Uli Hoeneß called the 2026 World Cup a “fiasco for football” because of ticket prices
Uli Hoeneß, honorary president of Bayern Munich and one of the most influential figures in German football in recent decades, has once again sharply criticized FIFA over ticket prices for the 2026 World Cup. In an interview with Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, according to a dpa agency report published by Welt, Hoeneß described the tournament in the United States, Canada and Mexico as a possible “fiasco for football”. His criticism primarily concerns the level of ticket prices, especially for the final, for which he cited the example of around 2,000 US dollars for a mid-category seat. “Two thousand dollars for a final ticket of medium quality, where does that lead?”, Hoeneß said in a conversation that caused a strong reaction in the German and international football public.
Hoeneß did not appear as an opponent of the commercial development of football in principle. On the contrary, the long-serving Bayern official emphasized that he had always supported commercialization, but that the current model, in his opinion, had gone in an extremely unacceptable direction. “I have always been in favour of commercialization in football, but not in such an extreme form. I do not want to support this further by buying tickets,” Hoeneß said, according to the dpa report. In doing so, he directed his criticism at the broader question of the accessibility of major sporting events, and not only at the individual price of the final. His message fits into a debate that has been going on for months: can the World Cup, as a global event presented as a celebration of football, remain accessible to fans if the most attractive matches increasingly take on the characteristics of a luxury product.
Criticism from Germany, but the issue is global
Hoeneß is known in German football for his direct public statements, but this time his comment goes beyond the usual debates about clubs, national teams or sporting results. The honorary president of Bayern is speaking about an event that is being held from 11 June to 19 July 2026 in 16 cities across three host countries. According to FIFA’s official information, it is the largest World Cup in history, with 48 national teams and 104 matches. Such a format brings a significantly greater sporting, logistical and commercial scope than previous editions, but also greater pressure on fans who want to travel between distant cities, buy tickets and pay for accommodation during nearly six weeks of competition.
That is precisely why Hoeneß’s criticism cannot be viewed only as a German topic. It strikes at the fundamental question of the relationship between global football and its fans: who can actually afford to attend the most important matches. According to data and reports published in recent months by international media, the price range for the 2026 World Cup is significantly wider than at previous tournaments, with prices for the final and high-demand matches particularly high. The Guardian reported in April that the highest ticket price for the final had reached 10,990 dollars in one sales phase, while even lower categories for the closing match had become significantly more expensive compared with previous sales waves. At the same time, FIFA emphasized in its public communications that revenue from the tournament supports football development and programmes around the world.
For fans from outside North America, the problem is not only the nominal ticket price. The costs of travel, visas where required, accommodation, local transport and food can multiply the total amount needed to attend a match. For that reason, the discussion about tickets has turned into a broader debate about the accessibility of the World Cup as a public sporting event. When high prices become the main topic alongside the action on the pitch, the tournament risks being perceived by part of the audience more as a commercial spectacle than as a shared football experience. Hoeneß formulated his strongest message precisely in that direction, warning that football must not become an event only for those with very high incomes.
He is not travelling to the tournament despite being offered accommodation
Hoeneß, according to the dpa report, said he had the opportunity to stay free of charge during the tournament at the house of an acquaintance in Florida, but that he nevertheless decided not to travel to the World Cup. “I had no desire at all to travel to this World Cup,” he stated, adding that the desire would have disappeared when he heard where the house was located. According to him, the proposed location was only a few minutes from the Mar-a-Lago estate, which is associated with US President Donald Trump. That detail attracted additional media attention, but Hoeneß’s main argument remained tied to ticket prices and the direction in which, in his opinion, FIFA’s model is heading.
This is not Hoeneß’s first public statement on the same issue. Even before the tournament, according to reports by dpa and German media, he said that ticket prices made him “terribly angry” and announced that he would not travel to the championship. In those earlier statements, he also criticized examples from the resale market, where some tickets were being offered for exceptionally high amounts. His earlier message was that the World Cup final should not become an event similar to the Super Bowl, where the prices of the most sought-after seats are often beyond the reach of average fans. Now, while the tournament is being held, Hoeneß has gone one step further and described the entire championship as a symbol of the problematic development of modern football.
His position is especially interesting because it comes from a person who spent decades taking part in the professionalization and commercial growth of European club football. Under Hoeneß’s leadership and influence, Bayern became one of the most financially stable and marketable clubs in the world. For that reason, his criticism does not have the tone of a nostalgic rejection of business logic in sport, but rather of a warning that even commercial football has a boundary beyond which it loses its connection with the public. In that sense, Hoeneß does not dispute the need for revenue, sponsors and a global market, but claims that the price level for the 2026 World Cup has crossed the measure he considers acceptable.
FIFA defends the large format and revenue model
FIFA presents the 2026 World Cup as the historically largest edition of the tournament. According to FIFA’s official schedule, the first match was played on 11 June 2026 in Mexico, while the final is scheduled for 19 July in the New York and New Jersey area. The expansion from 32 to 48 national teams brought a larger number of matches, a larger number of participants and greater global representation, which FIFA regularly cites as one of the main arguments in favour of the new format. A broader tournament enables more national teams from different confederations to participate, but at the same time increases the burden on infrastructure, sales channels and fan budgets.
