Woo! New site is online - select here to use it!


Forums > General Discussion   Shooting the breeze...

What's the ROI on funding elite sports ?

Reply
Created by pierrec45 > 9 months ago, 11 Aug 2012
pierrec45
NSW, 2005 posts
11 Aug 2012 8:01AM
Thumbs Up

I do a lot of ROIs for a living (return-on-investment) for tech projects, quantifying investments and efforts versus payoff and risk of failure, etc. This entails eliminating intangibles, using probabilities, etc.

My question is: what is the ROI of us funding elite sports - Olympic and others - through taxpayers money. We know roughly how much we pay, but what is the hard return?

Had an interesting conversation at lunch on this. Got a lot of "raise the awareness", a few "makes us proud", "might help kids take up sports and be healthier" (yeah, right) and "discourage people getting fat" (really??????). But nothing concrete really. My donation is well defined, but not my return as a taxpayer.

So for once I would not know where to start justifying my and your tax money for this.
Asked differently: how much would I be willing to pay out of my taxes to maintain so many medals for elite sports? Is it 10$ a year? 100$? 500$? What am I getting out of my 'investment' in Australia getting medals? What am I losing out on if Australia was #30 rather than #7?

Really, am at a loss. Am asking - no answer here...

Sailhack
VIC, 5000 posts
11 Aug 2012 9:01AM
Thumbs Up

pierrec45 said...

"discourage people getting fat" (really??????).


I was thinking the same over the last couple of weeks whilst watching some of the events...beer & take-away food in-hand.

As for the initial question, your qualifications seem to give you the ideal knowledge in regard to this topic, so if you're asking - then I got nothing.

mineral1
WA, 4564 posts
11 Aug 2012 11:57AM
Thumbs Up

pierrec45 said...

I do a lot of ROIs for a living (return-on-investment) for tech projects, quantifying investments and efforts versus payoff and risk of failure, etc. This entails eliminating intangibles, using probabilities, etc.

My question is: what is the ROI of us funding elite sports - Olympic and others - through taxpayers money. We know roughly how much we pay, but what is the hard return?

Had an interesting conversation at lunch on this. Got a lot of "raise the awareness", a few "makes us proud", "might help kids take up sports and be healthier" (yeah, right) and "discourage people getting fat" (really??????). But nothing concrete really. My donation is well defined, but not my return as a taxpayer.

So for once I would not know where to start justifying my and your tax money for this.
Asked differently: how much would I be willing to pay out of my taxes to maintain so many medals for elite sports? Is it 10$ a year? 100$? 500$? What am I getting out of my 'investment' in Australia getting medals? What am I losing out on if Australia was #30 rather than #7?

Really, am at a loss. Am asking - no answer here...


You being such a clever vegemite I thought you would have worked this out by now.
Clever states/countries at least on the Western side have in the past when things are a little tough, invested heavily in athletes and prospective games approaching.
It's the “old feel good” syndrome for the masses. They feel good about the Country; they are less likely to stumble in work life. Nothing like a bit of home developed patriotism to get things rolling. GB for a start, its in the gurgler finance wise and looking rather crappy. But with the games success and the medal tally, they all feel a whole bunch better I bet. US isnt too far behind them.
Check history and its all there. Even ol Hitler had a crack at it with his investment into the games. Jessy Owens sort of buggered it a bit for him.
So the ROI is bloody huge if successful athletes bring home the goods.

Scotty88
4214 posts
11 Aug 2012 9:06PM
Thumbs Up

What percentage of our GDP is spent on funding sports ?
About as much as the carbon dioxide tax will reduce the carbon dioxide output 0.00000000000000000000000000 farkall%.

colk2004
317 posts
12 Aug 2012 4:50AM
Thumbs Up

Why use taxpayers money as such Team GB (3rd in medal table currently) is funded mostly from our National Lottery contrary to most of the worlds beliefs. Our government basically didn't want to pay for sport or charities so the lottery has been used for funding instead. The upshot of GBs success in Beijing has been a discernable increase in cycling - this Olympics has seen a big boost for membership of British Cycling. So for us, I can pay for it or not, my choice whether I buy a lottery ticket and it has had an impact (though I can see one massive dip on the horizon for Rio).

