The chapter contends that the value of the Keynesian multiplier used in impact studies depends on the historical economic context surrounding the Winter Olympics. This is verified with how the winter sports economy has evolved from Grenoble to Albertville Winter Games; comparing economic impacts and legacies for both, eventually the context was better to host the Games in 1968 than 1992. This is due to: GDP growth rate, inflation and unemployment in the French economy, a much more booming area in Grenoble, a changing winter sports practice in France and worldwide, globalisation and innovation clusters in the winter sports goods market and industry, with a subsequent product life cycle, and the positioning of Grenoble 1968 and Albertville 1992 in the Winter Games sequence.
Starting from an historical and methodological background of statistical accounting the sports economy, the chapter focuses on the European Union’s sport satellite accounts. The three – statistical, narrow, and broad – definitions of the sport sector adopted in Vilnius in 2007 are presented as well as the data required to fill the corresponding classes of CPA (Classification of Products by Activity) and some methodological tricks to be overcome. The results are exhibited for ten countries’ national sport satellite accounts published so far, then an estimation of the economic weight of sports-related activities in nationwide total in 2005. Then a discussion follows regarding the merits and hindrances met in elaborating on EU sport satellite accounts, which delineates the limits of this statistical and accounting exercise and opens avenues for further research.