SAIRR Today: Pricing poor black South Africans out of the Confed Cup - 19th June 2009

The sight of half-empty stadiums playing host to Confederations Cup soccer matches in South Africa embarrassed both Fifa as well as local soccer authorities. Reports of poor attendance have been published in newspapers around the world and many foreign correspondents have raised questions about the pricing of tickets for the tournament. Their concerns are validated by a simple review of ticket prices as a proportion of average household incomes.

It has become politically incorrect to raise questions around South Africa’s hosting of the 2010 World Cup. Those who do raise objections or critiques are attacked as nay-sayers, Afro-pessimists, and even racists.

This column is not questioning the hosting of the World Cup and its forerunner, the Confederations Cup. On balance these two events could yet return a net political and social profit for South Africa. Having sustained international focus on South Africa has some very real benefits for governance in the country. Politicians are more likely to take concerns over issues such as crime seriously. The absence of reliable and safe public transport has finally landed on the political agenda. There are also direct benefits to industries such as tourism. The problem lies not with the hosting of these events but the manner in which they are being hosted.

Domestic soccer remains a sport that attracts predominantly African support in South Africa. This is changing and the World Cup will see it change even faster but it remains true that soccer supporters generally represent the poorer segments of South Africa’s population.

The extent of this poverty is severe. According to data published by the Institute in the South Africa Survey 4/10 South Africans subsist on an income level of less than R3 000 per year. This figure has come down from 5/10 a decade ago but it remains very high. The household incomes of African South Africans average just over R25 000 per year or R2 000 per month. On average 3/10 African families draw their single greatest source of income from the social welfare system. Unemployment levels are officially recorded at just under 25% but unofficial figures reach as high as 45% among poor and black communities.

At the same time the Government, with Fifa’s blessing, saw fit to spend tens of billions of rands on preparations for the 2010 event. Whatever the organizers or Fifa may say such expenditure raises a moral question in a country as poor as South Africa.

At the very least poor South Africans, in whose names those billions were spent, should have the opportunity to attend events in those stadiums and not just at TV parks set up outside townships and squatter settlements. But with prices ranging from approximately R70 to several hundreds of rands, ticket prices are out of reach for many poor people. Consider that an African family of between four and six, living at the average income level of R2 000 per month, would have to pay a quarter of their monthly income to attend a match. Ticket prices of much over R20 would be unaffordable for most African families.

If Fifa had been made properly aware of these figures would they still have approved ticket prices at the level that they were set, particularly for matches in poorer areas such as Rustenburg. If they had known and proceeded regardless, that would suggest that they were happy for their tournaments to be elitist projects in a poor country. If that was the case then the tournaments might as well have stayed in Europe and North America. If the empty stadiums actually took them by surprise then someone did not do their background research properly.

Certainly there should be questions about the competence of the Local Organizing Committee beyond the question of empty seats at stadiums. While the committee has become fond of saying that it got 70% of many things right that is not good enough. Incorrect national flags being flown in public places, chaotic transport systems before certain matches, very low key pre-tournament marketing, and bad public relations have tarnished would should have been a slick and better organized showcasing of South Africa.

For example commenting on poor attendance at the tournament a spokesperson for the local organizing committee told the media earlier this week that the, "The South African nation's job is to host the event, not attend it, you can take the horse to the water, but you can't force it to drink that water." It was a dismissive, ignorant, and unfortunate statement to come from a committee that should have provided Fifa with greater insight into South Africa.

Earlier this week it seemed that some degree of sense and empathy was prevailing when Fifa reportedly announced their intention to distribute free tickets for the remaining group matches. But subsequent reports have said that free tickets would only be made available to corporate sponsors.

Much was made of bringing the World Cup and the Confed Cup to Africa for the first time. But it was too easy for the Fifa and local soccer authorities to paint a sanitized picture of South Africa as a well to do and prosperous society, a little bit of Europe in Africa. A result has been to price the Confed Cup beyond the reach of poor and black South Africans. This week’s empty stadiums are a rude awakening that will hopefully hold lessons that will make for a more inclusive 2010 World Cup. There could even be the additional benefit of rugby authorities waking up to reflect on what exorbitant ticket prices and half-empty stadiums, for the current British Lions tour, says about their commitment to appeal to more than the wealthy white elite.

- Frans Cronje

SAIRR

SAIRR Today: Pricing poor black South Africans out of the Confed Cup - 19th June 2009

With thousands of foreign tourists expected for the Soccer World Cup what advice do you have for them should they see a political blue-light convoy approaching? We will publish the results in a future article.

Personal tools