FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread

[sana54210]

The amount of money that is earned by everyone via World Cup is crazy. The hosts make money, Fifa makes a lot of money, the hotels around it makes money, the events around it make money, the shops around it makes money, players make more money due to endorsements as well, hell even clubs make more money because their players worth more if they play well, and even go as far as say that national teams that are not the host make money by selling their jersey as well, that merch income is not something small.

So, overall if we look at every single cent earned thanks to world cup, it is a 11 maybe 12 digit amount, I bet 30-40 billion at least when you calculate it all, and that's not easy to do that is a huge amount of money we are talking about, unheard of in anything else in the world.

Fifa only cares about the money they make though, the rest of it doesn't really matter to them. The tickets will be sold even before the world cup starts, I do not remember a single game, and I mean even if it's two of the worst teams in the world cup, there is not a single game where people buy tickets easily.

There are a lot of people who end up with tickets waaay before world cup starts, and a lot of games tickets are sold out months ahead, you think the final game will be bought right at the gate? We all know that will be already there even before the cup starts. So all in all ticket sales and TV rights and all that goes to Fifa and as long as that's profitable, they will be willing to do it in any nation all around the world, don't care about nothing but the money.

[freedomgo]

All of you need to remember one thing. World Cup matches are never played in empty stadiums. The demand for tickets are 10 times or 20 times the actual supply. During the 2022 World Cup, Qataris reserved a large fraction of tickets to themselves and made massive profits by selling these tickets to fans at exorbitant prices. So the argument that fans from the host nation may not watch the tournament in case their team is not there doesn't stand. If they don't watch, then fans from other countries will be ready to purchase the tickets. IMO, host nations should not be provided with automatic qualification. They need to qualify through the qualifier tournaments, just like the other teams.

Because this is a big tournament, there is never a doubt that there will be not fewer fans and that is also one of the reasons for FIFA to increase the number of participants because it means more money will be circulating throughout the World Cup. Conditions like any of the hosts will not reduce the interest of spectators to come directly to the stadium and watch the match even though there is a possibility that the match will be boring.
If regulations appear, the host country will not automatically become a participant because they still pass the qualifications. There may be less interest from the country that organizes it, because apart from economic reasons, one of the reasons why countries are interested in becoming an organizer is because they get the privilege of their national team automatically playing, and the rules of the organizing country automatically playing out like a lucrative deal for FIFA and that country.

The amount of money that is earned by everyone via World Cup is crazy. The hosts make money, Fifa makes a lot of money, the hotels around it makes money, the events around it make money, the shops around it makes money, players make more money due to endorsements as well, hell even clubs make more money because their players worth more if they play well, and even go as far as say that national teams that are not the host make money by selling their jersey as well, that merch income is not something small.

So, overall if we look at every single cent earned thanks to world cup, it is a 11 maybe 12 digit amount, I bet 30-40 billion at least when you calculate it all, and that's not easy to do that is a huge amount of money we are talking about, unheard of in anything else in the world.

In fact, the country hosting the world cup will earn more money than others because the hotels and markets in that country will get more demand they can get more tax during this time also regardless of the money they can earn during this time they can have the chance to introduce their country to the world which can have more benefits for them.

And in that particular time, it's already expected that the nearby hotels, Apartelles, or even condominiums will ask more than their regular price on their regular dates because in this kind of event, people are ready to spend twice as much as long as they can have a cozy and warm place to stay before and after every games, so it won't be a surprise anymore if these businesses/establishments will take advantage of the event because it's not every year where their country will host the FIFA World Cup.

[shogun47]

I believe it has been a tradition since the initial world cup to have the host qualify automatically.

I mean, can you imagine hosting an event in which you're not even participating?, doesn't seem too fair to be honest. The hosts need to put a lot of money and effort to make it happen, at a minimum they should qualify.

Your logic works when one or two countries are hosting the world cup. But it doesn't work when a large group of countries are co-hosting this tournament. And in 2030 it is going to be even worse. There is a combined bid from Uruguay–Argentina–Chile–Paraguay. If they succeed, then there will be 4 co-hosts and each one will qualify for the tournament automatically. And for all the other teams from CONMEBOL (including Brazil), only 2 spots will be made available for the 2030 World Cup. Do you really believe that this is fair?

I think there are a lot of considerations that had to be made that are not that obvious for us as outsiders to the topics of security, infrastructure, financial abilities and so on and so forth. I don't think that there hasn't been put a lot of thought into this decision. But I do get your point that this auto-qualification is a problem for some people, not for me though.

