Alan Rothenberg knows a thing or two about the World Cup. The former U.S. Soccer president was the man in charge when the tournament came to the United States in 1994, leading a resoundingly successful event that helped spark an increased interest in the sport domestically.
Prior to that, he was an NBA executive for both the Los Angeles Lakers and Clippers, and in ensuing years, Rothenberg launched Major League Soccer and chaired the 1999 Women’s World Cup. Rothenberg sat down for an in-depth conversation about the difference in the 2026 World Cup compared to 1994, if host cities will still benefit despite lagging ticket and tourism numbers, what he expects from Donald Trump during the tournament, the MLS, the Lakers and more.
With the World Cup coming up here in a few weeks, how much has changed in the soccer event planning landscape compared to 1994?
“FIFA has retained way more of the revenue opportunities than they did in 1994, leaving a real challenge for the host cities to cover their expenses. Limited rights of sponsorships, limited inventory of tickets. It’s night and day.
“Part of it obviously was that it was a bold move by FIFA (in 1994). They got a lot of criticism from traditional soccer people saying, ‘You’re going to the United States?’ They were all-in to try to make sure we succeeded.
“Obviously soccer has taken off since then and there isn’t the same attitude. Unfortunately it’s appearing more and more, from a PR standpoint at least, that FIFA is trying to milk it and squeeze every penny they can. That theme is overblown, but there is more than a kernel of truth to it. In ’94, they wanted us to succeed so badly that they were very cooperative and forthcoming in giving us a lot of rights.”
Do you think the high ticket prices are a big part of the backlash?
“There’s two parts to that. It doesn’t look good. The PR has been terrible. But the world is not used to dynamic pricing. Even in the United States, for the odd sporting event there is some dynamic pricing, but it’s not really overwhelming. On the other hand, in the concert business, it’s the way it’s done. It’s been a shock to the system to a lot of people.
“In reality, if dynamic pricing is working right, the tickets will ultimately go for what the demand is. If they price it too high, guess what? They’ll have to bring them down. And vice-versa, if they are too low they will have to raise the prices.
“The other is that in the Olympics and in the World Cup, you basically have the participants selected six months before the event begins. So there is that huge gap, and what’s the media going to write about? There aren’t matches going on. Obviously they’ll pick on whatever has a little public interest and controversy around it and focus on that.
“So it’s a combination of dynamic pricing being pretty new, and the media having to fill that gap for six months. And FIFA. With some of the things that have happened, FIFA has kind of put it out there for them on a silver platter. But we’re three weeks away from it, and when the tournament begins, it’s going to be spectacular. We’re not going to hear any of that.”
It does seem like the resale ticket values are dropping and people can get in cheaper at the venues. But from a tourism standpoint, do you think it kept foreigners away because they thought it would be too expensive?
“It’s hard to answer that. Right now, everybody is disappointed in the number of international people coming to the country. The estimates in virtually every city and tournament-wide have not been met. I’m hopeful there is going to be a real surge these last few weeks, but it’s a complex series of things.
“Obviously what’s going on in the economy is driving up the price of air flights. What’s going on in the United States with respect to immigration has people a little nervous. And then the potential for high ticket prices. I think all those things combined have put a little bit of a damper on the international demand.
“And in ’94 we were still basking a little as a country in what Ronald Reagan had described as ‘The City on the Hill.’ And the World Cup coming to the United States was brand-new, so there was a lot of interest in, ‘Hey, we want to come to the United States.’ Now we’ve had successful international soccer events for 32 years. The novelty is not there. And unfortunately right now I don’t think we are as beloved a country as we were in 1994.
“I’m hopeful about these last few weeks. You know how passionate soccer fans are. As it gets closer and closer, they’re going to say, ‘God d—–, I don’t care what it costs. I’m coming.’ I do think it’s going to be an uptick. It may not hit the original estimates, but it’s not going to be some disaster by any stretch of the imagination.”
You’ve mentioned some of the issues, but overall is it still a boon to be a host city in the World Cup? They do get a lot of recognition.
