Olympics are over and the blame games have begun over India's poor performance. We at Vartaa decided to take a look at the financial accounts of Indian Olympic Assosiation(IOA) and its US equivalent United State Olympics Committee(USOC). Both these institutions have similar responsibilities that is to send athletes to Olympics, raise the funds arrange for training etc. We took a look at the scale of operations of bota. The metric we chose to look at was the yearly income of the two.
Both the institutions rely on various grants, aids, investments as sources of income. The chart illustrates the composition of income over the years for these two. As anyone would imagine the USOC has a lot more revenue than IOA. In fact, the USOC is big enough that it has a strategic patnership with IOC over profit sharing too. It is interesting however to see how different these institutions are in terms of operation. IOA relies heavily on Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MOYAS) and the International Olympic Committe (IOC) funds to gather revenue. On the other hand USOC relies heavily on Marks Rights Income. Various companies get into agreements with IOC and USOC for the rights to use Olympic marks and terminology, which is the Marks Rights Income. Another major source of income is public and private contributions. USOC has reaped benefits of investing its income over time. A useful means which the IOA shows no sign of utilizing despite a decent surplus year over year.
The IOC had suspended the IOA in early 2013 over financial irregularities and corruption (Remember Kalmadi scandal?). So we see a sizable dip in revenue figures for 2014. A clear lesson we can take from the USOC here is more reforms in IOA so it can build better utilize public private partnerships. The option of public donations is something that can help the IOA and eventually the athletes.