Reuters is reporting that AOL Time Warner has pulled out of further funding of the Goodwill Games. Apparently they intend to spend their sports dollars elsewhere (like the NBA and ultimately an all-sports channel).

Reuters Story via the NYTimes Website

Well, apparantly Ted was thinking of funding this on his own, but has changed his mind.

Does it really matter, honestly? I mean, do we need the Goodwill Games?

Trevor

I don't know much about the Goodwill Games, but I'd guess there's another opportunity for athletes to compete against international athletes and go to other countries to compete.

Maybe the medals aren't important--there seem to be tons of those being handed out--but the opportunity to experience a different culture would be worthwhile for most athletes.

Steve

World class athletes (in general the only sort invited to the Goodwill Games, just like the Olympics) already travel the world to compete, not to mention competing against citizens of many nations. Meets, tournaments and other competitive formats whith representatives from every continent take place every day all over the globe. Even participants in the non-marquee sports travel a great deal for competition. What an event like the Olympics and the Goodwill games bring to the table is panathleticism. Not only are athletes exposed to other countries and cultures, they are participating in an event with athletes of other disciplines. Now, the question is, just how much of that is necessary? Can the world support more tnan one truely international, panathletic event, particularly considering the many regional events of that type, Olympic festivals, Panamerican games, Panasian games, I'm sure Europe and Africa have similar events. I'm not a fan of the Goodwill games because of their obvious packaging and marketing. The Olympics evolved to what they are. They earned their place in history by coming back after two world wars and carving a significant niche in the awareness of the world. The Goodwill Games tried to buy that niche readymade.