The talk here in Denver all week has been about the revenue sharing dispute between the USOC and the IOC. The USOC wants to tear up the existing contracts claiming that when they were signed, the economic climate was not as challenging as we are experiencing today. In all of the "he said she said" of this dispute, one fact has been easily forgotten by both parties: both sides signed a legally-binding contract.
A new contract is expected to be signed this week. But I think it sets a dangerous precedent. What if say a bid city that won the Olympics didn't like it's host city contract they signed, went to the IOC and said they wanted the terms renegotiated and if they didn't get their way, they would leave the IOC on the hook for millions, possibly billions of dollars?
I am really uncomfortable with this, only because this could go beyond revenue sharing and seep into other areas related to Olympic bid management and host city operations.
It will be interesting to see in the runup to Copenhagen what other issues come up that have been raised by this simmering dispute that has exploded into some ugly words between both parties.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for. It could be more than you can handle.
