New York Times afirma que o estádio que mais lucrou é o do Palmeiras!
Esta semana o New York Times realizou uma matéria onde ele comenta que o Brasil investiu milhões de dolares para modernizar e melhorar os locais para prática de futebol no País e quase um ano após o fim do torneio, o Brasil segue tentando encontrar soluções para esses “elefantes brancos.”
Os americanos comentaram a respeito do “ITAQUERÃO STADIUM” que está finalizando suas obras 11 meses após sua inauguração e ainda encontra dificuldades apesar do clube levar um bom público para os jogos, tendo em vista que 100% da receita é destinado a pagar o estádio.
A matéria citou o ” PALMEIRAS ALLIANZ PARQUE” como o estádio que vem arrecando o maior capital possível e não foi construído para a Copa do Mundo e ressalta que não houve incentivo do governo para sua construção – um contraste bem grande com os acordos com todos os outros estádios da copa. Afirma ainda que o Palmeiras tem direito a 100% da receita nos jogos e participação em shows e eventos – neste caso a WTorre (construtora do mesmo) fica com a maior parte das receitas pelas próximas 3 décadas.
Abaixo você pode ler a matéria na integra:
WORLD CUP STADIUMS LEAVE A TROUBLED LEGACY IN BRAZIL
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/sports/soccer/world-cup-stadiums-leave-a-troubled-legacy-in-brazil.html?_r=0
SÃO PAULO — Brazil spent billions of dollars renovating and building World Cup stadiums that were supposed to help modernize and improve local soccer. Almost a year after the tournament ended, the nation is still trying to figure out what to do with them.
Some of the 12 new state-of-the-art stadiums are just now being completed as originally planned. Others are already up for sale.
The Itaquerao Stadium in São Paulo hosted the World Cup’s opening match last June, a 3-1 win over Croatia for the host nation. But the stadium has only now been completed, nearly 11 months after the tournament. Some of the glass that is part of the stadium’s roofing was installed several weeks ago, along with other items that were still missing at the arena, which cost $450 million.
Attendance has risen significantly at the stadium, which is owned by the popular team Corinthians, but the club is using the revenue to pay for the construction. A year after the team handed over the stadium to FIFA for the World Cup, it still does not have a deal for naming rights.
Another stadium only now being finished is the Arena da Baixada in Curitiba, which recently completed the retractable roof that was abandoned before the tournament because of construction delays. The roof was in the original plan for the World Cup, but FIFA asked organizers to postpone its installation to avoid the risk that it would not be ready in time.
The club that owns the stadium, Atlético Paranaense, boasts of having the first soccer stadium in Latin America with a retractable roof, but while announcing the termination of a contract with the stadium operator, AEG, last month, the club said that the financial return “was not the one expected.”
“There are a lot of ways to make money from these stadiums,” said Joao Henrique Areias, a local sports marketing specialist, “but you have to work hard to make it happen; it’s not automatic.”
He added: “The way things are now, you can’t expect Brazil to profit from them. And we all know who is going to continue to pay for this bill, it’s the taxpayer.”
Brazil spent about $3 billion on the World Cup stadiums, saying the new arenas would become a legacy for the country. Most were turned over to private operators who are now struggling to profit from soccer. Some have resorted to children’s events, corporate gatherings and religious services to increase revenue.
The new stadiums are better and more modern, but they are also more expensive to maintain, prompting operators to charge more.
Flamengo, one of Brazil’s largest and most popular teams, recently said it could lose money by playing at the Maracanã Stadium, the site of the World Cup final. The club said that under the current contract with the stadium’s new owners, it kept too little money from ticket sales to matches. Atlético Mineiro also pointed to a similar problem at the Mineirão Stadium, the site of Germany’s 7-1 win over Brazil in the World Cup semifinals.
“It’s not worth playing at the Mineirão unless we have a crowd of more than 40,000 people,” said Atlético Mineiro’s president, Daniel Nepomuceno, whose team often preferred to play at the smaller Independencia, a non-World Cup stadium in Belo Horizonte.
Bahia last month threatened to stop playing at the Arena Fonte Nova in Salvador in a dispute with the consortium running the new stadium over revenue. It agreed to keep playing after renegotiating the contract.
The stadium that has profited the most this year in Brazil is Palmeiras’s Allianz Parque, which was not built for the World Cup. There were no financial incentives from the government to help build the arena, in contrast to arrangements for the World Cup stadiums. Palmeiras keeps all the money from attendance at soccer matches, while WTorre, which built and paid for the arena in São Paulo, receives most of the revenue from concerts and other events over 30 years.
In April, two World Cup stadiums were virtually put up for sale. OAS announced it was selling its stake in the Arena Fonte Nova and in the Arena das Dunas, in Natal. OAS has been struggling after being linked to a corruption investigation at the nation’s state-run oil company, Petrobras.
In the western city of Cuiabá, the Arena Pantanal was closed for emergency repairs this year after officials discovered structural problems. The stadium also is not finished as planned.
Fonte: The New York Times