On Dec 2, FIFA's executive committee voted to decide World Cup host countries in 2018 and 2022. As a result, Russia won the host in 2018, and Qatar in 2022. The committee must have assessed so many factors of each candidate: vision, stadiums, transportation, concept, security and more. Yet, reportedly, it is said that strong government support did contribute to the awards for Russia and Qatar.
Wait a minute. A strong government support? Hey, sovereign debt crisis is a huge concern around the globe right now. Ever since the global financial crisis hit here and there, the IMF has been busy with providing its financial packages to many countries. Also, still others are concerned for sovereign risks: The United Arab Emirates (or Dubai to be precise), Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy.
Without doubt, to host a FIFA World Cup costs a lot. A host country (or its football association) needs fundraise a lot of money. As taking a look at Moody's sovereign credit ratings (as of today) for the countries which bid for the World Cup host, however, FIFA seems a risk-taker.
The World Cup 2018
England: Aaa (the United Kingdom)
Belgium & Netherlands: Aa1, Aaa
Spain & Portugal: Aa1, A1
Russia: Baa1
The World Cup 2022
USA: Aaa
Australia: Aaa
Japan: Aa2
Qatar: Aa2
Korea: A1
Now you can see Russia and Qatar are the lowest credit ratings among the bidders. Well, South Korea is lower than Qatar, but the country did host in 2002! I can't check the credit ratings for South Africa and Brazil when the two were awarded. Still, today's ratings are A3 and Baa3 respectively. In other words, a BBB country like Russia had a fairly good chance to win it.
Among BRICs, now Brazil is hosting in 2014 and Russia in 2018. Seems like China (Aa3) and India (Baa3) have a good chance to be a host in 2026 or later games. As for India, however, the nation perhaps needs give up cricket. The 11 billion's passion. And that's not a easy thing to happen in the near future.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment