The country may have largely played second fiddle to the United States in hosting this summer’s World Cup, but Mexico is the spiritual home of soccer for many fans.
The national team were beaten 3-2 by England at the Azteca in the round-of-16, which was the last of five matches at the stadium and of 13 in Mexico in total.
After that thunderstorm-soundtracked epic, many England fans suggested that it was a travesty that the final wasn’t being staged in Mexico City, the seat of the 1970 and 1986 finals, where Pele and Maradona each wrote their names in the history books.
But whether it is Lamine Yamal (Spain), Harry Kane (England) or Lionel Messi’s Argentina again, they will be doing so in New Jersey, not the capital south of the border.
Staging the World Cup is expensive for host nations. The Azteca, for example, had to shell out nearly $134m to renovate the stadium in time for the tournament, plus another $62m to buy out the personal seat licenses held at the stadium in order to placate FIFA, who demand 100 per cent of gate receipts.
So with the Mexican leg of the tournament over, how much did the country get in return?
Economic report suggests Mexico GDP increased by just 0.1% thanks to World Cup
According to a new report from Banamex relayed by Mexico Business News, hosting the World Cup in Mexico City, Jalisco and Nuevo Leon is likely to have generated around $2bn for the country’s treasury, equivalent to 0.1 per cent of GDP.
The study also suggests that the estimated 5.5 million tourists that the Mexico Ministry of Tourism hoped to attract for its leg of the tournament was too optimistic.
The analysis suggests match-going fans spent $499m on hotels, $257m on transport and $156m at restaurants.
Receive exclusive football transfer news and updates twice a week to your mailbox
