For years, cities around the world have aggressively competed for the right to host major sporting events based on a familiar promise: economic transformation.
The logic seems simple. Host a global event, attract millions of visitors, fill hotels and restaurants, generate tax revenue and showcase the region to the world. Politicians celebrate the projected impact long before the first ticket is scanned.
This is certainly part of the narrative surrounding the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which will host matches in the New York metropolitan area next month, including the tournament final at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey.
But an interesting aspect begins to emerge.
Some early indicators for New York’s hotel industry appear weaker than expected.
This does not mean that the World Cup will fail economically. It will continue to attract huge crowds, global attention and significant spending. But this raises a larger and increasingly important question:
Do mega-events systematically generate the economic benefits promised to the public?
Or do projections often exceed reality?
These questions are important because public agencies and taxpayers often bear enormous logistical and financial responsibilities related to these events. Transportation systems are extensive. Security operations are intensifying. The costs of policing, sanitation, emergency management and infrastructure are increasing dramatically. Public officials justify much of this spending by citing the expected tourism boom and long-term economic benefits.
But the economics of modern mega-events are often more complicated than the headlines suggest.
One possible explanation for hotels’ more moderate expectations is the pricing itself.
Traveling to the World Cup is becoming extremely expensive. Between plane tickets, event tickets, restaurant, transportation and lodging costs, many fans are already facing eye-popping totals before they even arrive. Some may choose shorter stays. Others may attend just one game rather than planning an extended vacation around the tournament.
And some might simply decide not to come at all.
There is also the question of geographic dispersion.
This is not a traditional World Cup between a single country and concentrated in a handful of closely linked cities. The 2026 tournament will take place in the United States, Canada and Mexico across 104 matches. Fans can move frequently between regions rather than staying in one place for long periods of time. Others attending games at MetLife Stadium can stay outside Manhattan entirely, including in New Jersey or suburban markets where hotel prices are lower.
Alternative accommodation platforms can also reshape traditional hotel demand. Major sporting events are increasingly pushing travelers toward short-term rentals, group accommodations and other non-traditional options that reduce pressure on conventional hotel stock.
There is another factor that cities rarely like to discuss publicly: displacement.
Major events don’t just attract tourists. They can also discourage repeat visitors.
Some business travelers are postponing their trips to avoid crowds and inflated prices. Some families are delaying vacations because hotel rates go up during big events. Local residents sometimes avoid entertainment districts altogether during major tournaments because transportation and traffic become difficult.
In other words, the World Cup could create new tourism while eliminating some existing tourism.
This dynamic is rarely clearly reflected in early economic projections.
History offers many edifying examples. The Olympics, Super Bowl, and other international sporting events have often featured headlines predicting transformational economic benefits that later turned out to be overestimated or unevenly distributed. Some industries and neighborhoods may benefit significantly while others will experience little significant impact.
This isn’t to say that hosting major events doesn’t have value.
There is a real prestige attached to being at the center of a global cultural moment. International visibility matters. Companies in the hospitality, entertainment and transportation sectors could see significant gains. Some infrastructure improvements can create lasting public benefits.
But prestige and economic reality are not always the same.
This distinction becomes particularly important when governments and public agencies commit substantial resources based on assumptions of considerable financial potential.
The public deserves honest conversations about the opportunities and limitations associated with events of this magnitude.
Will restaurants and hotels benefit? Many certainly will.
Will the region benefit from extraordinary international visibility? Absolutely.
Will every economic projection come true exactly as promised? History urges caution.
The problem is not enthusiasm for the World Cup itself. Football remains one of the few truly global shared experiences, capable of bringing together people from different countries, languages and cultures. Next summer will create memorable moments for millions of fans.
But major sporting events are increasingly located at the intersection of sports, politics, commerce, real estate, tourism and public finances. This means that cities should evaluate them with clear eyes rather than pure optimism.
If New York’s hotel numbers are lower than expected at this point, that doesn’t necessarily mean failure. This may simply reflect a more complicated economic reality than the public often believes when these tournaments are announced.
And perhaps that is the real lesson.
Mega-events are rarely as economically simple as promotional brochures suggest.
Michael J. Epsteingraduate of Harvard Law School, is a trial lawyer and managing partner of The Epstein Law Firm, Pennsylvania, a law firm based in New Jersey.