Ticket prices have become the most sensitive part of that model. The Guardian reported that FIFA is applying a model for this edition in which prices can be adjusted to demand, and such an approach has drawn criticism from fan groups and some political actors. According to the same report, FIFA takes a fee of 15 percent from buyers and 15 percent from sellers on the official resale market. FIFA, on the other hand, has emphasized that revenue from the tournament is important for financing football programmes, including development activities in national associations. Such an explanation does not reduce the fact that fans are facing high and variable amounts, especially for matches with the greatest demand.
After earlier criticism, FIFA announced in December 2025 the introduction of a “Supporter Entry Tier” category with tickets priced at 60 dollars for all 104 matches, including the final. According to FIFA’s announcement, that category is intended for fans of national teams that qualified for the tournament, with distribution and criteria handled by individual national associations. Although that move was presented as a measure for greater accessibility, critics warn that the limited number of such tickets does not change the overall picture of the market, especially when most of the audience seeks tickets in general sales phases or on the resale market. In practice, the availability of cheaper tickets depends on the rules of national associations, luck in the allocation and the timing of purchase.
Fan organizations and pressure for transparency
The issue of ticket prices has not remained only within the domain of media commentary and statements by well-known football figures. According to reports by specialized football media, the organizations Football Supporters Europe and Euroconsumers filed a complaint with the European Commission over FIFA’s ticket sales policy for the 2026 World Cup. The complaint raises concerns about high prices, purchase conditions and the fact that FIFA has central control over the official ticket sales for the tournament. Such a move shows that the debate about prices is increasingly moving from sports commentary into the area of consumer rights, market competition and fan protection.
International media have in recent months also recorded additional problems related to demand, resale and ticket availability. Reuters, according to a report carried by The Star, warned already at the start of the tournament about empty seats at some matches, which reopened the question of whether ticket prices and allocation are aligned with real demand. Such cases are particularly sensitive for FIFA because the World Cup depends on the television image of full stadiums and the atmosphere created by fans. If high prices simultaneously fill the budget but leave gaps in the stands, then commercial success can collide with the sporting and symbolic goals of the tournament.
Hoeneß’s statement therefore resonates at a moment when three debates around the 2026 World Cup overlap. The first is sporting and concerns the expanded format, the quality of matches and the workload on players. The second is logistical, because the tournament is being held in three large countries with great distances between host cities. The third is social and financial, and it is precisely this one that stands at the centre of Hoeneß’s criticism: how far organizers can go in monetizing demand before some fans conclude that they are no longer a desired audience. In that debate, the final-ticket price of around 2,000 dollars, which Hoeneß cited as an example, becomes a symbol of a much broader problem.
Football between the market and accessibility
For decades, the World Cup has been an event that brought together local fans, travelling groups and a huge television audience. A change in the economic model does not mean that interest in the tournament is disappearing, but it does change the structure of the audience that can be physically present in stadiums. If the most important matches turn into a product reserved for business guests, high-spending tourists and corporate packages, then the atmosphere around the event itself also changes. In his criticism, Hoeneß called exactly that the key problem: football can be profitable, but it must not lose its connection with the fans who have sustained it for decades as a global phenomenon.
FIFA faces a complex balance. On the one hand, it wants to generate record revenue, justify the expansion of the tournament and finance projects in 211 national associations. On the other hand, it must preserve the credibility of the claim that the World Cup is an event for the entire football world, and not only for the strongest market segments of the audience. In such a context, Hoeneß’s criticism is not an isolated protest by one football veteran, but part of broader pressure on organizers to explain how they define a fair price, accessibility and fan experience. The debate will probably not end with the conclusion of the tournament itself, because the experience from 2026 will serve as an important precedent for future major competitions.
For now, it is clear that Hoeneß has decided to send a message by personal example. According to his words, he does not want to participate by buying tickets in a system he considers excessive and distant from ordinary fans. Even when he had the possibility of free accommodation, he declined the trip because, as he said, he had lost interest in the championship. That contains the strength of his statement: the criticism does not come from a fan who cannot afford the trip, but from a man who could be present, yet does not want to support a model he considers wrong. In doing so, he has further directed the debate about the 2026 World Cup toward a question that will follow FIFA even after the final: can the most popular sport in the world remain truly global if its biggest events become increasingly expensive for the audience to which they formally belong.
Sources:
- Welt / dpa – report on Uli Hoeneß’s interview with Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and his statements about the 2026 World Cup. (link)
- FIFA – official overview of the 2026 World Cup, including the format, national teams, host cities and tournament dates. (link)
- FIFA – official match schedule for the 2026 World Cup and confirmation of the 104-match tournament. (link)
- FIFA – announcement about the Supporter Entry Tier category and 60-US-dollar tickets for fans of qualified national teams. (link)
- The Guardian – report on ticket prices for the final, the price-adjustment model and fees on the official resale market. (link)
- Inside World Football – report on the complaint filed by Football Supporters Europe and Euroconsumers with the European Commission over ticket prices and sales conditions. (link)
- The Star / Reuters – report on empty seats at a match in Guadalajara and renewed questions about ticket prices at the start of the tournament. (link)