FIFA is “set to earn billions of dollars from selling World Cup match tickets and hospitality over the next five weeks,” but critics “question how the money is spent and the transparency” of the organization’s finances, according to Josh Noble of the FINANCIAL TIMES. FIFA expects the four-year cycle that ends with this summer’s World Cup to generate $13B, of which $8.9B will come from the tournament. The N.Y. and N.J. attorneys general launched probes into ticket prices. FIFA has responded to complaints about prices by introducing a small number of cheaper tickets but insisted that its ticketing policies “were in line with the local market for big events.” The decision to expand the tournament has also been contentious and has formed part of a legal complaint against FIFA filed by FIFPRO. The tournament itself is set to cost about $3.8B to stage, including more prize money for participating teams. However, host cities and national governments “face bills for additional security, transportation and the cost of putting on fan festivals.” The bulk of FIFA’s budgeted spending -- about $3.9B -- has “been allocated to ‘development and education’” (FINANCIAL TIMES, 6/7).
EMPTY SECTIONS: In Calgary, Scott Stinson noted there have also been reports of “large numbers of seats being dumped on third-party resale sites, raising suspicions that FIFA is scrambling to avoid embarrassment.” Stinson: “Did FIFA overplay its hand? Will it hold a fire sale in the coming days to get rid of excess inventory? Possibly not.” Swaths of empty seats are “less of a problem for the organizer if the seats that are filled were sold at super-premium prices.” Empty sections, though, would “hurt the in-stadium atmosphere and make matches feel like much less of an event.” But FIFA and organization President Gianni Infantino have “made clear in 2026 that the World Cup was never about the average fan” (CALGARY HERALD, 6/7).
WHO’S THE AUDIENCE? In S.F., Ann Killion wrote the tournament may “be the most absurd and infuriating. But the most inclusive?” Many are calling the upcoming tournament “the most exclusive, based on exorbitant prices, travel concerns and a primary host -- the United States -- that isn’t exactly welcoming to the rest of the world” (S.F. CHRONICLE, 6/7). THE ATHLETIC’s Jerry Brewer wrote we are “really doing this. Hide your wallets and freeze your credit cards. Here comes the largest, priciest World Cup ever, right on schedule, forging into a volatile world unprepared to receive it.” Yet the “great paradox of this historic, expansive World Cup is that it threatens to be the least accessible edition so far.” The World Cup has “widened its doorway, but it still feels more closed than ever” (THE ATHLETIC, 6/8).
CAN BARELY GET IN THE DOOR: The HOLLYWOOD REPORTER’s Scott Roxborough wrote both within and outside the U.S., “politics has invaded World Cup coverage.” For many newsrooms, the question is whether fans will “make it through the door?” The answer, “for some, is definitively no” (HOLLYWOOD REPORTER, 6/5). WOMEN’S WEAR DAILY’s Jean Palmieri notes aceodds.com data shows that it will cost “an estimated $62,000 for two people to follow one of the 48 teams to all its matches.” The single most expensive expense is tickets at $31,000 for two people (WOMEN’S WEAR DAILY, 6/8).
CAN’T AFFORD TO FAIL: THE RINGER’s Lex Pryor writes the World Cup itself is “too big to fail.” If there is an “unstoppable force of the sporting world, it’s this tournament.” Pryor: “No matter how many stumbling blocks or quandaries might appear in the lead-up to the North American tournament, the safe (and overwhelmingly large amount of promised) money is still on the 2026 World Cup being a financial windfall: just for a select few” (THE RINGER, 6/8).
LOOKING AHEAD: FIFA World Cup 2026 Toronto Secretariat Exec Dir Sharon Bollenbach said that after spending more than CA$1B (US$720M) for 13 World Cup games, Canada’s two host cities “should have a frank discussion about how these kind of mega-tournaments are best paid for in the future.” Bollenbach acknowledged that the combined municipal, provincial and federal spending for the marquee tournament has “given some people sticker shock.” GLOBE & MAIL’s Greg Mercer noted Bollenbach’s remarks came after being asked about the decision by some U.S. hosts to “rely more heavily on private funding and corporate sponsorships” to finance their World Cup games. Vancouver and Toronto’s games are being “almost exclusively bankrolled by taxpayers” (GLOBE & MAIL, 6/6).
LACK OF APPEAL: In N.Y., Shawna Richer wrote it does “not feel as if the biggest sporting event on the planet is about to get underway in Canada.” Richer: “Blame staggering ticket prices, FIFA’s tyrannical resale rules and an unglamorous slate of matches in Toronto and Vancouver.” Thousands of tickets to the opening game in Toronto “remain unsold,” and “not a single match in either city has sold out” (N.Y. TIMES, 6/6).
PRO FOR EXPANSION: In N.Y., Andrew Keh wrote the great agony of the World Cup, “for its most ardent fans, stems from its scarcity.” This month, a mass exhalation “will ripple through the five boroughs,” as the expansion of the tournament from 32 teams to 48 “has blown open the doors of the World Cup to a crop of debutantes and otherwise long-absent nations.” A spot in the tournament “has awakened a dormant sense of soccer pride for each community” (N.Y. TIMES, 6/6).
