For almost a century, FIFA has not cared about selling cheap tickets: the money in football came from television. But, as has happened with music, film, and other cultural events, spectacle is now the rule of the game, and for the 2026 World Cup the business model leans closer to Ticketmaster. The direct consequence: two American attorneys general have already asked for explanations in court.<\/p>\n
A dismal record.<\/strong> The World Cup hosted by the United States, Mexico, and Canada opens this Thursday as the most expensive cultural event in history. The cheapest group-stage ticket averaged about $200, and the most affordable final seat started at $2,030. Adjusted for inflation, the price doubles versus Qatar 2022 and quadruples versus the United States 1994.<\/p>\n Why.<\/strong> The reason is more than evident: for the first time FIFA controls ticket sales directly, without delegating it to local organizers, and it has introduced dynamic pricing. Between October and April, it increased at least one category in 95 of the 104 matches, with an average rise of 35%. The Category 1 final ticket rose from $6,730 to $10,990.<\/p>\n Other niceties.<\/strong> Another novelty this year that fans are not happy about is that the buyer does not choose the seat. They pay for a category corresponding to a zone of the stadium, and FIFA assigns the row and seat months later. For example, in April many Category 1 fans discovered that their seats were in zones previously marked as Category 2, because FIFA had modified the maps and reserved the best seats for a new “Front Category 1.” More expensive, of course.<\/p>\n The law.<\/strong> The attorney generals of New York and New Jersey have subpoenaed FIFA to investigate its sales practices; New Jersey accuses the organization of turning purchases into a labyrinth of “false scarcity.” California had already sent its own demand letter earlier. The authorities accuse FIFA of building its own secondary market with no price cap in the United States and Canada: as explained on its own support page, it charges a 15% commission to the seller and another 15% to the buyer. Only in Mexico does it limit resale to the original price, and by legal requirement. On that platform there have been finals tickets listed for more than two million dollars.<\/p>\n Opacity does the rest.<\/strong> FIFA has rarely disclosed how many tickets remained per match or phase, and before publishing any price it sold tens of thousands of “Right to Buy” tokens through its crypto-collectibles platform: hundreds of dollars for the right to buy a ticket whose final cost was not known until much later.<\/p>\n More opacity: in February, FIFA president Gianni Infantino stated that all matches were sold out. His own organization had to correct him, and in April it acknowledged that about five of the 6.7 million tickets had been sold and that the rest were being held for a “continuous sale.” Various ticketing experts identify that holdback as a classic tactic to manufacture a sense of demand. Although it\u2019s unclear whether the move produced the expected results: the opening USA vs Paraguay match drew around 10,000 tickets listed on resale platforms, many well below the original price.<\/p>\n The numbers add up.<\/strong> They sure do: at Qatar 2022, the box office brought in about $950 million; for 2026 FIFA budgets up to $3 billion from tickets and VIP packages (premium ticket plus experience). The organization expects to earn $8.9 billion with the tournament, within a four-year cycle of roughly $13,000 (which is how FIFA organizes its books) in the most optimistic calculations. Some argue that this figure may even be short: an academic analysis projects that only box office and VIP experiences will surpass $7.4 billion, and television rights, sponsorships, and other revenues would be added to that total.<\/p>\n A caveat.<\/strong> The Economist points, however, to a very specific problem this year: the on-site crowd is part of the television product FIFA sells worldwide for more than $4 billion. It\u2019s worth recalling that at the Club World Cup they had to reposition spectators in front of cameras in nearly half-empty games to maintain appearances. All of this underlines the idea that FIFA is navigating two businesses it wants to lead: extracting value from the live spectator and protecting the image of the spectacle seen by the rest of the world. For now, the dollar signs appear to be focused on the former.<\/p>\n On Xataka | How to configure your Smart TV to watch the 2026 World Cup in the best possible way<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1161,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"class_list":["post-1160","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","generate-columns","tablet-grid-50","mobile-grid-100","grid-parent","grid-50"],"yoast_head":"\n