Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
Well just ask the Chinese how their olympic stadiums are holding up.
http://www.citylab.com/work/2012/07/...ic-ruins/2499/

Quick google search will give you plenty of decay in the aftermath of 2004 Olympics in Athens.

If the Chinese can't find use for their stuff, what makes you think a brand new 40,000 seat stadium in the middle of the amazon, with only 551,000 people living near it is going to thrive after July 13th?
Olympics are quite different from WC. Football doesn't demand such a diverse infrastructure and is by far the most popular sport in the world. Even more so in Brazil.

Football stadiums are also quite versatile and can be used for other sports, athletics tournaments are often held there, and even for some stuff unrelated to sports, for instance concerts.

In the case of Cuiaba, the stadium was built in place of an older stadium, that had capacity of cca. 44,000, and it will be used as home stadium by two local clubs, Mixto and Cuiaba.

I'm not saying it couldn't have been done cheaper as I don't really know the average attendance of Mixto and Cuiaba.

But, again, not FIFA's fault. World Cup is one of the few international sporting events that are actually profitable if done correctly. FIFA often allocates WC to a country that could use a significant investment in football infrastructure so that they could offset much of the cost. Of course, corruption in said country can drive the cost higher than it should have been but that is again not FIFA's fault.

Brazil is a sound choice and they will benefit in the long run. Qatar, on the other hand...