IT SEEMS only a matter of time before mighty Gazprom takes its place as an Olympic sponsor.

 

The question is, will it be pre- or post-2012?

 

When I reported last month that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) had held talks with the Russian oil and gas behemoth, a deal covering the four-year period, or “quadrennium”, culminating with London 2012 looked a very feasible proposition.

 

Following my latest conversation with Gerhard Heiberg, Norwegian chairman of the IOC’s Marketing Commission, though, my assessment has changed.

 

I now think that the energy giant is more likely to come on board either for 2013-16, or as a direct domestic sponsor of the 2014 Winter Olympics to be held in the Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi.

 

Mr Heiberg, a very fit 68-year-old who always seems to have been cross-country skiing when I speak to him, confirmed that he hopes another meeting with Gazprom will take place in the next few weeks.

 

But he also said that if London 2012 comes up with a satisfactory oil and gas sponsor of its own, the Russian company would be out of the picture as a so-called TOP, or worldwide, sponsor for the quadrennium that will kick in once this year’s Beijing summer Games are completed.

 

Oil boom fuelling London hopes

 

With oil prices currently at giddy heights, London has high hopes for the sector, with one report suggesting it could yield £60 million or more.

 

So you have to think there is a strong chance that a BP or a Shell will indeed be tempted to join Lloyds TSB, EDF Energy and the others as a domestic London 2012 sponsor.

 

Gazprom though, it seems, will not be part of this particular race.

 

A company spokesman was recently quoted as rejecting the notion that Gazprom might become an official sponsor of London 2012.  

 

The saga is a good illustration of the complexity of Olympic sponsorship, or marketing programmes.

 

These operate on the principle of product-category exclusivity: for as long as Coca-Cola, say, remains a worldwide Olympic sponsor, no other non-alcoholic beverage-maker can be signed up – unless it is for a different product category.

 

The picture is complicated by the fact that both the IOC itself and the organisers of the successive Summer and Winter Games seek to attract corporate sponsors.

 

If a particular product category is claimed by the IOC for its worldwide programme, known as the TOP programme, then Games organisers must generally steer clear of it and procure their domestic sponsorship funding from other fields.

 

To muddy the waters further, some of the cash (and goods and services) delivered by the TOP programme – usually about half – is channelled by the IOC to the organisers of individual Games and hence ends up, essentially, in the same pot as money raised from domestic sponsors.

 

TOP programme a financial success

 

What is crystal clear is that the sums involved are now enormous.

 

The 12 TOP sponsors for the current quadrennium, which culminates with Beijing, are contributing $866 million (£436.290 million) to the Olympic cause.

 

That is not far off 10 times the $96 million (£48.36 million) generated by the inaugural TOP programme, beginning in 1985, which included the Calgary and Seoul Olympics.

 

The 2009-2012 quadrennium should produce more than 10 times that initial figure, with Mr Heiberg saying that the IOC hopes the total “will reach around $1 billion” (£503 million).

 

Domestic sponsorship of London 2012 should raise even more, with organisers expecting it to generate more than 30 per cent of the approximately £2 billion cost of actually putting on the Games ie around £650 million.

 

60 or more domestic sponsors could be signed up in all at one of three levels.

 

The top tier is expected to comprise eight or nine blue-chip companies.

 

The amounts involved are even more astounding when you consider that Olympic events take place in largely advertising-free arenas.

 

For the record, the 12 TOP sponsors for the period including Beijing are: Coca-Cola (non-alcoholic beverages); Atos Origin (information technology); Johnson & Johnson (healthcare products); Kodak (film/photographics and imaging); Lenovo (computing technology equipment); Manulife (life assurance/annuities); McDonald’s (retail food services); Omega (timing, scoring and venue results services); Panasonic (audio/TV/video equipment); Samsung (wireless communications equipment); Visa (consumer payment systems); and GE. Many of these will remain TOP sponsors for 2009-12.

 

More than four years out, London 2012 has already secured five of its top-tier sponsors: Adidas, British Airways, BT, EDF Energy and Lloyds TSB.

 

Don’t be surprised if Number Six turns out to be an oil company.

 

David Owen is a specialist sports journalist who worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup. Now freelance. He was shortlisted for a 2006 Race in the Media award for a piece about swimming. He has twice run the Athens Marathon. Owen has written about sport all over the world from dogsledding in Yukon to cricket in Chicago and football in Japan and South Africa.