See, do you think that the host always has an advantage over all other participants? The biggest disadvantage is that the hosts don't have a lot of serious games with their national teams before the tournament actually starts. The qualification is still a good opportunity to find the right team for the right time. I am ok with the three nations already being qualified.

The bad thing about the 2026 world cup and even previous world cups is getting auto qualification when they host the world cup. I mean when they host the world cup they get some advantages, for example, they will have more visitors for their country and it helps the country financially while getting an auto qualification is not necessary and they should get qualified like other teams.

I see that differently for sure. Imagine the hosting countries would fail to qualify for such an event. Do you think that there is a chance that the mood and the atmosphere could be as spectacular when the hosting countries are not even participating? That wouldn't be good and I think the hosting countries should always be auto qualified and at least be able to participate during the group stage. They are putting so much work into organizing that event and if they were than just sit on the sidelines and not play, it would only hurt the event in general.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Alcohol or no alcohol it will not affect the next  world cup games in any way. The main thing we should be looking up to in the next World cup should be good security , making sure fans should be given the best welcome all through as the game last. I know the host in the next one will give the best to visitors.

in our culture - it is said that the root cause of all the evil is Alcohol.
Banning it helped people helped them enjoy in real time and women and families felt secure as well.

I think that things are better without alcohol, alcohol sometimes makes people lose control, sometimes freedoms can turn into tragedies if they are Abused, because this becomes Licentiousness and that is not good, always that there is alcohol associated with it, sometimes they can kill and they don't remember what they did, and then if so, how is it left after a misfortune occurs?I think that the healthiest thing here is that in the next World Cup there will be no alcoholic beverages,but it is difficult to Control,and if they have those Freedoms,then more problems can be generated.

[Gosgosking]

Alcohol or no alcohol it will not affect the next  world cup games in any way. The main thing we should be looking up to in the next World cup should be good security , making sure fans should be given the best welcome all through as the game last. I know the host in the next one will give the best to visitors.

in our culture - it is said that the root cause of all the evil is Alcohol.
Banning it helped people helped them enjoy in real time and women and families felt secure as well.

I think that things are better without alcohol, alcohol sometimes makes people lose control, sometimes freedoms can turn into tragedies if they are Abused, because this becomes Licentiousness and that is not good, always that there is alcohol associated with it, sometimes they can kill and they don't remember what they did, and then if so, how is it left after a misfortune occurs?I think that the healthiest thing here is that in the next World Cup there will be no alcoholic beverages,but it is difficult to Control,and if they have those Freedoms,then more problems can be generated.

It would have been easy for the host if already alcohol is illegal in  the country but since alcohol is taken by the people in the country it won't be easy for it to be regulated all of a sudden because of the world cup games. If it can be regulated,  well it will help people to do things to do things in the right way during the tournament.

[nullama]

~snip~
I think that things are better without alcohol, alcohol sometimes makes people lose control, sometimes freedoms can turn into tragedies if they are Abused, because this becomes Licentiousness and that is not good, always that there is alcohol associated with it, sometimes they can kill and they don't remember what they did, and then if so, how is it left after a misfortune occurs?I think that the healthiest thing here is that in the next World Cup there will be no alcoholic beverages,but it is difficult to Control,and if they have those Freedoms,then more problems can be generated.

The main countries of the world cup are from Europe and South America.

Those countries usually have alcohol as part of their culture. Therefore, I don't think the world cup will remove alcohol any time soon.

Plus, they have sponsors from alcoholic companies, so there's almost no chance of having a world cup free of alcohol.

[Leviathan.007]

I see that differently for sure. Imagine the hosting countries would fail to qualify for such an event. Do you think that there is a chance that the mood and the atmosphere could be as spectacular when the hosting countries are not even participating? That wouldn't be good and I think the hosting countries should always be auto qualified and at least be able to participate during the group stage. They are putting so much work into organizing that event and if they were than just sit on the sidelines and not play, it would only hurt the event in general.

Doesn't really matter if they have a good mood and atmosphere in their team or not, at the end when they host the world cup they will have many benefits and I think even because of these benefits they can get there will be a good atmosphere for them, just imagine how much money they can earn in this country, obviously they are happy to host the world cup even if their team is not participating.

[tusandii]

I think that the healthiest thing here is that in the next World Cup there will be no alcoholic beverages,but it is difficult to Control,and if they have those Freedoms,then more problems can be generated.

