#4 — The Asian hole: the market that refused to pay
Here's the part few people tell — and it shows that not everything is a record. China, the biggest potential soccer market in the world, offered about $50 million for broadcast rights. FIFA expected more than $300 million.
Why? Time zones. Since the World Cup is in North America, most games air after midnight in China, which destroys the advertising market that would justify paying a premium. India and Southeast Asia face the same problem. It's the World Cup's biggest commercial weak spot — a fortune FIFA simply won't collect.
Three to go. And #1 is the biggest source of all.
#3 — The sponsorships: about $1.8 to 2.8 billion
The third-biggest source. The 2026 World Cup sponsorships should bring in between $1.8 and $2.8 billion (estimates vary) — a record for a sporting event, up about 37% from Qatar.
The novelty is the new global partners: Saudi oil company Aramco, China's Lenovo, plus Verizon, Bank of America, and Unilever. Curiously, several Chinese companies are among the biggest investors — even with the broadcast problem in China. For them, the World Cup isn't a media buy; it's global brand-building, with returns measured in years.
#2 — The bill left to the cities and the taxpayers
Before #1, the uncomfortable question: who foots the bill? FIFA captures most of the central revenue — but the costs of security, transportation, preparation, and public services fall, in large part, on the host cities and governments.
In Canada, the public cost of hosting is estimated at more than 1 billion Canadian dollars. In the U.S., an investigation found that "almost all" organizing costs fall on the cities. Economists warn: the economic impact of mega-events is usually overestimated, because ordinary tourists avoid crowded cities and governments divert funds from other priorities. FIFA's profit is guaranteed; the cities' is not.
And now #1 — the source that alone is worth nearly half of everything.