UP520: Olympic Provocateur: Michael Payne on Sport Politics, from Dassler to Trump

0:00Hello there, Richard Gillis here. Welcome to Unofficial Partner, the sports business podcast. Today we've got Michael Payne as our guest and Michael is one of sport's great insiders. He was for many years the head of marketing and broadcast at the International Olympic Committee and then he worked alongside Bernie Eccleston as his advisor in the Formula One group. Before that he was British freestyle skiing champion in the 1970s and began his career at West Nally under the tutelage of Patrick Nally. and he's written a book which is called fast tracks and dark deals how sport became business and business became sport and as ever michael never dodges a question always interested in talking about the bigger themes that impact the sports industry how we got here and where it's going is basically the arc of the podcast and he's been in rooms where decisions are made and has been at the top table for a long period of time so strap in it's a good conversation and I think you'll learn a lot.

0:57I did. This episode of the Unofficial Partner podcast is brought to you by Sid Lee Sport. Sid Lee Sport is the fame-making creative and sponsorship agency for brands in sport. Through exceptional creativity, deep sponsorship expertise, and flawless on-site delivery, they help brands, sponsors, and rights holders unlock their full potential in sport. Most recently, picking up a Leaders Sports Award for their work with Lidl at UEFA Euro 2024. Everything they do is driven by a culture of effectiveness because in sport, performance matters, not just on the pitch, but in the work too. So whether you want to build buzz, connect with audiences or do something that actually cuts through, Sidley Sport knows how.

1:45Visit sidleysport.com where brands become champions.

1:56it was funny the other day when you did something on the nfl buying rugby you were sort of provoking on linkedin one of your conclusions and i put that to our whatsapp group on unofficial partner and um alan gilpin who's the chief exec of world rugby and came back and then suggested that he and um brett gosper who's the nfl's international guy sit down and have a beer about it so you know these things travel.

2:23Michael Payne:Well, there is more to this than maybe meets the eye. It is one of the more provocative observations I make on the future of sport in my book, Kicking Off on Governance, and the governing structure of federations that have served them well for the last century does not mean that it's automatically the model for the next 50 years. I gave a speech to the IF Forum in Lausanne where all of the federations were attending and the previous evening who am I sitting next to in the bar that Brett Gosper and I told Brett what I was going to say which prompted him to say bloody glad I'm not there then tomorrow in the room.

3:07Michael Payne:How did the federations take it because they they're an interesting group aren't they en masse? They are I mean the front row had the heavy hitters. So you had Lalavik from wrestling, Ingemar DeVos, the new head of Aswa from equestrian, Erdner. So you had a few IOC board members and some IOC directors like the head of sport. And I mean, not to sound my own trumpet, but A, you could have heard a pin drop. B, straight afterwards, the executive board members were all like, Michael, I need a copy of that speech immediately, please. It is probably one of the most provocative speeches we've heard, but you hit every single point that we have to think on.

3:54What were you telling them? What got their goat?

3:56Michael Payne:It wasn't so much as got their goat as to designed to be thinking. So, I mean, have you had a chance to plough through the final chapter of the book or not yet? All right. Well, I just picked eight points out of there. One was governance. and my point on the governance, if you were a company and the NFL was a company, it would be a no-brainer to take over world rugby in terms of the gap in your corporate profile. And it would cost you nothing and the resources you have. But it was really designed to, on the governance issue, to reinforce that there will be change, whether it's athlete breakaways, which will continue.

4:36Michael Payne:So that was on governance. I then dealt with everything from AI and obviously the replacement of judges and referees. But at what stage does sport risk losing its soul if everything is technology? Yeah. And how do you find the balance of ensuring fairness? And let's not kid ourselves. How can a human eye judge a diver at the speed with which he's going into the water? I've got a load of questions and we will come to the speed of divers in due course. I've got an enhanced games question. You'll be thrilled to hear. Did you see who I had nominated for the good, bad and ugly? I did see that. I need to get you the hard copy.

