What does it cost to host the World Cup?
It’s not cheap to host FIFA’s premier sporting event. Here is an overview of what recent hosts have paid for the privilege:
- South Africa planned to spend 205-238 million USD on stadiums and stadium upgrades for the 2010 World Cup (4 times less than Germany in 2006). However, after costs rose significantly, South Africa actually spent several billion USD on hosting.
- South Africa made a return of just 549 million USD on the roughly 5 billion USD it spent on building stadiums and infrastructure for this summer’s tournament, according to official figures. The country predicted it would receive an initial boost of £570m from tourists flocking to attend the festival of football. However the tournament failed to attract as many foreign visitors as expected. Marthinus van Schalkwyk, South Africa’s tourism minister, said just 309,000 foreign fans attended the tournament, compared to predictions of 450,000. South African-based companies also failed to reap the benefits of the tournament, according to a study by KPMG. Just 22% of KPMG’s 100 biggest African clients, including several multinationals, said they had benefited from the World Cup, compared to 45% predicting a boost last year. John Saker, chief operating officer of KPMG Africa, said: “The big boost didn’t happen. Businesses that directly served the World Cup did relatively well, but those without direct involvement struggled.” Source
- Germany built 12 stadiums at one billion for 2006
- South Korea spent 1.3 billion, building 10 stadiums
- Japan spent over 2.5 billion (exact figure unknown), building seven stadiums and refurbishing three
- For the 2002 WC, 30 stadiums were built and only 20 used, resulting in higher than indicated costs
- USA spent 186 million for WC98, improving nine stadiums