“I think it’s a plus no matter what. It’s a great experience. It livens up the city. Most cities have funds that are dedicated to events like this so they are not suffering financially. Some, like Los Angeles, unfortunately don’t, but I think will break even on the direct costs. But the indirect benefits make it all worthwhile.
“The people who come are staying in hotels and going out to dinner and going out to bars. Restaurants, museums, entertainment facilities. So a lot of economic activity takes place in the city. The indirect benefit of having those businesses thrive and increase in sales tax takes care of it.
“And then showcasing your city to the world is hopefully a big boost in future tourism. Maybe on that one it’s a little less for L.A., New York and San Francisco, because the world knows them. But think of Kansas City. A wonderful city in the Midwest. The world doesn’t know about Kansas City unless they are an NFL fan and follow the Chiefs. So I think it’s going to be a real boon to them.”
I’ve read that Bill Clinton was supportive of what you did, but was a little more hands-off. Do you think Donald Trump will be more front and center?
“Oh, yeah. First of all, Donald Trump created a World Cup task force and named himself chairman. He actually was the signatory on the application in the first place, so he has a rightful claim that it is his World Cup. He also put in his Big, Beautiful Bill $650 million of security money for the 11 cities. So he’s pretty well committed.
“And I like to say that I don’t care what your ideology is; you can hate Donald Trump. There are two things I think everyone would agree on: one is, he genuinely loves sports. The other is, he genuinely loves being in the media. The notion he wouldn’t want to be in front of two billion international TV viewers to kick the opening ball or whatever they do to start it is inconceivable. And then there will be two to three or four billion (viewers) for the final. I do think he’s going to be all in.
“And I’m really hopeful on this point: one of the things that concerns people is any ICE issues. In the Super Bowl they made a deal where ICE stayed away. This is going to be a little more challenging because there are 104 matches, not just one in one city, but I’ve got to believe for the reasons I stated that the Trump administration is going to have ICE lay low during the tournament. At least I sure hope so. That’s the only thing that I can think of that would put a blemish on the tournament, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.”
There is speculation that Prince William will be coming to watch. Is that a reminder of just how big this event is viewed worldwide?
“Especially for the people that have not been to the United States, it’s an eye-opener. We innovated like crazy in 1994 and attached a lot of entertainment components to the World Cup that never existed before. It has been and will be a spectacle, not just in terms of the matches, but with everything else going on.”
Zohran Mamdani is using a lottery to give 1,000 New Yorkers tickets to the World Cup for $50 apiece. Is that a savvy political move?
“Politically, that is a great move for him to do.”
Do you foresee any surprises when the U.S. National Team gets announced?
“I’m sure there will be some individual surprises. The big thing with the team right now is that they’re a total unknown. People ask, ‘How are they going to do?’ It’s hard to know. They’ve been up and down the last couple years and have been experimenting with different groups. I don’t think we’ve ever had the 11 players that are going to start in the World Cup together in any of the matches. It’s so difficult to know.
“Just based on what we’ve seen, they should get out of the group. And depending on who is in that group of 32, they’ll have a good chance to get out of there and get to the quarterfinals. That certainly would be considered a success. And obviously if we move anywhere beyond that, that would be awesome.”
Is there any player you’ve seen that may be able to take that rocket ship to stardom by playing well in the World Cup in the U.S.?
“Well, no, because right now it would have to be some young player we develop. It’s too late in that sense for a (Christian) Pulisic. He’s the first one people would point to. But a future Pulisic, who at 16 stays in the United States and doesn’t run off to Europe? We could watch them grow and succeed.
“Another great hope I have is that the training center that opened earlier this month, the $250 million training center (in Georgia) will be a big boost for what I’m talking about. Right now, one of the problems is that our players are scattered all over the world. When they get together as the Men’s National Team, they are strangers to each other. They’re there for camp for a week and then they’re competing.
“If we can emulate what France has done in terms of a great national training center, where from the time they are a 13-year-old, that’s home. In France in the offseason (Kylian) Mbappe goes to the training camp. They have a style and the players know each other. It’s much more of a team rather than an All-Star group. That could also result in players being much more attached to the United States, as far as the future of their careers. I think in the next decade-plus, it’s going to happen. I think it’s a breakthrough that’s important.”