5:27Michael Payne:It comes out on Monday. That's the proof version. And I'm coming to London and we'll be doing a sort of a massive signing as they come off from the printer and get dedicated copies sent around the world. So let's stay in that room, then, the federations, because the sports market is really interesting and the Olympics plays a very significant role, obviously. and I always think wonder and you've you know one of the architects of the top program and the the media money and the sponsorship money that's flooded into the Olympics since the sort of 80s and we'll go back in time in a minute but do you ever sort of think actually the Olympics is the impediment to innovation it's quite it's the federations don't have to innovate because the Olympic you've done all the work for them the money has just come in there you've removed any incentive from the marketplace to change because those sports have been there and they will be there until they don't get paid anymore presumably but it's not a free market as such the olympic money has sort of made sport uh in an inefficient market in many ways because in some ways i sort of think well actually the olympics could be the best of the best sports most popular sports in any given quadrennial but it's not that it's the you know still the same old sports that are still propped up?

6:41Michael Payne:Well, I think you're being a little bit hard there. I think the IOC, if you look at how the sports program has evolved over the last 20 years, the winter program, with probably a little bit more flexibility, I think has more than doubled the number of sports and disciplines embracing, you know, all of the new trends from snowboard to ski cross. And in Milano, you know, next year, you'll see alpinism, the ski mountaineering. Look at how many new sports are coming on the program in the summer program in LA. And so I think the IOC has done a pretty good job, particularly in the last, or particularly under Samaranch and again under Bach.

7:27Michael Payne:I think it lost its way under ROG with the sports program because he was too rigid in saying, well, the the program can't grow, correct? Therefore, I've got to throw somebody off the bus to let somebody else get on the bus. Not incorrect, but you needed to be realistic and creative as to how you would allow it to evolve. I think you raise a very interesting question on the finances where there's no question that a significant number of the IFs are solely dependent on the Olympic revenue, which perhaps has allowed them to become too lazy to not innovate and not to step up and generate their own funding.

8:13Michael Payne:You could argue that for a period of time, you didn't have a queue of television stations waiting to broadcast modern pentathlon and there wasn't a load of sponsors. And so the IOC's role was to keep certain sports alive. But equally, that can't go on indefinitely. Well, I guess it leaves them sort of vulnerable to attack from disruptors, you know, new leagues, new things that, and at the moment, and, you know, you know, far better than I do in terms of the amount, there's money waiting to come into sport, wants to deploy in sport. And there's a live golf coming for every sport is the cliche. So those federations, again, it's when I think about the Olympics, I think there's a model where it's an umbrella for the most popular sports in the world.

9:00is that that's one model. And it could be a free market within that in terms of sports coming in and coming and going. But it's not that it's a sort of ball walk against that.

9:10Michael Payne:Well, you will always have the establishment wanting to protect their position. And the Olympics is not unique to that. You go into any organisation or company in the world, and the balance between your traditional model and the need to evolve and with the changes. And I think the new president, Coventry, is probably going to shake things up. She was pretty blunt in her remarks and comments to the IFs shortly before I gave my future speech. And she said, you know, there's going to have to be changes. Not everybody's going to be happy. I think, I mean, I was at the forefront of bringing private equity into the Olympic federations by conceiving and brokering the CVC investment deal into volleyball.

10:00Michael Payne:That a lot of people at the time thought, is this a good idea? Five years on, you've got a lot of IFs saying, how did that model work? How can we repeat it? And one of my remarks about the future and governance is the sovereign wealth funds, example, what's happened with golf, the athlete breakaways. Sport is increasingly viewed as a very interesting, attractive asset class. So there will be disruption. And how sport manages that disruption and makes sure that it doesn't lose its soul will be a key issue for all sports leaders in the decades to come. I guess there's a question. What was the veiled threat that Kirsty Coventry was making to the IFs?

10:51What's the, some of them won't be here next year, that sort of vibe?

