AFTER billions spent on stadiums now lying empty and fewer tourists than hoped for, South Africa marks six months from the kickoff of the 2010 World Cup on Saturday asking whether it had been worth it.
The tournament, Africa's first World Cup, delivered an undoubted boost to national pride, but many are ruing the fact that it fell in the midst of the worst global economic recession in generations.
The government spent R33billion on the football extravaganza, an event officials say attracted almost 310000 tourists and $521million (about R3,6billion) in foreign spending to the economy.
But that was one-third short of the 450000 visitors that had been forecast. And while their average spending of R11800 helped the economy continue its tepid recovery from a 2008-09 recession, that money added up to about one-tenth of what the government spent on the tournament.
"The country made a bit of money but less than expected," said Mike Schussler, director of consulting firm economists.co.za.
Businesses reported the impact of the month-long tournament was less than hoped for.
Consulting firm KPMG surveyed 100 of its top clients and found that just 22percent felt they had benefited from the World Cup.
The year before, 45percent thought the tournament would have a positive impact.
South Africa's economic growth slowed from 4,6percent in the first quarter of 2010 to 3,2percent in the second and 2,6percent in the third, the periods covering the June-to-July World Cup.
But without the spending boost from the tournament, the country's flagging growth would likely have been slower still, analysts say.
"For many businesses, the World Cup was the saviour this year," said Gillian Saunders, an analyst with consulting firm Grant Thornton's Johannesburg office.
Those who see the tournament as a blessing say the money spent on roads, communications infrastructure, a new public transport system and the first high-speed train in Africa will be a lasting legacy.
But critics complain that South Africa, which has 25percent unemployment and staggering inequality, could have better spent the money on jobs, education and homes.
"Instead of building houses, we built stadiums," Schussler said.
The World Cup stadiums - five new and five revamped, completed at a cost of R11,7billion - have become a particularly sensitive issue as several have struggled to find post-World Cup uses.
While Johannesburg's iconic FNB Stadium, which hosted the opening and final matches, has found new life hosting local football and a U2 concert, smaller towns like Nelspruit and Polokwane have no clear future purpose for the stadiums they built from scratch.
But Saunders said the cost of the venues was "miniscule" when compared with overall infrastructure spending - R787billion from 2009 to 2011.
She credited the tournament with bringing "real, hard economic benefits", including half a point of GDP growth from tourist spending.
Michael Tatalias, head of the Southern Africa Tourism Services Association, said the World Cup had put South Africa on the global tourism map.
"People don't ask 'Where is South Africa?' anymore. They now ask 'What can we do in South Africa?'" he said.
Was the 2010 World Cup worth it?
AFTER billions spent on stadiums now lying empty and fewer tourists than hoped for, South Africa marks six months from the kickoff of the 2010 World Cup on Saturday asking whether it had been worth it.
The tournament, Africa's first World Cup, delivered an undoubted boost to national pride, but many are ruing the fact that it fell in the midst of the worst global economic recession in generations.
The government spent R33billion on the football extravaganza, an event officials say attracted almost 310000 tourists and $521million (about R3,6billion) in foreign spending to the economy.
But that was one-third short of the 450000 visitors that had been forecast. And while their average spending of R11800 helped the economy continue its tepid recovery from a 2008-09 recession, that money added up to about one-tenth of what the government spent on the tournament.
"The country made a bit of money but less than expected," said Mike Schussler, director of consulting firm economists.co.za.
Businesses reported the impact of the month-long tournament was less than hoped for.
Consulting firm KPMG surveyed 100 of its top clients and found that just 22percent felt they had benefited from the World Cup.
The year before, 45percent thought the tournament would have a positive impact.
South Africa's economic growth slowed from 4,6percent in the first quarter of 2010 to 3,2percent in the second and 2,6percent in the third, the periods covering the June-to-July World Cup.
But without the spending boost from the tournament, the country's flagging growth would likely have been slower still, analysts say.
"For many businesses, the World Cup was the saviour this year," said Gillian Saunders, an analyst with consulting firm Grant Thornton's Johannesburg office.
Those who see the tournament as a blessing say the money spent on roads, communications infrastructure, a new public transport system and the first high-speed train in Africa will be a lasting legacy.
But critics complain that South Africa, which has 25percent unemployment and staggering inequality, could have better spent the money on jobs, education and homes.
"Instead of building houses, we built stadiums," Schussler said.
The World Cup stadiums - five new and five revamped, completed at a cost of R11,7billion - have become a particularly sensitive issue as several have struggled to find post-World Cup uses.
While Johannesburg's iconic FNB Stadium, which hosted the opening and final matches, has found new life hosting local football and a U2 concert, smaller towns like Nelspruit and Polokwane have no clear future purpose for the stadiums they built from scratch.
But Saunders said the cost of the venues was "miniscule" when compared with overall infrastructure spending - R787billion from 2009 to 2011.
She credited the tournament with bringing "real, hard economic benefits", including half a point of GDP growth from tourist spending.
Michael Tatalias, head of the Southern Africa Tourism Services Association, said the World Cup had put South Africa on the global tourism map.
"People don't ask 'Where is South Africa?' anymore. They now ask 'What can we do in South Africa?'" he said.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos