You could say the 2026 tournament is a record-breaker, but the writing on the wall is that there is only one true winner: FIFA. Fans are having to deal with markups on everything from a train ride to a seat in the stands, and host cities are left holding the bag. In some ways, the world’s premier football event has been overtaken by its own bottom line.
Fans feel the squeeze before kickoff
For a lot of supporters, the letdown starts at the turnstiles or even on the way to the game. Take a round trip to MetLife Stadium on New Jersey Transit: $98. On any other day you’re looking at $13. That kind of spread is emblematic of the premium you have to pay for this whole affair.
Once you’re in the stadium, you see the same thing. Even something as simple as water has been a hassle, with some not sure if they can bring in their own. It all adds up. Before the referee has even blown his whistle, the whole thing can feel like an expense, and an uneven one at that.
If you want a ticket for a marquee match on the secondary market, you can be forking over six figures. Then there’s the World Cup tax on parking, food and a cold one. A few fan clubs have said they won’t be in the stands, citing the price tag and, for some, the unease of the Trump administration’s hard line on immigration. US hotels aren’t exactly packed, which says something about the demand.
In short, here is the state of play for the fan:
– It’s costlier to get to the venue
– You’re left wondering what the rules are on pricing
– Some would rather watch from home
Cities put up with the costs while the money moves up
It comes down to the numbers. The host city doesn’t see a dime of the matchday take; that is for FIFA. What they get in exchange is the promise of some tourist dollars and good will that should stick around after the last game.
But it’s hard to put your finger on those benefits. The US put aside $625 million in grants for the 11 American hosts, though they didn’t get the check until March. “If you have that cost on one side and on the other side you have essentially zero revenues, then you have a net loss of that amount of money,” says Andrew Zimbalist, one of the top sports economists. “The balance would be defrayed by the taxpayer.”
On paper, the organisers will put $2.5 billion back into the 16 cities for running the show. But local officials will tell you it’s a lopsided arrangement: they cover the police and staff, and FIFA reaps the windfall from the broadcasts and the box office. Sponsors and donors can make up some of it, but the rest is on the public.
The promise versus the payoff
This is the way of the mega-event. The international body has the commercial end covered; the host has to muddle through the operational side. If you ask an economist, the case for any lasting value to the city is tenuous, particularly when you can’t count on the stadium to put anything in your pocket.
FIFA’s profit engine: scale, location, timing
Step back and look at the big picture and the record books make sense. We are talking about a $3.76 billion budget. From the tournament itself, FIFA is looking at $8.9 billion in revenue, and up to $13 billion over the 2023-2026 period. Put that next to the $7 billion in 2022 and you have a 56% increase.
A few things are behind it. For one, there is the sheer size of it: 48 teams, 104 matches in 16 different places, more to sell. And then there is where we are. The US is the most lucrative sports market in the world, and the media rights alone are up 94% on 2022.
Then there is the matter of timing. As football’s hold on North American culture has only grown, FIFA has been in a position to make the most of it with a 39-day, three-country run.
You can see where the money is coming from by looking at the numbers:
– Broadcast rights: some $3.8 billion or more, a 22% jump
– Sponsorship: on track for $2.4 billion, up 37%
– And not one of the 16 worldwide sponsorship slots is left open
The sponsor list is a who’s who. You have your Tier 1s like Adidas, Coca-Cola, Visa, Hyundai-Kia, Lenovo, Qatar Airways and Aramco. Then there are the Tier 2s: McDonald’s, Verizon, Michelob Ultra, Hisense, Lay’s, and Bank of America. With US brands accounting for 52% of the sponsorship take (36% in 2022), it’s clear who this World Cup is for.
Ticketing and the about-face
For 2026, FIFA put its foot down on ticketing, did away with the middlemen and sold it as a system that was fair and hard for scalpers to game. What they got instead was an uproar over dynamic pricing. In 95 of 104 games, you’re looking at an average 35% hike over the base rate.
They once said the final wouldn’t top $1,550. Come April 2026, the most you could do for a standard seat was $5,785. Top-shelf face-value went to $10,990 and then some. Even after you factor in inflation, the entry-level group stage fare is double what it was in Qatar and quadruple 1994. One final ticket on the official site was put up for $11.5 million.
With 180,000 tickets still on the table two days before kick-off, New York and New Jersey lawmakers made an issue of it, pointing to the confusion and the prices. So FIFA made a show of giving an inch: a $60 ‘Supporter Entry’ for every match, even the final, making up about 10% of what each country gets.
But the retreat didn’t stop there. In early June they trimmed the price on all 104 fixtures and put back 70% of the hotel rooms they had put on hold. The market made its point and the organiser adjusted.
A spectacle with a plan
You could tell from the get-go how big they wanted to be. Three opening ceremonies were put on: Mexico City on the 11th, then Toronto and L.A. on the 12th. All of them 90 minutes before the host’s first game, and all under the direction of Marco Balich.
The talent they put in front of the cameras was no accident. Shakira and Burna Boy in Mexico; Alanis and Buble in Toronto; in L.A. you had Katy Perry, Future, Anitta, LISA and Rema. These aren’t cheap affairs – they run into the tens of millions and are part of the $3.76 billion tab. They’re really just the prelude to a month of TV.
More for the winners
The money on the field is up, too. The prize pot is $871 million, 65% more than 2022. Every team that makes it in is sure of at least $12.5 million, with the champion walking away with $50 million.
There’s more for prep, as well: $2.5 million to each qualified side before they even play. Put it in perspective: Argentina’s 2022 haul was $42 million. This year’s winner will be up $11.5 million on that. It’s not just a pat on the back; it can fund your youth setup and staff for years to come.
What it comes down to
FIFA will say it puts the billions it makes right back into the game. Hard to swallow when you’re paying $98 for a train. When a city is left with the bill and the fans are hit with dynamic pricing for something that should be for everyone, you start to chafe.
We’ll see if the recent price cuts win back any goodwill. The fact is, a premium-only approach can go south even at a World Cup. If the numbers don’t add up, we may see more of the same.
Still, on TV it’s a behemoth. For a lot of people, the World Cup is a thing you do in the living room now. The fun is in the game. But if you look at the books, it all works out for one side.
This one is being driven by size, the U.S. market and good timing. The fans and the host cities are feeling the cost of it. Without a change in the model, 2026 will be known as the priciest in the book, with the stands further out of reach and only one real winner in the end.