10:55Michael Payne:Well, basically, you've got a scenario in Los Angeles, where the sports program is growing, forgive me, is it from 28 to 35 sports, where LA has added several new sports. Under the current structure and model, is that sustainable for Brisbane, in terms of the number of venues and resources that are required. I mean, the IOC is frankly playing with a little bit of smoke and mirrors, pretending that it's still capped at 10 ,500 athletes. I don't think that's true. I think the number is significantly greater in order to accommodate all these new sports. Now, Los Angeles is one of the few cities probably able to do it because they have the facilities.

11:41Michael Payne:But post-Los Angeles, what is going to be the model? Does it stay at 17 days? Do you extend it to a longer period of time, to three weeks, to allow more sports to go on the program? There is a debate in play about should some of the summer sports be moved to the winter program in order to manage the profile. I mean, personally, I don't think it's a very good idea. I think you would be, I don't think the Winter Federations would accept it. And I think you would be compromising the ability to find great winter hosts. But I think what Coventry has launched with her sort of pause and reflect program is to say, listen, there's no sacred cows.

12:27Michael Payne:Everything has got to be put on the table and see how the Olympic movement should evolve and what should be the IOC's core focus. There was a very interesting remark from Ingmar Davos, who is now the chairman of ASWA, the Summer Federations. And he challenged the IOC leadership to say, you need to tell us what your focus is. What is your real strategic vision? Is it to stage the great Olympic Games? Or is it to try and become a mini United Nations with all of the different policies on human rights and environment? and there are certainly some people who think maybe the IOC in the last few years has not taken its eye off the ball of the games, but has got so caught up in all of the UN-type aspects of the business.

13:28Michael Payne:And is that where the focus should be? So the remit is too broad. They're trying to be too many different things and they should go back to being the host of the Olympic Games. And I can see how they get there. I'd be interested to get your view on this. Again, it's a sort of slight provocation, but are we at the end of the brand purpose era? And are we saying actually that sell and sport has prospered very well from that in terms of presenting itself as a vehicle for social purpose campaigns? And the Olympics is very central to this. Whether or not we're through the end of that or at the end of that cycle, No way you can say you're at the end of it, and sport is so integrated into society.

14:09Michael Payne:Quite a good question, though. It's a great question to be debated, and I think it's one that is being debated in terms of how do you find your balance. Should the Olympic world have an environmental policy? Absolutely. in the way that any organization or company that is wanting to engage with the population at large needs to show that they are responsible. I thought it was interesting. Just on that. Sorry. Just to finish the point, just on the environmental, because this illustrates it exactly. It's one thing to have a strong environmental policy on how you conduct sports events. But the IOC a couple of years ago launched a program called the Olympic Forest.

14:55what's that got to do with sport?

14:57Michael Payne:And so I think like in any company or organization, it's a pendulum and it finds its balance. Everything should be run by headquarters. No, the next leader comes in and says, everything should be run by the local office. Then the next one comes in and says, well, maybe there's a middle ground here. And I think we're probably from the IOC perspective, a little bit on that middle ground in terms of first and foremost, making sure that you are putting your resources and primary focus behind your product and the product is the olympic games then you look at what else do i need to do that is responsive that is a leadership position in sport but the product has got a lead that's interesting that isn't it because i was watching so christian clow who is the i you'll know obviously the IOC director of corporate communications he listed and it was Kirsty Coventry's sort of to-do list that was announced about a month or so ago and four new working groups the Olympic program working group the protection of the female category working group and obviously there's been news this week about the trans category the commercial partnerships and marketing working group the youth Olympics working group and a select about the selection process of the Olympic hosts now there is nothing in there about environment and there's nothing in there about climate and I found that was an interesting omission and I sort of and being slightly sharp elbowed wondered aloud whether or not that was written with with the next the president of the country that's hosting the Olympics next it felt like this is a list that Donald Trump would approve of there was no explicit mention of climate and I wonder if it's for that reason or for the reason that you just articulated in terms of there is a sharpening of what strategy now is?

16:45Michael Payne:Well, I mean, let's be clear. I am no longer inside the IOC. You are the ultimate insider, Michael. You're in every room. Privy to what is their thinking and strategy. But I think Coventry has pulled forward there a few very select working groups or subjects that are either major issues to get your head around or potential problem areas that need fixing. Within that, she's staying very focused on the product and core mission. But environmental sustainability impacts and would be part of many of those working groups. The selection process for the future host city and what does the games look like and what period, you cannot have that discussion without being conscious of environmental sustainability.

