The World Cup: Is it worth the cost?

South Africa is in the midst of hosting one of the biggest sporting events in the world, and it is set to cost the country money that could have been spent on other projects. Will the long-term cost of hosting the Football World Cup be worth it, or should the country have rather spent the money on tackling the many social and economic ills facing the country?

Much has been said about the cost of the Football World Cup to South Africa and how the money could have been spent on more pressing problems facing the country. This is all true. It must be questioned whether Cape Town and Durban needed to spend billions of rands on building new stadiums, when they had stadiums such as Newlands and Absa Stadium which would have been perfectly suited to hosting World Cup football. The construction of new stadiums in smaller cities such as Polokwane and Nelspruit also raised the country's eyebrow. These two stadiums are likely to become white elephants after the World Cup in what are two of the country's poorest provinces.

The number of tourists expected to come to South Africa and the boost to GDP that they would have provided has also been overstated. The global economic downturn has helped reduce the number of football fans who have come to this country. For example, Grant Thornton, a tax advisory and audit firm, originally estimated that 483 000 people would come to South Africa for the World Cup. It subsequently revised this down to 373 000. Many other foreigners who would have come to South Africa in this period are likely to have stayed away, turned off by overinflated prices and the hordes of soccer fans descending on the country.

Hosting the World Cup will cost South Africa money, not provide a windfall. Looking at the hosting of the tournament purely from a financial point of view, it does not make sense for South Africa to host what is probably the biggest sporting event in the world. Upgrading of infrastructure and construction and upgrading of stadiums for the World Cup cost taxpayers approximately R30 billion.

However, hosting the World Cup is about more than just money. It is an opportunity to rebrand a country. Germany, still tainted by the legacy of the Nazis and World War II, used the hosting of the World Cup in 2006 to reinvent themselves as a country. No longer were they seen only as a nation of dour but efficient workers but as one willing to welcome the world to their cities. South Africa has the same opportunity to rebrand itself.

Without the catalyst of the World Cup it is a valid question whether the Gautrain, a high-speed railway link, would have been ready when it was, and whether upgrades of major highways around the country would have been completed by the time they were. The Gautrain's first link between Sandton in Johannesburg and OR Tambo International Airport was completed on schedule, as were most of the country's highway upgrades. By meeting these deadlines South Africa has proved Afro-pessimists wrong.

Prior to the beginning of the tournament there was much doubt over South Africa's ability to host it, especially in the European press, some the reports having racist undertones. One can not help but remember the British Daily Sport's claim that vicious gangs of ‘machete-wielding blacks' were stalking the streets of South Africa. Rumours also abounded that the event would be moved to Australia or the United States, as South Africa would not have completed construction and upgrades of stadiums and infrastructure in time. However, the country has shown that an African country is capable of hosting a world-class event, which would rival anything held in Europe or North America.

The World Cup will go a long way to changing perceptions of this country and the continent. South Africa has always been world famous for certain things, formerly apartheid and Nelson Mandela. Since the turn of the century the country has gained the (not entirely undeserved) reputation of being one of the most dangerous places on Earth. The election of an admitted polygamist as president last year also made the country a laughing stock in some quarters.

South Africa will, after the end of the tournament, be known for having hosted a successful World Cup, an event which probably figures more prominently in the global consciousness than even the Olympics. The country will have proved that an African country is capable of excellence and efficiency. South Africa and its taxpayers will be paying for this World Cup for decades, but the value of the change in perceptions of this country and the continent will have been priceless.

This article first appeared in SAIRR Today, the weekly online newsletter of the South African Institute of Race Relations.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter

Services Subscribe to newsletters News feeds Share this article Facebook Google Laaik.it Yahoo! Digg del.icio.us

Comments

If you come across comments that are injurious, defamatory, profane, off-topic or inappropriate; contain personal attacks or racist, sexist, homophobic, or other slurs, please report them and they will be removed.

 

responses to this article

Choice "South Africa and its taxpayers will be paying for this World Cup for decades" Did SA taxpayers have any say in the matter ? Perhaps they should get votes commensurate with the Tax that they pay ? by Bibliophile on June 18 2010, 19:39 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

FIFA wins, not South Africa The SWC is a mega-event, and a once -off event. We need not show the world that "yes we can" just to change their perception about us. The peaceful transition from apartheid to what we have today was already noted by the world when both Nelson Mandela and . .more FW De Klerk jointly received the Nobel peace prize. The SWC only serves the purpose of temporary endorphin stimulation, which shall leave the body once the exercise is over. The costs was enormous to our country, and I fear that our LOC and government sold us out when they signed those documents that made Blatter now the man in charge. It is worse because we shall not only sit with huge debts, but our own people were denied in many instances to profit from this huge event. FIFA did not hide it when they announced that their profits went up with 50% in comparison to the SWC in Germany. IT IS all about money, and we only "won" the bid for our willingness to prepare South Africa for FIFA's big and deep pockets. . .less by Howard on June 18 2010, 19:42 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

ummm.nah.... i don't agree at all that " the value of the change in perceptions of this country and the continent will have been priceless".....because lets face it, the logistics are not so sound, the transport not great, strikes, etc.....it's only been 1 week, so . .more maybe we should hold back just a tad before we pat ourselves on the shoulder??? . .less by onlooker on June 18 2010, 20:01 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

hooliganism All the positives there might be, the bloody vuvuzela is destroying all of that, and is the only thing the SA WC is going to be remembered for. by arnaud on June 19 2010, 11:22 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

