![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/GettyImages-2280024823_81a3d9-e1781021441127.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
On Monday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Mayor Zohran Mamdani stood in Central Park to announce a free watch party for 50,000 New Yorkers in the park for the World Cup final. The State of New York is spending $6 million so that residents who cannot afford the most-watched sporting event on earth can at least watch it together on the Great Lawn. \u201cIn a moment where sports, experiences, and memories have grown increasingly unattainable for working people,\u201d Mamdani said, \u201cwe will make this viewing party 100% free.\u201d<\/p>\n
Standing nearby was FIFA president Gianni Infantino, who\u00a0last month\u00a0defended the exorbitant costs\u00a0of the world\u2019s most prestigious sporting event and blamed them<\/span> on \u201cmarket rates\u201d that apply in the U.S.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have to look at the market\u2014we are in the market in which entertainment is the most developed in the world, so we have to apply market rates,\u201d\u00a0Infantino said at the Milken conference.<\/p>\n His comments mirror what some economists have pointed to as driving the World Cup\u2019s pricing crisis, saying it\u2019s a market deliberately designed\u2014by FIFA, with full knowledge of the consequences\u2014to generate revenue at every stage of a fan\u2019s increasingly expensive journey to a seat. By offering the watch party to soccer fans who otherwise should be able to attend in person at a stadium just 20 minutes away, these economists say the governments of New York City and state are patching a hole that FIFA deliberately designed to enlarge.<\/p>\n Those market rates have produced numbers without precedent in World Cup history. Face-value tickets to the July 19 final at MetLife Stadium started at $2,030 and ran to $6,730 for Category 1 seats\u2014but under FIFA\u2019s dynamic pricing model, they didn\u2019t stay there. By early May, FIFA had tripled its best available final tickets to $32,970, up from a previous high of $10,990, on the same day members of Congress pressed the organization for transparency on its pricing. On FIFA\u2019s own resale exchange, final tickets were listed at about $9,000\u2014each transaction generating 30% in combined fees that flow back to FIFA. Four years ago in Qatar, the most expensive seat at the final cost roughly $1,600. Football Supporters Europe estimates that a fan following a single team from its opening match through the final would spend a minimum of $6,900 on tickets alone.<\/p>\n \u201cWe as customers and fans should look at those fees and be annoyed by them, the same way, potentially even more so, than we are annoyed by very high initial ticket prices,\u201d said Judd Kessler, a professor of business economics and public policy at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania\u00a0and author of the new book\u00a0Lucky by Design<\/em>, which looks at how market designs force a hidden market that benefits only a select few at the cost of the many. \u201cWhen you have limited supply and lots of demand, the market can generate very, very high prices for the tickets.\u201d<\/p>\n When a seller prices tickets below what the market would bear, the surplus doesn\u2019t disappear, but rather, moves into queues, bots, and resale platforms. Tickets end up costing the same or more. That means when Bruce Springsteen, for example, prices tickets at $60 and they get bought by bots and resold at $4,000, that money goes straight into the speculators\u2019 pockets.<\/p>\n \u201cYou kind of would prefer that the money go to the Boss, because you know he at least is performing at the show, as opposed to the speculators who buy the ticket and add nothing to the production,\u201d Kessler said.<\/p>\n For most of its history, FIFA ran a relatively conventional version of this system: face-value tickets, price caps on resale, fees of 10% or less. But this year, FIFA abandoned price caps for matches in the United States and Canada, defending the decision by claiming that restrictions would drive sellers to third-party platforms like StubHub. In their place, FIFA launched its own official resale marketplace\u2014and charged both buyers and sellers a 15% fee, effectively collecting $30 for every $100 in resale transactions on its platform.<\/p>\n \u201cMaybe they don\u2019t raise prices because they\u2019re worried about the backlash,\u201d Kessler told Fortune<\/em>, \u201cand being able to make 30% on the secondary market allows them to collect without as much backlash.\u201d The optics of a $700 ticket feel different from a $500 ticket plus a $200 fee collected at the back end. <\/p>\n Mexico, where ticket resale laws are stricter and the government lobbied for consumer protections, got a different deal: FIFA agreed to limit resale prices to face value for matches held there. But for American fans, there\u2019s a 30% fee and no cap.<\/p>\n In late May, the number of tickets available on FIFA\u2019s official portal suddenly dropped by 44,000 to under 30,000. The inventory then reappeared on StubHub and SeatGeek at prices well below FIFA\u2019s official site. Florian Ederer, a professor of economics at Boston University\u2019s Questrom School of Business, noticed the seat maps contained large, contiguous blocks of seats that had suddenly appeared on the secondary market. This, Ederer told Newsweek, <\/em>is a pattern inconsistent with ordinary fan or commercial scalper behavior, which typically produces scattered pairs and small clusters.