Skip to main content

%u201CSport%20Had%20to%20Learn%20to%20Live%20Under%20the%20Microscope%u201D%3A%20Michael%20Payne%20on%20Fast%20Tracks%2C%20Dark%20Deals%2C%20and%20the%20Global%20Business%20of%20Sport%20-%20iSportConnect

%u201CSport%20Had%20to%20Learn%20to%20Live%20Under%20the%20Microscope%u201D%3A%20Michael%20Payne%20on%20Fast%20Tracks%2C%20Dark%20Deals%2C%20and%20the%20Global%20Business%20of%20Sport%20-%20iSportConnect: Michael Payne The title of your book—Fast Tracks and Dark Deals—suggests both progress and controversy. What were some of those ‘dark deals’? Every industry has its murky corners, and sport is no exception. When big money enters the room, competition gets fierce. In the book, I recount several episodes—from nations pulling every trick in the book to win hosting rights, to personal experiences of espionage and sabotage. In one instance, during a bidding campaign against Russia, my office was broken into and my hard drive stolen. Later, I found scratch marks on my home door from another attempted break-in. Eighteen months later, I was skiing behind Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and his security team—and I couldn’t resist asking his aide, “Now that you’ve won, can I have my hard drive back?” He just smiled. Then there were the infamous U.S. TV rights battles—some of the most cutthroat negotiations in sport. One time, Fox spread a rumor that Rupert Murdoch was flying into Lausanne for the final bidding round. NBC panicked, thinking Murdoch never liked to lose, and overnight they increased their offer by $200 million. Murdoch, of course, never turned up. Fox didn’t want to win the rights—they just wanted NBC to blow its budget before the next bidding. That’s the kind of drama that was happening behind closed doors. That’s straight out of a Hollywood script! Governance has often been sport’s weak spot. Has commercialization helped or hurt integrity? It’s part of any industry’s growing pains. When big money arrives, so do big temptations. Sport had to learn to live under the microscope. It’s far more scrutinized than any other business because fans care deeply—it’s emotional. When the IOC faced the Salt Lake City scandal, the global media and governments came down hard. For months, it felt like the IOC might not survive. I used to come to work wondering if the organization would still exist by nightfall. In the end, the total amount of “misplaced” money was about $500,000—on a multi-billion-dollar contract. Compare that to the European Commission, which lost billions and made headlines for just one day. Sport, for better or worse, is held to a higher standard. The upside is that today, the governance of major federations is among the best in the world—arguably better than many corporations. You helped shape the Olympic marketing model. How has sponsorship evolved in the era of digital fandom and athlete influencers? The pace of change is extraordinary. The TOP program has lasted nearly half a century—no marketing program has ever endured that long. But even that model must evolve. Today, sticking your logo on a shirt or track isn’t enough. Fans expect authentic engagement. There’s so much content competing for attention—TV, streaming, mobile—you need to create campaigns that truly connect. Sport remains an incredibly powerful tool for connection, but brands have to be more creative and more genuine than ever before. When you do connect, the impact is far deeper than any other marketing channel. From Saudi Arabia to Silicon Valley, new power centers are emerging. How are geopolitics and technology reshaping global sport? They’re rewriting the entire playbook. Historically, sport sponsorship was dominated by Europe and North America. Then Japanese companies like Canon, Seiko, and Fuji used global events like the 1982 FIFA World Cup to build international recognition. Korea followed with Samsung and Hyundai, then China with Alibaba—and now the Middle East. Leaders in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE see sport as both a nation-branding tool and a way to develop grassroots participation. It’s not about “taking over,” as some in Europe claim. It’s simply the natural globalization of sport. Even India is beginning to look beyond cricket. That’s the next frontier. The business of sport is no longer Western—it’s truly global. Speaking of India, the country is eyeing the Olympics. Can India host a Games successfully—and should it? Should India host the Games? Absolutely. Taking the Olympics to a nation of over a billion people would be transformative. It could accelerate sports development like nothing else. Can India host the Games? That’s a tougher question. Staging the Olympics is the most complex peacetime project a country can undertake. The FIFA World Cup, by comparison, is a walk in the park. To give you perspective: the World Cup produces around 200 hours of live sport over a month. The Olympics produces 10,000 hours in just 17 days. There’s a non-negotiable deadline—whether you’re ready or not, the world shows up. India’s last major multi-sport event, the Commonwealth Games, didn’t go well. So, the challenge is to prove that the country has learned from that experience. Government, business, and sport must present a brutally honest plan that de-risks the project and demonstrates accountability. If that can be done, then yes—it becomes a very real, and very exciting, possibility. Finally, what do you hope readers take away from Fast Tracks and Dark Deals? That sport’s global success didn’t happen by accident—it was built deal by deal, often in smoky rooms, by a handful of visionary (and sometimes ruthless) characters. But more importantly, that the next phase of sport’s evolution will depend on transparency, creativity, and collaboration. If the last 50 years were about building the business of sport, the next 50 will be about ensuring sport remains worthy of the passion people have for it. You can order the book here.

Popular posts from this blog

Elizabeth Holmes Discusses Theranos at WSJDLive 2015

Elizabeth Holmes Discusses Theranos at WSJDLive 2015 Elizabeth Holmes Discusses Theranos at WSJDLive 2015 At the WSJDLive 2015 conference, Theranos founder and CEO Elizabeth Holmes discusses her company's proprietary technologies, the FDA's inspection of its facilities, and the assertion that her company was too quick to market its products.

(26) Post | LinkedIn

(26) Post | LinkedIn : ► Trump was first compromised by the Russians back in the 80s. In 1984, the Russian Mafia began to use Trump real estate to launder money and it continued for decades. In 1987, the Soviet ambassador to the United Nations, Yuri Dubinin, arranged for Trump and his then-wife, Ivana, to enjoy an all-expense-paid trip to Moscow to consider possible business prospects. Only seven weeks after his trip, Trump ran full-page ads in the Boston Globe, the NYT and WaPO calling for, in effect, the dismantling of the postwar Western foreign policy alliance. The whole Trump/Russian connection started out as laundering money for the Russian mob through Trump's real estate, but evolved into something far bigger. ► In 1984, David Bogatin — a Russian mobster, convicted gasoline bootlegger, and close ally of Semion Mogilevich, a major Russian mob boss — met with Trump in Trump Tower right after it opened. Bogatin bought five condos from Trump at that meeting. Those condos were...