A common theme from several of our speakers is how the Olympics is evolving. The Olympics is one of the premier sporting events in the world and has not been immune to the changes in the sports industry including increased sport media rights, sponsorship and increased fan demands. With more money flooding into the Games fans are expecting the best of the best – especially when many of the fans traveling to the Games are American. Americans are used to seeing a spectacle when they attend a sporting event with in-game entertainment and a myriad of food and beverage options. This had led to greater expectations around hospitality packages with adjustments needed to match the tastes of a fan base used to premier hospitality.
Hospitality changed tremendously from London to Paris. The Paris Games are the first games with one company, On Location, managing all hospitality. Emilio Pozzi, the On Location SVP in charge of Milan-Cortina, noted that On Location wants to re-invent the culture of hospitality in Europe and bring them more aligned with American hospitality. Europeans are used to maybe getting a drink or small snack at sporting events. They do not expect premier food, beverages or entertainment. This is what hospitality was like at the Olympics pre-Paris – unless you were a citizen of one of the 15-16 largest NOCs. These NOCs hired their own partners to provide hospitality to their fans. On Location is working to make those experiences available to all. They are selling different packages to appeal to different price points in hopes more people can afford the experiences. On Location is also ensuring the majority of sports at the Games have hospitality venues instead of just select sports. The only sports they have excluded are the venues that are too far in distance that hold sports with not many spectators.
However, On Location has received criticism in Paris. With only 3 years to prepare, they did not have all plans set in stone and are adjusting on the fly. Emilio has noted he is already adjusting his Milan plan based on Paris’s challenges. A large group of critics is the travel agents who feel they cannot do their job adequately for their clients. An Israeli CEO, Yoav, noted to us how On Location has made Paris a disaster and he had to bring 3x as many employees to combat their issues. He struggled to get tickets (On Location is managing 475,000 tickets themselves), and the hospitality packages provided did not have the flexibility his clients were used too. He feels On Location does not have the personalized market knowledge needed to cover all levels of hospitality. He had several instances of IOC members calling him for tickets when On Location could not deliver what they needed. While I personally did not have hospitality tickets, I heard mixed reviews from my classmates who did attend. Patrick loved the hospitality package with beach volleyball (one of the premier events and locations), while Savannah and Max were less enthused by what they received at indoor volleyball and football respectively. On Location’s current contract is for the next 3 Olympic games. They will need to demonstrate improvements to Milan and LA to ensure they stay a part of the Olympic movement.
A benefit of this program has been our ability to hear different perspectives such as those of Emilio and Yoav. It helps round out our understanding of the Games and the nuanced complexities on the operational side. I believe the true answer is somewhere in the middle – a balance between On Location and companies like Yoav’s. We cannot revert to only the richest countries providing hospitality, but we also must recognize it may be too big of a job for one company to manage it all. I am interested to see the changes implemented by On Location in Milan and hope they can find peace with the travel agents like Yoav.