Cheers Col

Mobydisc
NSW, 9029 posts
12 Aug 2012 7:17AM
Thumbs Up

The lottery sounds like a better idea than governments spending directly on sports.

According to an analysis by the Sydney Morning Herald each medal for the 2012 Olympics cost about $10,000,000

On ROI. The ROI for sports elite sports administrators and coaches is quite high. They have very highly paid jobs with little accountability, ie if the sport they work in fails to perform they can just say the other countries put more money into it. Give me the $$$.

Also for the athletes the ROI is pretty good too if they perform, especially if they are in a popular sport like swimming. If they fail to perform then at least they have lived a few years at the taxpayers expense and they don't have a big debt owing to the government for it. Hopefully they've saved up a bit for the now rainy days. There is always sports coaching and administration to look forward to as well.

The IOC and their various sub committees do quite well too. Those involved in the construction of the big stadiums and venues do well. As for everyone else, get out your wallet coz someone has to pay for all this even if you don't care about it.



FormulaNova
WA, 15107 posts
12 Aug 2012 7:21AM
Thumbs Up

Who said it was an investment? Why do you need a return?

It would be a very boring world if everything needed to be justified for ROI.

theDoctor
NSW, 5786 posts
12 Aug 2012 10:51AM
Thumbs Up


Five hundred bucks a year.

That's what I'd pay

Just so once every four years I can get stoned with my buddies in front of the tele and watch the 50km mens walking final with the sound turned down.

And do the voice over commentary...

"oh, I gotta poo, I gotta poo, quick I gotta poo... Whaddya mean the toilets 50km away.. I gotta poo, I gotta poo..."

pierrec45
NSW, 2005 posts
12 Aug 2012 11:23AM
Thumbs Up

Multiplied by every other places our money go.

This is OUR money the gov't is thusly 'investing', not theirs.
Would you write blank checks to someone and say "Go invest where you want, I won't follow up on you" ?

BundyBear
NSW, 325 posts
12 Aug 2012 11:36AM
Thumbs Up

All the sports generate jobs throught he people who administer them

Some sports can result in export $ for Australia, for example the mens 470 team used brand XYZ sails from local Joe sailmaker in Sydney, now every 470 sailor in the world will want them so they can start the race with equal gear.

The higher Australias profile in a sport the more likely we will be selected to host and international event for that sport, which equals incoming tourism $

Not one athlete at the games would have had a free ride, all would have laid out some big bucks at some stage in their career to get themselves to the standard required to even get some funding.

At the end of the day sports are a far better investment and are more accessable to the Aussie population than some other things the government funds

pierrec45
NSW, 2005 posts
12 Aug 2012 1:09PM
Thumbs Up

BundyBear said...

All the sports generate jobs throught he people who administer them. ANY money we spend generates jobs (decreases unemployment), i.e. building schools, bridges, prisons, defense, and so on. It doesn't mean sports-funding is an effective way, by far.

Some sports can result in export $ for Australia, for example the mens 470 team used brand XYZ sails from local Joe sailmaker in Sydney, now every 470 sailor in the world will want them so they can start the race with equal gear. We probably import way more, javelins, RSX boards, other sailboats, rowing equipment, running shoes, various balls, none are made locally. We even import trainers for some of those sports.

The higher Australias profile in a sport the more likely we will be selected to host and international event for that sport, which equals incoming tourism $ Meanwhile, for the very great majority of events, we compete overseas and money simply leaves the country.

Not one athlete at the games would have had a free ride, all would have laid out some big bucks at some stage in their career to get themselves to the standard required to even get some funding.

At the end of the day sports are a far better investment and are more accessable to the Aussie population than some other things the government funds.
Hey not picking on sports per se, just that I can somewhat quantify some of the other forms of taxation, not this one.

Chris6791
WA, 3271 posts
12 Aug 2012 5:03PM
Thumbs Up

FormulaNova said...

Who said it was an investment? Why do you need a return?

It would be a very boring world if everything needed to be justified for ROI.



It's the government they account and quantify every dollar they spend (don't confuse that with spending it 'wisely').

I'll bet someone in Canberra will be able to answer the question, most probably in a 700 page report tabled in parliament that no-one besides the author will ever read.



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > General Discussion   Shooting the breeze...


"What's the ROI on funding elite sports ?" started by pierrec45