Sport: Eve of a New Olympics

• Share

(6 of 10)

What Montreal Mayor Jean Drapeau envisioned as "modest Games," budgeted for $200 million, turned out to cost about $1.5 billion and left behind a deficit of $1 billion. Moscow spent $9 billion. Emboldened by its position as the only suitor, the Los Angeles committee proposed to cut a revolutionary deal with the I.O.C. The citizens of Los Angeles have amended the city charter to make sure taxpayers could not be charged for the Games. So the I.O.C. would just have to waive its fundamental rule of awarding the franchise to a city and instead hand it over to a board of businessmen. Past I.O.C. President Lord Killanin, a sparky Irishman, sputtered in reply, "You may be the only horse hi the race, but you still have to cross the finish line." Once the private organizing committee and the U.S.O.C. jointly contracted to guarantee zero financial liability for the city, the face-saving technicality was agreed to all around.

The Games were tendered to a city as always, but not really. Oh yes, and the I.O.C. would have to surrender entirely its usual control over costs. This is what eventually intrigued Ueberroth. For $ 115,000 a year, about a 70% cut in salary, he accepted the presidency of the most awesome and diverse and fast-growing and quick-dissolving company in the world. Nine months into his new stewardship, he sold First Travel for $10.1 million. As of Jan. 1, he will become an unpaid Olympic volunteer.

Poring over the histories and financial ledgers of past Games in exacting detail, Ueberroth concluded that, minus construction costs, all of them would have been solvent. Of course, they might not have appeared as grand. But then, as he analyzes recent Olympics, "They have had two purposes: first, as a statement by a national government. The Germans were saying, 'We're a large, industrialized nation recovered from war. We are a friendly, outgoing world citizen.' The Canadians were saying, 'We are not the stepchild of the United States. We are strong and wonderful.' Certainly the Soviets said time and time again that the Olympics was the best example of acceptance of the world's largest socialist state. The second purpose has been as simply a sporting event for athletes of all nations. But that's our only purpose. We are not a nation and we have no statement to make. We are celebrating sport."

Naturally, not everyone is celebrating. Some of the world's playground directors feel ill at ease with this free-enterprise organization, finding it anomalous and annoying. However, except for a common dread of freeway traffic, and an occasional fearful word about smog, most have reacted with at least a cautious grace. Kosti Rafinpera, secretary-general of the Finnish Olympic Committee, says, "This is the first time the Games have been organized by a company, not a city. We're trusting that the Olympic spirit and the spirit of amateurism will be preserved." And many who have inspected the individual venues have cheered. "The facilities are extraordinarily good, among the best we've ever had, splendid," says Wolf Lyberg of Sweden.