You were very involved in MLS, too, kicking that league off. There is a question of whether the Whitecaps will stick in Vancouver. How do you see that shaking out?
“My guess is as good as yours, because I don’t really know. Even if I was on the inside I probably wouldn’t know, because I don’t think they’re sure. I do think that a core of the current ownership and certainly the fandom that wants to keep it in Vancouver. So whether that’s finding more local investors and some commitment to an upgraded facility, it would be a huge move for that.
“On the other hand, Vegas is a magnet for seemingly everybody. Although you do wonder if at some point it’s saturated. The A’s haven’t even gotten there yet. The only people left out at that point will be the NBA and MLS.”
When you look at over-saturation and trying to make that determination, how tough of a call is that for the MLS? The Raiders have seemingly done well there so it does feel like there is plenty of reason to go to Vegas.
“Oh, yeah. It’s still a growing community. It isn’t as it was years ago, a mirage in the desert, if you will. It continues to grow. I also think that a new stadium would be required, a soccer-specific stadium. It has been proven through the history of the MLS now that having that right sized stadium is really crucial for the presentation of the game.
“Expansion in the MLS in the last decade has been very, very successful. Usually there is a two- or three-year advance notice, so it isn’t like you expand and they are there two months later. There is a lot of time to build up interest. There’s been an insistence on strong financial ownership and soccer-specific stadiums. The expansions have been rolling out very successfully, so whether it’s a move from Vancouver or an expansion team, I’m sure it will be done right.”
David Beckham came to the MLS early on and now Lionel Messi is playing for Inter Miami. What does that do for the league, when you’ve got players with that star power headlining it?
“Those are great short-term boosts. Not just their star power. Even though they were at the back-end of their careers rather than the front-end, they were still very productive. Those have both been winners, and there have been a lot of other international players that have come. Each one of those helped in their own way.
“It would be great if one of the results of 2026 is that it may encourage some of the international stars to come earlier in their career. And even more importantly, can we launch a U.S. star? That would be really, really helpful. I think there is a lot of hope that the interest (in MLS) is going to soar and it can help get us there faster.”
I wanted to ask you a couple Lakers questions since you were an executive with them in the 1970s. How would a LeBron James retirement affect the Lakers, on-court but also from an economic perspective?
“At this point, (economics) really isn’t the issue. The issue would be, who do they bring in around Luka (Doncic)? Since Jerry Buss died, the Lakers, even with LeBron, have really not lived up to the earlier years. When Jerry Buss and my mentor, Jack Kent Cooke, owned the team, they were perennially winning or in the Finals. Other than the pandemic year, that hasn’t been the case for a decade. They have new ownership, and the track record (is good) for Mark Walter with the Dodgers — it’s not just the money, but also the intelligent management.
“LeBron is unbelievable, and he was very gracious in taking the supporting role. Obviously when Luka and (Austin) Reaves were injured, somehow at age-41 he took control of the team. So if he stays, he will be a force. That’s one hell of a role player. And if he leaves, there are a lot of roster changes that have to take place.
“The Lakers obviously need a good big man and help on defense. Right now, their best players are great offensively but questionable defenders. They need to put the pieces together. But with the proven track record of Mark Walter, I would not bet against them the next few years.”
You helped facilitate the Kareem Abdul-Jabbar trade and were there when the Lakers drafted Magic Johnson. Obviously those are two legacies synonymous with the Lakers. Where do you think LeBron’s legacy will land when it comes to the Lakers, specifically?
“He will not be the Los Angeles icon like Kobe, Magic and Kareem are. He will be recognized more leaguewide, that this was an NBA force. Obviously he’s been in a few different cities and been a winner everywhere.
“The place he will probably still be identified most with will be Cleveland. That was his hometown, and he brought them their first-ever championship. I think if he’s going to be identified with any city, it will be Cleveland more than anywhere else.”
You mentioned the Lakers haven’t won a championship in awhile. As far as the allure of the organization, does that remain top-notch in terms of drawing talent?
“Absolutely. Their brand is unbelievable. During that ten-year drought, it hasn’t mattered. Attendance is 100 percent. Sponsorships are 100 percent. TV viewership is 100 percent. They have an awesome brand.”
