In an AP staff interview in the LA Times, the CEO discussed the current and long term tension the US Committee has with IOC members over, what else, money. According to the article:
the USOC still receives a 20 percent share of global sponsorship revenue and 12.75 percent cut of U.S. broadcast rights deals.
I actually think the issue is way more simple to address than these "high level" talks: Ask what the sponsors want! I mean really, this is marketing 101 and it's really on the sponsors to determine where their money goes -- effectively, where they perceive they will get the most bang for the buck. Case solved!
As a side thought, I note that McDonald's has been making a huge connection to the Olympics. Do they really like athletes and/or winter sports? Undoubtedly, there are McDonald's executive team members who do. But more importantly, the Olympics provides McDonald's with a really positive identity to all the countries involved and this of course translates into short term and long term sales. So, is this a win-win proposition? May well be one of those cases for the academics to document and teach how marketing and philanthropy can sometimes fit so well together.