Nearly 12 months after the World Cup held in South Africa, the Administration still continues to pick up an annual tab of at least R$ 17.1 million just for the maintenance of three of the ten stadiums used in this event.
On June 11th, 2010, the Soccer City stadium in Johannesburg was lit for the first time and had all its 95 thousand seats sold out for the opening ceremony and also for the first game of the competition, between South Africa and Mexico.
The country invested more than R$ 9.2 billion on new airports, transport and infrastructure in general, of which almost half was used for the construction and adaptation of ten stadiums. Now, they continue to make calculations about the benefits of having organized the event, in a nation where rugby and cricket continue to be the most popular sports.
Only the Soccer City, which also hosted the final between Spain and the Netherlands, is economically profitable, while the rest of the premises continue to pass on the monthly Bill to the South African Administration.
The maintenance expenses of the infrastructure are particularly heavy for the Governments of the smaller cities and towns, such as Port Elizabeth, in the Southeast of the country, and also Polokwane and Mpumalanga, in the North, which have built stadiums worthy of European capitals.
According to the South African newspaper, the Mail and Guardian, just three of the ten World Cup stadiums now drain a total of R$ 17.1 million from the taxpayers.
The most expensive of all, the stadium in Cape Town, has a budget of some R$ 10.5 million, while the municipal financial department at Mpumalanga has an expense of R$ 3.9 million and Polokwane is using R$ 2.65 million to compensate for the deficit in the exploitation of the stadium.
“There is a need to look at expenses with stadiums in context, as they were essential so we could have the World Cup here”, the director of consultancy company Grant Thornton, Gillian Saunders, who provided advice to the South African Government in the planning of the event, explained to the Efe news agency.
The international projection of South Africa, the benefits in terms of national cohesion and also the national pride in being able to organize something like the World Cup, and also the economic impact on 350 thousand tourists made the investment in these premises well worthwhile”, she added.
The company Stadium Management South Africa (SMSA), that manages many of the stadiums, managed to find a business solution for the Soccer City, through the organization of shows, sports competitions, religious events and also tourist visits.
Last year, 40 thousand visitors passed along the stands and also the field of the stadium that saw Spain wins the World Cup for the first time, in the final match played on July 11th.
The Green Point, in Cape Town, however, is still seeking a private company to manage the stadium premises, after the previous concessionaire withdrew from the contract through “errors in the calculation of expenses and income”, according to one of the directors, as informed to the Press.
"The stadiums of the smaller towns will never make a profit and will be an expense for the local City Halls. However, this is what the Governments do: there are many infrastructure projects that do not make a profit but are kept on because they report a different kind of benefit to the citizens”, Ms. Saunders commented.
The South African Ministry for Tourism also informed that in 2010 there was a rise in the number of visitors by 1 million, of which 350 thousand came over to watch the World Cup, and this means that 650 thousand tourists got to know the country thanks to the hosting of the World Cup.
“We can never know the real benefits brought to the economy, but this may be the reason why Wal-Mart (the largest retail chain in the world) and HSBC Bank have stated their intention to set up here”, the director at Grant Thornton completed.
highlights
04/05 | News