SWC Costs I belive the middle ground should have been taken. No to FIFA in building umpteen new stadiums - we'll re-vamp existing. No to FIFA about them running the ticketing. No to FIFA about tax free status, licensing laws etc. We should have some pride against . .more the chubby new colonists like Blatter and stand our ground. I'm sure Steve Biko would have. . .less by Horace on June 20 2010, 08:47 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

SWC cost I agree with you Horace, but don't think that we would have "won" the bid if we were playing hardball with FIFA. You only win if you are willing to bend over for them. My feeling is that we could have done what you suggested above, show them the . .more middle finger if they were not willing to come to the table, and then opted for buying the rights to broadcast the event. It would have costed us much less. Ask Abdul Bumjee, he knows. . .less by Howard on June 20 2010, 10:35 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

YEAH REBRANDING FIFA AS THIEVES See who is happy in Townships and how THEY will display their joy with no money left in the kitty. by CYNIC on June 21 2010, 06:33 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Is it worth the cost? In a word, Mr. Roodt, "No!" Perhaps you need to read Voltaire's "Candide" - you may find the parallels instructive. by Dr. Angelo Lambiris on June 21 2010, 06:42 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Great tournament, great atmosphere, great games! The World Cup is the best thing that has hit South Africa since the 1994 elections! It is worth every sent spent on it. And on Pareira!! Now that the French team strikes to train, things can get even better. LOL by Voelvry on June 21 2010, 07:39 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Some questions to tink over Is the SWC slowing coruption? Slowing crime? Stopping farm murders? Is the Gautrain for the workers? Stopping SAPs abuses and rapes? Helping make the masses wealthy? Building schools? Paying teachers? Training . .more teachers? Building white elephant stadiums wot will never be filled again Stadiums that need maintenance You mense confuse perseptions wit needs. Dis n skande. . .less by Klilling on June 21 2010, 08:36 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Trying to be objective, really.... Agreed, the only who has won is FIFA. Very few South African businesses will be able to say that they really benefitted from the WC. Even the 'bloody vuvuzella's' have benefitted the Chinese manufacturers and their economy. Sadly this is the one and . .more probably only thing this World Cup will be remembered for, and not with fond memories, that's for sure. The millions spent on 'state of the art' stadiums could have been used to building houses, and toilets for the thousands of desperate people in this country. After the WC these stadiums will be nothing but expensive 'white elephants'. The upside, my fellow South Africans is that, despite the fact that most of the back roads are disappearing into ever enlarging potholes, at least we are beginning to feel the benefits of the work done on the freeways - this wouldn't have happened as quickly if it wasn't for the WC. . .less by Is there an upside? on June 21 2010, 08:47 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Pothole mania! As far as I remember the Gautrain was so supposed to be totally completed and not only one link. Works on the major highways while the rest of the roads went to pot? by Koos on June 21 2010, 08:51 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

the blame game this govt. and it's tenderpreuners will claim responsibility for bringing the worldcup to SA .GREECE hosted the OLYMPICS and is now bankrupt. when the W.C euphoria is over ,and service delivery rears it's head AGAIN, will FIFA and tthe ANC/ SAFU taliban . .more contribute towards the bill or will they continue to blame APARTHEID ! . .less by past-patriot on June 21 2010, 09:24 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Siyabangena!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ke nako - Ya siyabangena ke nyalo- bakahle let them strike , by the time they wake up they will be in France and we will be in the second round by @Voelvry on June 21 2010, 09:30 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

@Klilling@SWC? Hey bro, what's with SWC ? WC-2010 in SA is a FIFA event = FOOTBALL Association, nie Soccer nie ! Soccer is what schoolboys, girls, en Bafana Bafana play. The grown-ups in the rest of the world play FOOTBALL (unless they are . .more Yanks - because Yanks like to think they know everything about everything, including the English language, bless). As for me, I definitely think WC-2010 in SA will have been worth the cost if SA can learn how to progress out of the Soccer Junior league, and into the world league for big boys called FOOTBALL. Handeyi, hawu, madhoda ! Chikurubi Coach . .less by John Austin on June 21 2010, 11:18 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

SWC Koos is right. Six years ago when the SWC was 'awarded' the gautrain was motivated as being necessary to transport all the fans from all over gauteng to the soccer venues. Only a small portion was completed and without the deadline of 9 June 2010 will . .more probably never be completed. The widening of major highways was done at the cost of letting all other roads go to pot. In addition the 'new' roads, for which the motorists have already paid twice by means of fuel levies and tolling, will now be tolled even more. The SWC is an expensive smoke screen to hide the ANC regimes total inability to govern from the masses. Next year after the eletions we will see how well they have succeeded. . .less by Jacko on June 21 2010, 12:08 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Be Positive Entertainment is NOT free.A movie ticket is not refundable.In this case South Africans will gain from spin offs.The costs vs benefits are debateble.Not all is negative.Marketing,tourism is never free.Hopefully we will attract foreign direct investments . .more from coverage of this event.Talk indicates that we will break even.For entertainment,thats not so bad.Yet we need to focus on real priorities in terms of managing local economic projects better.Let us keep hope alive. . .less by Hussein on June 25 2010, 12:23 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Name
Subject
Comment