Well, if this isn’t obvious I don’t know what is.

The African credentials of the event have also been called into question after it became clear that Fifa’s ultra-secure internet ticketing system had left most of the continent unable to buy seats. With Visa as a major sponsor, Fifa kept ticket sales online until 15 April when poor sales forced them to open ticketing booths in the host country. As a result, only 11,000 African fans outside South Africa have purchased tickets, even though a record six African teams – the hosts, as well as Ghana, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Nigeria and Algeria – have qualified. Local organising committee chairman Danny Jordaan admits the African sales have been a disappointment. “Tickets sold best in countries like the United States, where internet penetration is the highest. Yet we know that African fans often do not have credit cards and access to the internet, and they prefer to hand over their cash and get their ticket. It is a lesson for the future.”

The article says that there will be a noticeable help to the economy from the World Cup, but is it enough? Was it worth it? A columnist had this to say about the money the South African government has spend on the host cities for the WC.

He claims that the £4bn spent by the government on infrastructure development in the nine host cities should have been used to create sustainable jobs in industry.

I recall hearing something similar about Chicago when it was a candidate city for the 2016 Olympic games.