizers of the Athens Games are finally getting down to the nitty-gritty of building the Games' infrastructure. But as the opening of the Games drew nearer and nearer, contractors increased their workloads by two or three times at the last minute as project builders continued to press on with their projects, with the result that construction costs skyrocketed.

The government lacked adequate Olympic publicity because of non-commercialization, with only a third of the total number of tickets sold by early June. In contrast, Sydney organizers had already sold more than half of the tickets for the 2000 Olympics, also two months before the games began.

In the current market economy and commercialization as the mainstream of society, the refusal of commercialization, restriction of capital participation, the government's administrative promotion, the result is either overstretched, or corruption, waste, resulting in a large number of non-performing assets and tofu dregs of the project, so non-commercial, non-market transparent operation, its "money" is indeed a cause for concern.

It is reported that the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games and the Athens Olympic Games with the public **** investment budget for financing is different, the need for operating funds, more than 80% of the funds will be obtained through the Olympic Games market development, but also to take advantage of the full development of the capital markets and financial market innovation to raise funds.

Currently domestic funds, trusts, stock market financing, most of the "money" component is heavy, so the Olympic finance, Olympic financing will not be so?

In the eyes of He Xiaofeng, the use of financial instruments for the Olympic Games financing is not "money", but a long-term investment, mainly to see whether a comprehensive demonstration and market-oriented operations, rather than just use the original legal yardstick to measure the future of the scale, should be treated with an innovative vision, the original and the current financial system, why there will be a "circle of money" of the strange circle, mainly man-made! Black box operation and the backwardness of the financial system due to the Olympic Games financing must be strictly governed, the implementation of financial innovation.

We can envision that if we can raise development funds for the 2008 Beijing Olympics through modern financial derivatives and various operations in the capital market, it will better reflect the spirit of Olympic innovation. Therefore, we also firmly believe that the future 2008 Beijing Olympic Games will be able to realize the "Green Olympics", "Science and Technology Olympics", but also be able to complete the "Olympic Finance" dream.

Olympic insurance: making money is not as good as earning?

Because of the confidentiality agreement, insurance brokers, experts and officials involved in the bidding for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games insurance procurement program have been tight-lipped in their interviews with the China Economic Times.

Entering the subcontracting and price-seeking stage

"We are currently in the price-seeking stage, and the program has not yet been determined, which is highly confidential." As an expert who has been involved in related work, Prof. Hao Yansu, head of the insurance department of the Central University of Finance and Economics, spoke cautiously.

Olympic insurance related work by the Olympic Organizing Committee of the Ministry of Finance and Risk Management Department specifically responsible for leading. According to international practice, the plan and specific operation of the Olympic insurance by an insurance brokerage company. According to sources familiar with the matter, shortly before, the Olympic organizing committee for the insurance brokerage industry ranked about the top ten companies for public bidding, by the insurance brokerage company to organize experts on the Olympic risk assessment. As the Olympic Organizing Committee in the issuance of notice on the request for confidentiality, and signed a confidentiality clause, the relevant and experts are not allowed to disclose the relevant content, especially to the media. It is said that the reason for the Olympic Organizing Committee to do so is mainly to not allow insurance brokers to take the opportunity to promote themselves.

According to Hao Yansu, the insurance work for the Beijing Olympics has not only been limited to the initial research, but has entered the actual operation stage. What is currently underway is the procurement of insurance for the Beijing Olympics. In this regard, the Olympic Organizing Committee has a package of plans, a lot of pragmatic, concrete work is being carried out in an orderly manner.

The U.S.-based HNLI is one of the IOC's TOP partners, and its Olympic program has been extended to the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Because of the TOP program, Hengkang Life will enjoy worldwide Olympic marketing rights, product (service) category exclusivity and other rights and benefits package. According to the reporter's understanding, there were domestic life insurance giants interested in replacing Hengkang as the TOP partner for the 2008 Beijing Olympics, and have made a series of attempts and efforts, including contacts with the top management of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), but ultimately failed to succeed.

Hengkang Tianan Life Insurance Co. Ltd. is a joint venture of U.S.-based Hengkang in Shanghai. On the company's Web page, the reporter saw the U.S. Hengkang's company logo with the five rings of the Olympic Games and the words "Global Olympic Sponsor."" Participate in the opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games" has even become the company in the recruitment of personnel to give a treatment.

"Hengkang is the world's only life insurance Olympic sponsors ......" for the company's profile of the above introduction, Hao Yansu that is inaccurate. Because, whether it is the previous Olympic Games or the current Athens Olympics, the Olympic Games insurance is by many