Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 400 posts

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#301

Post by t_mann »

dod9er wrote: post #256
eviks wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But don't expect many people to pay to watch right? Why did you ignore the fact from the article that people do pay to watch (it's one of the most watched events in the world) it's just that that money doesn't reach the athletes? Not sure which pokemon represents that

First quote from Google-Search: "The International Olympic Committee (IOC) generated US$902 million in revenue for the 2023 financial year."

That's comparable to the revenue of a single (top-level) soccer club: https://www.sportico.com/leagues/soccer/2024/manchester-unit... https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/40629331/real-madrid-...

A quick Google search suggests that the Olympics feature about 10k athletes in summer games and 3k in winter games - 2-3 orders of magnitude more than the typical 20-30 players on staff at a soccer club. I wouldn't be surprised if the wage gap was even more crass than those numbers suggest, but it shows that major spectator sports are an entirely different game.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#302

Post by echoangle »

shakna wrote: post #299
echoangle wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The criterium is "does it bring viewers" though, which is mostly objective. That a lot of people watch football games on TV and not a lot of people watch fencing is something that can be measured.

Many sports have lost and struggled to get an audience again, before suddenly booming. Like cricket in Australia going downhill, and then Big Bash and women's leagues reigniting. What brings in viewers isn't a predictable measure of much. Like the weather forecast, you're not going to have much more than vague generalisations each season - and they can turn out very wrong.

If you seriously think that there is even a tiny chance of fencing ever continuously bringing in even half as much viewers as football, I don't know what to tell you. The uncertainty there is not weather report level, more like "the sun will rise tomorrow".

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#303

Post by gorbypark »

jalapenos wrote: post #204
DontchaKnowit wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yo idk what youre talki g about with fencing. Its entertaining as hell

Olympic fencing is straight up dumb - they do the equivalent of immediately charging to their deaths with a goofy flexi-"sword". If you want some real entertainment in that area watch HEMA fencing.

Yea I always thought it was a bit silly that the method for winning was charging at your opponent and stabbing them a hundredth of a second before they stab you. As a person who knows nothing about fencing besides watching it on TV at the olympics once I think they should change the rules where it's not who stabs who first, but who stabs the other without getting stabbed themselves.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#304

Post by hartator »

I don’t think we should paying taxes to support this of events.

There is little support that sport competition is any good for humankind and Socrate argued in his days that competition had the reverse effect of making you see others as the enemy.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#305

Post by iamacyborg »

sahila wrote: post #266
graemep wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What looks stupid and cool is purely subjective. Fencing is hard to follow because its fast and movements are subtle. > If someone wants to spend their time seeing how far they can throw a stick, cool, but they shouldn't be surprised they're waking up to an empty bank account every day. But if someone wants to see how well they can kick a ball its somehow worth paying them? The biggest factor here is that team sports…

No, the biggest factor is that certain sports are more entertaining than others - even individual sports - and I'd pay to watch some but not others. I'd pay more to watch cyclists do the tour de france or tony hawk go on a half-pipe or Mike Tyson fight someone than someone do a long jump; it's just more fun!

I dunno, the atmosphere at certain track and field events can be pretty great.

See the Night of 10k PB’s in London as an example of an event done right, even if it’s just watching people run 25 laps.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#306

Post by ossobuco »

hartator wrote: post #304

I don’t think we should paying taxes to support this of events. There is little support that sport competition is any good for humankind and Socrate argued in his days that competition had the reverse effect of making you see others as the enemy.

The entire economy is based on competition; if we agree that cooperation beats competition for the common good, then we have much larger systemic changes to do before we get to sports.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#307

Post by input_sh »

prmoustache wrote: post #280
braza wrote: post #106

Being a former athlete (100/200 meters), the issue is that the top-tier sports (e.g., football, volleyball, basketball, etc.) capture the majority of money/value, and if you are from javelin throwing, fencing, or racewalking, unless you have a great sponsor, it will definitely require personal sacrifices to make it to the games. In Brazil a very long time ago, there was a gigantic tug of war between the top-tier spor…

Honestly it is the first time I read volleyball mentioned as a top-tier sport. This must be a regional thing because in most countries volleyball is totally anonymous.

Team sports always matter more because every player on the roster gets a medal. Exact rules vary between sports, but winning a volleyball tournament = winning 12 gold medals, not just one. That's what makes it a top tier sport.

There are even more fringe ones which aren't particularly important under any other circumstances, but matter a lot in the Olympics: water polo (13 players), field hockey (16 players), synchronised swimming (8-10 players) etc.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#308

Post by sofixa »

eviks wrote: post #242
insane_dreamer wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

once every four years (and that's if you're good enough to make it to multiple olympics) isn't going to pay the bills

This doesn't make sense as 1) it entirely depends on the prize and the financing infrastructure around it 2) athletes can participate in other competitions besides the Olympics

> athletes can participate in other competitions besides the Olympics

They can, but almost none of them are even remotely as popular as the Olympics. The only exceptions are in massive sports (football, in the US american football, hockey, basketball; in countries like India cricket; tennis, F1). For every other sport, the Olympics are the pinnacle and nothing is even remotely comparable.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#309

Post by sofixa »

teractiveodular wrote: post #246
Frieren wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if your hobby "Olympians" representing their countries. - Is your hobby "to create software"? Then you should not be paid for it. - Do you like to help peolpe? Then you should not be paid for being a doctor. - etc. Who should earn all the money then? The owners of the TV stations, the owners of the hospitals, basically the people that does nothing and just own things. What a dystopia of a world are we creating.

Creating software is an economically profitable activity that many people are willing to pay top dollar for. Throwing a disc really far by hand, not so much. That said, the "hobby" angle is irrelevant here. As the article points out, the IOC makes an absolute fuckton of money from Olympic broadcast rights and sponsors, essentially none of which flows back to the actual athletes.

> As the article points out, the IOC makes an absolute fuckton of money from Olympic broadcast rights and sponsors, essentially none of which flows back to the actual athletes.

A lot of it flows back into the Olympic Committees of each country, who are in charge of spreading it, investing into infrastructure, youth development, etc.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#310

Post by ourmandave »

graemep wrote: post #263
jalapenos wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fencing as done now looks legit stupid, so does racewalking. Javelin, while slightly more cool, is you throwing a stick. Mildly interesting for a few seconds. Football is a top tier sport because it's entertaining. People will pay to see it. Hence there's money to be earned. If someone wants to spend their time seeing how far they can throw a stick, cool, but they shouldn't be surprised they're waking up to an empty…

What looks stupid and cool is purely subjective. Fencing is hard to follow because its fast and movements are subtle. > If someone wants to spend their time seeing how far they can throw a stick, cool, but they shouldn't be surprised they're waking up to an empty bank account every day. But if someone wants to see how well they can kick a ball its somehow worth paying them? The biggest factor here is that team sports…

Fencing is hard to follow because its fast and movements are subtle.

For example, if you use your right hand, it's over to quickly.

Post reply on HN