17:34Michael Payne:If you're having the discussion about revenue, I would be surprised if any sponsor would let you off the hook without saying we need to have a clear sustainability strategy tied to the Olympics. But if you put sustainability all on its own, that's where you suddenly risk running off and having projects like the Olympic Forest and everybody thinking, well, the IOC has got this massive great war chest, so it can pay for all these lovely ideas. and you cozy up to the UN and they suddenly see the IOC as a nice little bank. And that's where I think things can occasionally fall off the rails. I think you're probably, obviously there will be interesting discussions and exchanges to be had with the future, with the head of state of the future host Olympic Games.

18:23Michael Payne:But I don't think that list of working groups was structured in a manner that was going to facilitate those discussions with the Donald. old it's interesting yeah by the way i think handling the next handling trump is an interesting question all in its own right because again when you look at infantino's approach to it it's it feels different but you you have to do something with it and he has changed the weather in terms of just the the assumptions that were made previously are now all up for grabs so there's a question about did the olympics really believe in the stuff that it was saying it believed in or is it retrenching from that becoming narrower because of trump no well you're throwing an awful lot of things into that question or debate and one should sort of probably you know if i may break it down a little bit one having the head of state of the next host so actively engaged is a positive because at that level, the focus and the resources and the attention and making sure that it all comes together is something which the head of state can achieve.

19:33Michael Payne:And I think that rarely has there been a Games where the head of state is so vested in the success. China, 2008, probably certainly with But you go to London, you go to Paris, yeah, the Games were important. But I think for Trump, and everything he sort of stands for with his Make America Great Again, it's a perfect platform. Look at what it meant for Reagan in 84 and did for his polls and everything coming out of that. Now, does that mean that the road getting to the games isn't going to have the odd bump along the way, particularly as you try to bring all 200 countries together and the US's foreign policy gets caught in the crossfire or the Olympics gets caught in the crossfire of US foreign policy.

20:25Michael Payne:Yeah, that's going to happen. And if I move on there to Infantino, I know he's being criticized for his focus of cozying up to Trump. Personally, I think he's doing his job. I think if that's where your World Cup is being staged and you've got issues about security and access and entry, What better than to become friends with number one? And whether you agree with Trump's politics and policies or not, your actual responsibility is to ensure the successful staging of the World Cup or the Olympic Games in the United States. And if Trump is president, is hosting on those events, you want to get him on board.

21:03Michael Payne:And so I think he's doing correct. Now, moving on from the politics, You jump on, is the IOC retrenching and putting its mission solely focused on the Olympic Games? I don't think so. I mean, the Olympic movement is an incredibly powerful organization that by some miracle has survived more than 125 years, which is a lot longer than any other international organization. But also being realistic, it's not going to solve the world's environmental problems. that it showcases how sport works in a constructive way with the environment going forward, that it isn't tone deaf and ignoring certain things.

21:47Michael Payne:The most recent example on the transgender, you know, I think under Bach, maybe, you know, being the lawyer, there was perhaps a little bit too much focus on the human right. And in the course of protecting the human right, which was a very popular sort of UN and even migrating into the woke era, did you lose something about your responsibility to protect the female athlete? Coventry's come down, I think, pretty clearly on that. Most of the candidates for the presidential election were pretty clear in saying, the IOC needs to re-look at this policy, not try and be friends with the UN and pass the hot potato on to all of the IFs.

22:28Michael Payne:Take some leadership. It does take leadership, but it's also, it's an easier time to make that decision now in the environment we're in now than it was for Bach, presumably? Absolutely. I mean, if you look at how society has evolved over the last 12 years of the Bach presidency, I mean, one of the biggest threats that I see to the future of sport is the increasing political weaponization of how politicians are again using sport to serve their agenda. I joined the IOC in the middle of the Cold War when the boycotts between Soviet Union, US, you had politicians using sport, and very nearly the whole ecosystem unraveled.