Alcoholic drinks cannot be avoided at a football match, friend, because some alcoholic beverage products become one of the sponsors at a sporting event so that there will be many fans who watch sports matches with these drinks.
Moreover, if the country where the World Cup is held does not prohibit the free consumption of alcohol, it is not surprising that there are fans who drink alcohol.
Indeed, crimes can occur due to the influence of alcoholic beverages, but usually in a sports match, spectators are given a limit on how much alcohol they can bring.
But the idea that in the next World Cup there will be no alcohol in the stadium while watching the games is a pretty good idea.

[shogun47]

I see that differently for sure. Imagine the hosting countries would fail to qualify for such an event. Do you think that there is a chance that the mood and the atmosphere could be as spectacular when the hosting countries are not even participating? That wouldn't be good and I think the hosting countries should always be auto qualified and at least be able to participate during the group stage. They are putting so much work into organizing that event and if they were than just sit on the sidelines and not play, it would only hurt the event in general.

Doesn't really matter if they have a good mood and atmosphere in their team or not, at the end when they host the world cup they will have many benefits and I think even because of these benefits they can get there will be a good atmosphere for them, just imagine how much money they can earn in this country, obviously they are happy to host the world cup even if their team is not participating.

You can't be serious about that. I can't see any advantage of your suggestion whatsoever. You will always want the hosting nation to be on board, to allow the people exactly feeling that comes with participating. You want them to have some emotional skin in the game as well. I doubt that a Mexican guy thinks about the money that some private companies can earn by building infrastructure and what not. Do you really think that the financial effects of hosting a World Cup tickle down to the poorest of the poorest? Not really... But the poorest of the poorest still often like to cheer for their country in a competition. Sports is sometimes all they have and what they afford to appreciate. I am all for the hosting nations being auto qualified and I am not saying this because I like to see the big soccer nations being auto-qualified. I don't care about those. I care about poorer nations getting the one chance in a lifetime to be part of an event where their own nation is competing with the big ones.

Take the US as an example, do you believe that there would be the same euphoria in the country when the national team would not participate? Quite an interesting point of view.

[Daniel91]

I see that differently for sure. Imagine the hosting countries would fail to qualify for such an event. Do you think that there is a chance that the mood and the atmosphere could be as spectacular when the hosting countries are not even participating? That wouldn't be good and I think the hosting countries should always be auto qualified and at least be able to participate during the group stage. They are putting so much work into organizing that event and if they were than just sit on the sidelines and not play, it would only hurt the event in general.

Doesn't really matter if they have a good mood and atmosphere in their team or not, at the end when they host the world cup they will have many benefits and I think even because of these benefits they can get there will be a good atmosphere for them, just imagine how much money they can earn in this country, obviously they are happy to host the world cup even if their team is not participating.

Of course, earnings from competitions and international promotion of the country are very important, but the sports aspect of the story is also very important for every country.
FIFA understands this very well, and ever since the first world football championship, held in Uruguay in 1930, the hosts of the competition have always had the automatic right to participate.
If that rule were to change, the interest and enthusiasm of domestic fans and the public for the World Cup would certainly decrease, and nobody wants that.
It is not only important to earn money, it is also important to participate and be part of the whole story.

[Tumanggor]

I see that differently for sure. Imagine the hosting countries would fail to qualify for such an event. Do you think that there is a chance that the mood and the atmosphere could be as spectacular when the hosting countries are not even participating? That wouldn't be good and I think the hosting countries should always be auto qualified and at least be able to participate during the group stage. They are putting so much work into organizing that event and if they were than just sit on the sidelines and not play, it would only hurt the event in general.

Doesn't really matter if they have a good mood and atmosphere in their team or not, at the end when they host the world cup they will have many benefits and I think even because of these benefits they can get there will be a good atmosphere for them, just imagine how much money they can earn in this country, obviously they are happy to host the world cup even if their team is not participating.

Being the host country for the World Cup gives its own privileges to the hosts because they (countries) can participate in the qualifying round without any burden (Canada, Mexico and USA must have secured a place in the qualifying round)

so that's why many countries are scrambling to try to register their country to be the host especially countries that are self-aware that the quality of their football is still low LOL

[og kush420]

nailed it - obviously America and Canada are the great countries. But Qatar was no less than them. They have progressed in all phases of life and they have not kept anything for themselves. They even donated the temporary residential spaces to turkey after the earth quack

We know in America they have a much better situation to host the world cup than Qatar and the reason is they have a better weather situation and better stadiums, in Qatar they had to spend money to build stadiums and hotels while in America they don't need to spend this money. Also because of the weather situation in Qatar, they had to use many cooling devices for even the stadiums while in America they have a much better situation to host the world cup.

