[embedding-shape]

> Another $100,000 will be in the form of a guaranteed benefit for their families after they pass away.

> So half of it will never be seen by the athlete

This can't be right, right? I never heard of people "receiving a donation" that you get the promise of now, but will be given to your family once you die, sounds a bit macabre. And as you mention, also pointless, how would that make them "break through new frontiers of excellence" when they may not be able to afford rent while being alive?

[mindslight]

My very rough lay understanding is that life insurance policies can be quite lucrative due to tax-free growth, and the main thing that holds back taking life insurance on arbitrary people as a general investment strategy is that you need to have some plausible reason why you're connected to someone's lifespan. I have to wonder if this whole thing isn't some giant tax dodge based on taking life insurance policies that pay a small amount to the athletes and the bulk back to whatever asset protection vehicle.

[falcor84]

> will be given to your family once you die, sounds a bit macabre.

To me it sounds more than a bit macabre - depending on the familial relations, it would seem like a motive for them to commit suicide in order to provide for their children or for their children to murder them. I can already imagine the memoires being adapted into Netflix shows.

[smileysteve]

Many companies provide a life insurance benefit equal to 50%-150% of annual salary.

If your sport has any mortality or long term risk (concussions, cardiac events) then this could be seen as a nice extra insurance policy.

[pooloo]

Why even question it? Its a donation that no one ever had to make.

[Carrok]

“You only get this money if you submit yourself to Christ and living a conservative lifestyle”

Still not worth questioning?

[irishcoffee]

That isn’t a donation.

Also, $donator is making, as far as I know, zero demands. These people would be competing if they had to pay. Actually, most of them do have to pay.

Your analogy is comparing apples-to-sqrt(-1)

[lovich]

If there are stipulations for receiving the money then it is a demand.

If you think the above example isn’t a donation then I don’t see the logic behind seeing this as a donation.

And to be clear, I view it as a donation that is still probably net good, but it’s not a selfless donation. The timeline as well also means it can be clawed back at some point in time.

I’d probably rate it a 2/10 for “goodness” where anything greater than 0 is still good.

[rsanek]

Many, if not most, donations have limits / requirements on what the money can be spent on. That's why it's such a big deal when someone doesn't make such a demand and says the grant is "unrestricted."

[dylan604]

Have you never heard of a trust before? They have all sorts of stipulations depending on what the person creating the trust wants. It's very common for a kid to only get access to their trust when they turn 18 with more access granted at other milestones. It also sounds like a free life insurance policy. Those also only pay out when someone dies.

This doesn't sound macabre at all to me. Sounds more like loophole finding to avoid directly paying the athletes to allow them to keep their amateur status to me.

[embedding-shape]

Yes, I've heard of all of those things, but never used in a way to motive the person who is currently alive.

[dylan604]

A trust that says you don't get access to the rest unless you graduate college isn't meant as motivation? Allowing extra payout for a house only if married? People have put all sorts of limitations on trusts specifically as motivation.

[embedding-shape]

> A trust that says you don't get access to the rest unless you graduate college isn't meant as motivation?

No, a trust that is setup to give your family money when you die, in order to serve as motivation for you to "break through new frontiers of excellence"

[dylan604]

This isn't motivation though. This is a reward for achieving a place on the Olympic team. If this does not continue as a thing past the upcoming Olympics, athletes will still train in hopes of qualifying for the next team. They won't be doing it because this might be available to them. If they qualify, this will just be a bonus.

[embedding-shape]

> This is a reward for achieving a place on the Olympic team.

Well, that makes it seem like this isn't a donation then at all, if you need to "achieve a place on the Olympic team"? I thought this was given for people to be able to better reach that, not as a "reward".

This is a "prize" it seems to me, not a "donation".

[ojbyrne]

Amateur status hasn’t been relevant to the Olympics in quite a while.