23:20Michael Payne:adult. Sam Ranch made it his priority to get the whole boycott concept off the table by engaging with the political leaders and having an open, direct dialogue. And he was incredibly successful at that. And frankly, for the next three decades, up until the invasion of Crimea, Ukraine, sport had it pretty easy. It wasn't caught in the political crossfire. Now, you know, sport is an easy sort of tool for a politician to sort of jump up on his soapbox and grab some good headlines. And suddenly you're at a tipping point where if you don't manage it correctly, the next thing you know, you've got boycotts and the whole deck of cards starting to unravel.

24:10Let's go back because the part of the fun of your book is revisiting characters like mccormack and horse dassler bernie eccleston there is a a sort of it's interesting there's never been a biography of dassler i find him a fascinating character nor mccormack i've always assumed that's to do with img as a house of lawyers whether or not there is you know whether you could do a proper one i think barbara smith's book pitch battle was was as close as yeah i think it was it was very good on just the detail and she had access obviously to the adidas archives But they're really interesting figures. And you worked, you know, in that world.

24:51I sometimes look at FIFA and I wonder, it's a question I asked Patrick Nally when he came on. We did a few podcasts around, you know, that period. and it's sort of looking at the fingerprints of someone like Dassler and where you can still see traces. Sometimes I think culturally I can see Dassler in some of the way in which FIFA behaves today. Is that fair or is that too much of a stretch?

25:19Michael Payne:Well, I think it's got to be a little bit of a stretch in the sense that when Dassler and Nally were brokering the very first package deal for sponsorship and consolidating all of FIFA's rights. This was in the late 70s. I think FIFA's total number of employees was four. And the sums of money might have been intimidating to Dazzler and Nally at the time. But you look at it today and it's petty cash. So I think it's a bit of a stretch to suddenly imply that Dazzler's modus operandi, 40 years after his death, continues to be the modus operandi of FIFA or any other organization. I think what he successfully did was open the eyes of sports leaders of how to begin to build a partnership and a narrative with the business community.

26:16Michael Payne:and what Mark McCormack succeeded in doing of building that sort of understanding and bridge with the athlete and getting the athlete to sort of be perceived like a Hollywood star. Dazzler, you know, drove the same agenda on the event marketing. And there were some other characters in there. And I was actually, like you, surprised there had been so little written about the history of the business of sport. So few biographies of the key people who do have a tremendous story to tell and also built the foundations of the industry as we know it today. And having had the privilege to work for all of them or negotiate across the table from all of them, I thought, well, it'd be interesting to tell some of the stories of how it came together.

27:09There's a sort of roguish characteristic to each of those three. would you agree with that there's there's something and i'm saying this as someone you know it's quite appealing now when everything is corporatized and it's committees and it's sort of gray men mainly making decisions business is you know sport as business there is something i quite like the sort of entrepreneurial bit of those three life stories there is something

27:34Michael Payne:appealing about it do you think well entrepreneur no question and by definition an entrepreneur is always going to be somebody who is pushing the boundaries and who is thinking and thinking outside of the box. I think if you were to call Bernie Eccleston a rogue, he would chuckle and take it as a compliment. If you were to call Mark McCormack as a rogue, you would have the full weight of the IMG legal system breathing down your neck. And Dazzler? And you can be friendly Well, Dazzler was remarkably low profile. And he was fascinated by the sports politics of it all. And frankly, the power. And he wanted to keep his Adidas sports equipment front and center.

28:24Michael Payne:He became increasingly aware that he couldn't actually afford to pay large sums of money to FIFA to keep Adidas as the official ball. But what happened if you found somebody else to pay the bill, starting with Coca-Cola? And that's how the whole story began to develop. I mean, it's laughable when you see the sums of money that were involved in endorsement deals in the late 70s or the early 80s. I mean, some of the very first top sponsorships that I sold, total value,$3 million for four years. all rights. And Dazzler had the vision that if you could pull this all together, there was a very big pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.