One of the most beautiful thing in the next World cup is the weather,  the friendly weather will play role in the performance of players . The next world cup will really go smoothly because already everything have been set longtime ago,  and will be one of the best world cup tournaments.

Well it is true that the American weather is good and the site of the place where the world cup would take place will be quite better with no big restrictions like what happened during the last world cup that people where restricted from drinking beer and other beverages because it was against there law.
Making two countries to host the world cup is a bit very rare to me because I don't think this had been happening before. What I know is that it's only one country that normally host the world cup. Now it would involve two countries.

They are practicing different things earlier they allowed a muslim country to be the host and now they have given the opportunity to two countries.

[babygun]

~snip~
I think that things are better without alcohol, alcohol sometimes makes people lose control, sometimes freedoms can turn into tragedies if they are Abused, because this becomes Licentiousness and that is not good, always that there is alcohol associated with it, sometimes they can kill and they don't remember what they did, and then if so, how is it left after a misfortune occurs?I think that the healthiest thing here is that in the next World Cup there will be no alcoholic beverages,but it is difficult to Control,and if they have those Freedoms,then more problems can be generated.

The main countries of the world cup are from Europe and South America.

Those countries usually have alcohol as part of their culture. Therefore, I don't think the world cup will remove alcohol any time soon.

Plus, they have sponsors from alcoholic companies, so there's almost no chance of having a world cup free of alcohol.

I don’t really get it that we are discussing this topic lol. Yes alcohol can be misused but you can’t ban it. Anheuser - Busch with Budweiser and Bud light is one of the main sponsors of Fifa and the USA is one of the biggest markets no absolutely 0% chance that there will be no alcohol on the next worldcup. As someone already mentioned before, the Fifa only cares about money.

[Leviathan.007]

~~
Being the host country for the World Cup gives its own privileges to the hosts because they (countries) can participate in the qualifying round without any burden (Canada, Mexico and USA must have secured a place in the qualifying round)

so that's why many countries are scrambling to try to register their country to be the host especially countries that are self-aware that the quality of their football is still low LOL

Being a host will give them the chance to be in the world cup playing against the teams but in fact when the team is not ready for the world cup and they are not really qualified normally they will just lose all the games and leave the World cup fast, just like what happened to Qatar and it doesn't matter how much money they spend for the world cup.

[slapper]

The amount of money that is earned by everyone via World Cup is crazy. The hosts make money, Fifa makes a lot of money, the hotels around it makes money, the events around it make money, the shops around it makes money, players make more money due to endorsements as well, hell even clubs make more money because their players worth more if they play well, and even go as far as say that national teams that are not the host make money by selling their jersey as well, that merch income is not something small.

So, overall if we look at every single cent earned thanks to world cup, it is a 11 maybe 12 digit amount, I bet 30-40 billion at least when you calculate it all, and that's not easy to do that is a huge amount of money we are talking about, unheard of in anything else in the world.

Fifa only cares about the money they make though, the rest of it doesn't really matter to them. The tickets will be sold even before the world cup starts, I do not remember a single game, and I mean even if it's two of the worst teams in the world cup, there is not a single game where people buy tickets easily.

There are a lot of people who end up with tickets waaay before world cup starts, and a lot of games tickets are sold out months ahead, you think the final game will be bought right at the gate? We all know that will be already there even before the cup starts. So all in all ticket sales and TV rights and all that goes to Fifa and as long as that's profitable, they will be willing to do it in any nation all around the world, don't care about nothing but the money.

Money sings, and Fifa's all ears. But is it just to condemn them for seeking gain? They're a venture, and like every undertaking, they require riches to persevere. Bear in mind, the World Cup is colossal. The fiscal demands? Staggering. Erecting arenas, ensuring safety, hyping the event – it accumulates swiftly. Though Fifa may seem avaricious, ponder the intricate logistics of such a grand occasion. Yes, they profit, but it doesn't imply they disregard the sport or the devotees. Applaud the labor that births the World Cup. And if Fifa reaps rewards along the way? Who are we to judge?

[nullama]

~snip~
Being a host will give them the chance to be in the world cup playing against the teams but in fact when the team is not ready for the world cup and they are not really qualified normally they will just lose all the games and leave the World cup fast, just like what happened to Qatar and it doesn't matter how much money they spend for the world cup.

