FIFA misses China, India deals

The World Cup is supposed to be the easiest sports product in the world to sell. But with the 2026 tournament starting on June 11, FIFA still has not locked in broadcast deals for China or India — two of the biggest audience markets on earth. That is the actual news here. Not a vague “talks continue” story, but a real commercial gap, late in the cycle, around the biggest event in football. ### Why is this such a big problem? Because these are not side markets. China and India together account for nearly 3 billion people, and China in particular was massive for the last men’s World Cup on digital platforms. FIFA has said China generated 49.8% of all viewing hours on digital and social platforms during the 2022 tournament. If that audience is disrupted, the damage is not just local — it hits global reach, sponsor value, and the whole “worldwide event” pitch. (nytimes.com) ### What is stuck in India? Money, basically. Reuters reported that the Reliance-Disney joint venture offered about $20 million for the 2026 rights in India, far below what FIFA wanted. Other reports say FIFA had initially aimed closer to $100 million, then moved lower, but the gap still held. Sony also discussed the package and chose not to bid. So this is not just one reluctant buyer — it looks more like the market pushing back on FIFA’s price. (business-standard.com) ### Why would India push back that hard? The awkward truth is that football is popular in India, but it is not cricket, and this tournament lands in a bad time zone for a lot of live viewing. Advertisers care about that. Broadcasters care even more. A rights fee only makes sense if they can recover it through ads, subscriptions, or both. If the audience is passionate but not huge enough at those hours, the math gets ugly fast. That seems to be what FIFA ran into. (sports.yahoo.com) ### What about China? China is a different kind of problem. There is still no announced deal, and FIFA has only said discussions are ongoing and confidential. In past cycles, state broadcaster CCTV was central to major football rights in China, so the silence this close to kickoff stands out. The issue may be commercial, political, or both — but the important point is that there is no public resolution yet. (nytimes.com) ### Didn’t FIFA already sell Asia? Yes — in a lot of places. FIFA announced deals in Japan, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Singapore, and the Philippines in March. It also launched a formal tender for the Indian subcontinent back in July 2025. So this is not a case of FIFA ignoring the region. It is a case of FIFA getting many deals done, but missing two of the biggest ones. That makes the gap look more glaring, not less. (aljazeera.com) ### Why does the U.S. angle matter? Because FIFA has marketed this as a huge North American spectacle — 48 teams, 104 matches, three host countries, and heavy U.S. commercial energy. But the World Cup only works at full scale if broadcasters in Asia, the Middle East, Europe, Africa, and Latin America all buy into the package. A tournament can be physically hosted in the United States and still depend financially on viewers waking up in Shanghai or staying up late in Mumbai. (inside.fifa.com) ### Is this unusual? Pretty unusual, yes. FIFA says it has already concluded agreements in more than 175 territories. That is what makes China and India so conspicuous. When almost the whole board is filled in and two giant squares are blank, those blanks start to tell you something about pricing power — and about how much leverage broadcasters think they have this time. (fifa.com) ### Bottom line? This is less about football demand than about who gets to name the price. FIFA wants the 2026 World Cup to feel bigger than ever. But right now, two enormous markets are testing whether “biggest ever” also means “too expensive.” (nytimes.com) (cybernews.com)