COMMENT
Built to burden?
T
he Russian 2018 FIFA World Cup is over, and I can’t help
but wonder if the structures that were viewed with
awe, filled with zealous fans and the roar of supporters,
will become white elephants as in the case of many of
its predecessors?
In Brazil, the iconic Maracana Stadium stands in a state of ruin,
a shattered legacy of the Brazil World Cup and Rio Olympics. The
famous pitch is bare, with broken seats thrown in a heap while
more than 7 000 of the 80 000 seats are missing. There are huge
holes in ceilings and many of the catering areas have been stripped
bare. The ground, which cost almost R864-million to redevelop, is
in such poor condition that none of the professional sides in Rio de
While not all the stadia were built specifically for the FIFA 2014
tournament — the Maracana was built to host the 1950 World Cup
in Brazil — what makes this neglect more shocking is that the
impoverished country built and/or renovated no less than 12 stadia
for the event, with many of them falling into disuse once the
games were over. Brazil spent more than USD3-billion on the stadia,
some of which were placed in far-flung sites without popular local
professional teams to sustain them after the tournament.
Back home, the hype around South Africa being awarded the
2010 tournament was based on the incredible revenue stream that
was anticipated to flow into the country. The country spent billions
of rands on six new world-class stadia and upgrades to roads and
airports to host the 2010 World Cup.
However, barring the FNB Stadium in Soweto and Durban’s
Moses Mabhida — the only two of the 10 stadia to now be
profitable — many of the others, including Cape Town Stadium,
Mbombela Stadium (Mpumalanga), Peter Mokaba Stadium
(Limpopo), Royal Bafokeng Stadium (North West), and Port
Elizabeth’s Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium, are placing a huge
financial burden on local municipalities and are in danger of
becoming white elephants, so underused are they.
According to a study by risk analysis and finance company Grant
Thornton, the 2010 FIFA World Cup Country Report predicted a
USD6-billion boost to South Africa’s economy, but that was a mid-
to long-term projection. FIFA retained all the World Cup’s television
and sponsorship money, earned GBP2.2-billion, and returned to
Zurich with a GBP394-million profit, while the South African
government report assessed that the tournament cost the country
more than GBP2-billion.
With the likes of Cape Town’s Green Point Urban Park costing
around R34.6-million a year in public money to maintain, at one
stage, the cost of maintaining the stadia was calculated against
Janeiro can afford the costs of renovating it to play there.
Ras Abu Aboud Stadium in Doha has been designed with modified
shipping containers, making it modular and easy to assemble
and dismantle.
A country that appears to have planned ahead appropriately is 2022
host, Qatar. And, aside from changing the time of year that the
event will take place to accommodate its furnace-like summers,
Qatar also only has to build eight stadia.
To generate revenue to cover the exorbitant costs of
maintaining stadia after the tournament, the peninsula country in
the Persian Gulf has detailed plans in place to create communities
around the stadia after the event, replete with shopping malls,
accommodation, and even schools in some cases, pushing
residential prices around the stadia precincts into billions of rands.
The Ras Abu Aboud Stadium in Doha has been designed with
modified shipping containers, which means that the modular
stadium can be dismantled and moved to a new location after the
football tournament, while yet other stadia can be modified from
40 000 seats to 20 000
after the event, with the
removable seating
shipped off to “poor
African countries”.
What a pity South Africa
hosted their tournament
before Qatar, as maybe we
could have qualified as
recipients of this
generous offering?
demolishing them. However, amid public outcry and indignation, Kim
that idea was scrapped. Editor
SEPTEMBER 2018
3