Absolutely.

That's what you get as a host, you get to start playing in the world cup.

After that, you're treated the same as the rest.

The thing is that historically the world cup has been hosted in countries that are good at the game, Qatar was an exception.

[n0ne]

~snip~
Being a host will give them the chance to be in the world cup playing against the teams but in fact when the team is not ready for the world cup and they are not really qualified normally they will just lose all the games and leave the World cup fast, just like what happened to Qatar and it doesn't matter how much money they spend for the world cup.

Absolutely.

That's what you get as a host, you get to start playing in the world cup.

After that, you're treated the same as the rest.

The thing is that historically the world cup has been hosted in countries that are good at the game, Qatar was an exception.

Qatar is an exception, that itself confirms that something have have happened behind the light. If the host is Brazil, Argentina, Italy, Spain or some other country where football is celebrated then it would serve as a disappointment when the host team exits earlier. For a country like Qatar leaving the world cup earlier isn't a big thing. What they looked is grab the attention and improve the economy.

[Die_empty]

Being a host will give them the chance to be in the world cup playing against the teams but in fact when the team is not ready for the world cup and they are not really qualified normally they will just lose all the games and leave the World cup fast, just like what happened to Qatar and it doesn't matter how much money they spend for the world cup.

Every host mustn't just focus on preparation on physical structures but they should also prepare a quality football team that will feature in the world cup. This is because the early exit of host nations usually has a negative effect on the competition. The stadium will start becoming empty immediately after the host nation is knocked out and it will look as if it was because they just wanted to qualify for the world cup that was why they hosted the competition. Qatar is not a well-known football nation and the team also failed to make an impact in the world cup which was for me not pleasing. Even nations like Saudi Arabia made their mark when they defeated Argentina.

It was clear that what the 2022 world cup host wanted was fame. They wanted to prove to the world that they could host the world cup and they also wanted to rebrand the Middle East making it look like an area that has become receptive to civilization and changes. Before this time people usually classify these Arabic nations as people that are glued to their religious beliefs. But the world cup proved that the middle east could make changes to their policies that will make football fans and investors comfortable. But I didn't see the last world cup as one of the best because it had many shortcomings that wouldn't have happened in another country.

[Sithara007]

~~~
It was clear that what the 2022 world cup host wanted was fame. They wanted to prove to the world that they could host the world cup and they also wanted to rebrand the Middle East making it look like an area that has become receptive to civilization and changes. Before this time people usually classify these Arabic nations as people that are glued to their religious beliefs. But the world cup proved that the middle east could make changes to their policies that will make football fans and investors comfortable. But I didn't see the last world cup as one of the best because it had many shortcomings that wouldn't have happened in another country.

If that was the case, then I am 100% sure that it didn't worked the way they intended. Even before the start of the tournament, many of the European teams were protesting against discrimination on unmarried couples and LGBTs. And some of the European teams even raised the issue of lack of compensation payments to the families of 6,000+ workers who died during the construction of world cup stadiums. And during the tournament, a lot of fans were unhappy about overpriced amenities and ban on alcohol. If Qatar wanted to showcase middle-east, then I would say that they completely failed in doing that.

[Juggy777]

~~~
It was clear that what the 2022 world cup host wanted was fame. They wanted to prove to the world that they could host the world cup and they also wanted to rebrand the Middle East making it look like an area that has become receptive to civilization and changes. Before this time people usually classify these Arabic nations as people that are glued to their religious beliefs. But the world cup proved that the middle east could make changes to their policies that will make football fans and investors comfortable. But I didn't see the last world cup as one of the best because it had many shortcomings that wouldn't have happened in another country.

If that was the case, then I am 100% sure that it didn't worked the way they intended. Even before the start of the tournament, many of the European teams were protesting against discrimination on unmarried couples and LGBTs. And some of the European teams even raised the issue of lack of compensation payments to the families of 6,000+ workers who died during the construction of world cup stadiums. And during the tournament, a lot of fans were unhappy about overpriced amenities and ban on alcohol. If Qatar wanted to showcase middle-east, then I would say that they completely failed in doing that.

@Sithara007 I totally agree with you and how can we forget that they refused to pay labourers their dues, so this World Cup just proved that they’ll never give up on their rigid beliefs. Furthermore it’s only in media that one will hear good things about the Qatar World Cup, but in reality I don’t think that they should be allowed to host another important tournament again.