<\/p>\n His theorized to the publication that FIFA was dumping inventory in bulk onto secondary markets at below-official prices, allowing it to clear unsold tickets while keeping official prices high, thereby avoiding the refund demands and consumer-protection liability that an official price cut would trigger. Both SeatGeek and StubHub denied any partnership or distribution agreement with FIFA. FIFA has not commented about this publicly, nor has it responded to Fortune\u2019<\/em>s <\/em>request for comment.<\/p>\n Victor Matheson, a professor of economics at the College of the Holy Cross, predicted exactly this. \u201cI wouldn\u2019t be surprised if FIFA tries to dump any of its excess inventory kind of secretly by disguising them as secondary ticket markets,\u201d he told Fortune<\/em>. \u201cJust because you see them on the secondary market does not mean that\u2019s actually the secondary market. Lots of venues place tickets they still have in their possession on those secondary markets.\u201d In many cases, he said, \u201cthose secondary markets literally are the team in the first place.\u201d<\/p>\n Kessler estimates platforms take between 25% and 35% of secondary market sales, split between buyer and seller fees. \u201cThat\u2019s also why I worry that one of the reasons we haven\u2019t seen innovation in hidden markets is because a lot of the players in these markets have an incentive to allow transactions on the secondary market, because they get to take a big cut of them.\u201d<\/p>\n FIFA\u2019s 30% fee puts it in the company of the platforms it once positioned itself against, but with the added caveat that it also controls the primary market. FIFA sets the rules of access and operates the official resale exchange. This phenomenon, which could control the box office and resale platforms, led the\u00a0New York and New Jersey attorneys general\u00a0to subpoena<\/span> FIFA in late May.<\/p>\n The attorneys general have framed the investigation around two tracks: the alleged seat-location misrepresentation, and whether FIFA\u2019s phased release schedule was designed to artificially inflate prices. \u201cThe high ticket prices actually didn\u2019t have anything to do with the legal exposure,\u201d said Matheson, who bought Category 1 tickets himself. \u201cIt\u2019s that they are charging a high price for something and delivering something else.\u201d Category 1 buyers were shown maps indicating premium seats near the 50-yard line. Those seats went to VIP packages. \u201cFIFA made themselves the least sympathetic defendant in fraud history. If they were selling $25 tickets and screwing you over, Letitia James is not going to bat for you.\u201d<\/p>\n Mamdani and Hochul, who spent the morning alongside Infantino when announcing the watch party, have continued to point out the discrepancy in those who are some teams\u2019 biggest fans and those who can afford to watch their teams play. Mamdani negotiated 1,000 affordable tickets from FIFA at $50 each, with free round-trip transportation, for New Yorkers who won a lottery. He announced a $6 million free watch party for 50,000 more and fan fests across all five boroughs.<\/p>\n What he did not say and could not say, at least while standing next to the FIFA president, is that the $6 million the state is spending to provide a free alternative is in effect a public subsidy for a pricing structure that FIFA designed to extract maximum revenue from a captive market.<\/p>\n For Kessler, the problem is structural: As long as secondary market platforms take 30% of transactions and primary sellers benefit from the opacity that gap creates, there is no incentive to fix the system. \u201cI would like to see a world where artists, sports teams, and FIFA could sell tickets to real fans for reasonable prices, and those tickets would not then be resold at slightly higher prices. But that requires changes to the hidden market.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n #FIFA #market #rates #explain #World #Cup #prices #Economists #market #rigged #design<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" On Monday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Mayor Zohran Mamdani stood in Central Park to announce a free watch party for 50,000 New Yorkers in the park for the… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6537,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3826,5323,817,5480,5924,33,166,3455,3400,614,1455,8968,2284,51],"class_list":["post-6536","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-finance-news","tag-cup","tag-design","tag-economists","tag-explain","tag-fifa","tag-market","tag-markets","tag-new-york","tag-new-york-city","tag-prices","tag-rates","tag-rigged","tag-tickets","tag-world"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6536","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6536"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6536\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/6537"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6536"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6536"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fintechpulse8.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6536"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}What is a hidden market<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n
What about secondary markets<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n
The real cost of fees<\/strong><\/h2>\n
A free lawn watch party<\/strong><\/h2>\n