If you’re planning to attend the 2026 FIFA World Cup, prepare for sticker shock.
The cheapest ticket to the final is already more than ten times what fans paid in Qatar just four years ago. And that is before prices begin rising through FIFA’s controversial new dynamic pricing system.
The cost surge has made this edition of the World Cup, hosted across the United States, Canada and Mexico, the most expensive in the tournament’s history. Critics have said that it’s becoming a competition only for those who can afford it. Final tickets in East Rutherford, New Jersey, are now starting around $6,300. On the resale market, some are already listed for more than $25,000.
Supporters and politicians argue FIFA, despite being a nonprofit, is prioritizing revenue over access. Newsweek contacted FIFA for comment on Monday morning.
In September, FIFA confirmed it would introduce dynamic pricing for the first time in World Cup history. The system, familiar to fans of U.S. sports and air travel but largely foreign to European and South American soccer, adjusts ticket prices based on real-time demand. Group-stage tickets start at $60, while top-tier final seats are priced as high as $6,730. In Qatar, the highest price for a final ticket was $1,607.
“This is the first time in history FIFA has used dynamic pricing for a World Cup,” said Heimo Schirgi, FIFA’s Chief Operating Officer for 2026, in an interview with ESPN. “Get your tickets early […] because anything could happen.”
That uncertainty has some fans concerned.
Blind Bets
Under dynamic pricing, ticket prices rise or fall depending on demand, but few fans know what they’re buying when sales begin. With the tournament schedule still incomplete, tickets are sold without team assignments. A $400 seat could land a fan at England versus Brazil or New Zealand against Uzbekistan. Stadium, city and team matchups remain unclear. That uncertainty makes early buying a gamble, but one many are still willing to take.
For some, this World Cup could be the last chance to witness greatness. Lionel Messi and his Argentina squad have already qualified. The 2026 tournament may mark the final World Cup appearance for one of the sport’s all-time greats. Fans hoping to see Messi on the world’s biggest stage are paying now, even without knowing if their tickets will put them in the right place at the right time.
FIFA President Gianni Infantino has defended the pricing model, pointing to examples where they have said dynamic pricing has helped fans. At the 2023 Club World Cup, also held in the U.S., tickets for a semifinal between Chelsea and Fluminense dropped from $474 to just $13 within days.
“For us, the important element is to fill stadiums to give opportunities to people to come,” Infantino said.
But fan groups say that’s little comfort for those who bought early. In East Rutherford, many were frustrated when they paid top dollar for what turned out to be an underwhelming matchup. Others who waited bought tickets for less than the cost of a stadium beer.
“This is not ‘make football truly global,’ this is the privatization of what was once a tournament open to all,” said Ronan Evain, executive director of Football Supporters Europe, in an interview with The Athletic. “FIFA’s leadership seems unable to understand that it needs fans in the stands. It needs life, the atmosphere, the colors, the diversity. None of this exists when you set such prices.”
‘Empty Stands Don’t Look Good’
The backlash has also grown louder with the rollout of FIFA’s official resale platform. Unlike past tournaments where resale prices were capped at face value, FIFA is allowing uncapped resale in the U.S. and Canada. Some tickets to the final have already been listed for more than $25,000. FIFA will also collect 15 percent from both the buyer and seller on each transaction, taking 30 percent of every resale. At previous World Cups, combined fees were closer to 10 percent.
FIFA defends the model as aligned with standard ticketing practices in North America. In public statements, the organization has said that revenues from both primary and secondary sales will be reinvested into global soccer development. It has set a $13 billion revenue target for the 2023 to 2026 cycle, up from $7.6 billion during the four years leading to Qatar.
Some economists have argued that the approach, while unpopular, is economically sound.
In a commentary published by the Cato Institute, Ryan Bourne and Nathan Miller described dynamic pricing as a practical way to allocate limited seats in a complex, high-demand global tournament. “FIFA deserves a lot of criticism,” they wrote, “but its pricing proposal at least acknowledges the real-world trade-offs that this complex event must navigate.”
They noted that by allowing prices to move with demand, FIFA ensures that tickets go to those most willing to pay. The system can also work in the fans’ favor when interest is low. They cited the example of tickets at the Club World Cup in New Jersey dropping from $474 to $13 in the final hours before kickoff. According to the Cato economists, dynamic pricing is not about targeting individual fans, but responding to market-wide interest.
“Empty stands don’t look good, and electric audiences drive food, drink, and merch sales,” they wrote.
They also acknowledged the downsides of the pricing system. Prices for similar seats can vary widely depending on when a ticket is purchased. “Some fans could purchase tickets at vastly different prices to other fans for similar seats,” the economists wrote. For supporters with limited means, that unpredictability could make access less equal.
Democratic New York State Assemblyman and mayoral hopeful Zohran Mamdani has become one of the most vocal political critics of FIFA’s strategy. He launched a campaign titled “Game Over Greed,” calling on FIFA to end dynamic pricing, reinstate resale caps and reserve 15 percent of tickets for local residents at discounted prices.
“The biggest sporting event in the world is happening in our backyard,” Mamdani said, “but most New Yorkers will be priced out of watching it live.”
As pressure builds, FIFA has shown no signs of altering course.
“We’re looking at optimizing revenue, but also optimizing attendance,” Schirgi told ESPN. “It’s always a balance between different factors.”