Financial gigantism at the Winter Olympics: Myth or reality? A comparative analysis of the revenues of the Winter Olympics since 2002

The commercialization of the Olympic Games is often cited as the primary driver behind its gigantism (e.g. (<ns0:xref ref-type="bibr" rid="R27">Kurscheidt & Prüschenk, 2020</ns0:xref>; <ns0:xref ref-type="bibr" rid="R37">Preuss, 2004b</ns0:xref>). While much academic attention has been paid on the financial growth of the Olympic Movement and OG Games (e.g. <ns0:xref ref-type="bibr" rid="R30">Müller et al., 2022</ns0:xref>; <ns0:xref ref-type="bibr" rid="R43">Preuss, 2024</ns0:xref>; <ns0:xref ref-type="bibr" rid="R71">Zimbalist, 2016</ns0:xref>), our study focuses on the revenue growth of the Winter Olympics over the past two decades by analyzing the revenues of the Organizing Committees for the Olympic Winter Games (OCOGs) since 2002. Unlike previous studies, we ensured comparability of nominal data by adjustments for purchasing power parity and inflation, providing insights into comparable revenue figures and enabling trend analysis. Contrary to the assumption of rapid revenue growth linked to gigantism, our analysis uncovers only a moderate increase. This suggests that despite the commercial momentum and modest expansion of the Winter Games size, revenue growth has been moderate in real terms. These findings establish a robust foundation for accurate data comparison and and provide a clear picture of the financial stability of the Games over the past two decades. While various income categories experienced fluctuations, the consistent real-term increase in revenue from the TOP sponsorship program highlights a key driver of this stability.