From $473 to $13: FIFA slashes Club World Cup ticket price ahead of Chelsea-Fluminense clash
ticket prices
for the Club World Cup semifinal between Chelsea and Fluminense to just $13.40 — down from a staggering $473.90 — for Tuesday's clash at
MetLife Stadium
in East Rutherford, New Jersey.
The drastic markdown comes amid widespread reports of sparse crowds across most fixtures in the expanded 32-team tournament. While FIFA has employed a
dynamic pricing
model throughout the competition, this marks the most significant price drop for a marquee knockout fixture yet.
Standard tickets for Wednesday's other semifinal — a blockbuster between European giants Paris Saint-Germain and
Real Madrid
— remain far more expensive, starting at $199.60.
But it's the Chelsea-Fluminense game that has raised eyebrows, not just for the pricing gap, but for what it reveals about demand and attendance patterns in the US-hosted event.
Only Real Madrid drawing crowds; FIFA hopes cheaper tickets will help
FIFA had earlier cut quarterfinal ticket prices to as low as $11.15, including Chelsea's win over Palmeiras in Philadelphia and Fluminense's victory over Al Hilal in Orlando. The Athletic was the first to report on the slashed rates for the semifinals.
Live Events
Despite its global brand, Chelsea has struggled to fill stadiums during the tournament.
Real Madrid has been the lone exception, regularly drawing over 60,000 fans, including a tournament-high 76,611 for their quarterfinal clash with Borussia Dortmund.
Chelsea edge Palmeiras to set up Brazil showdown
Chelsea booked their place in the semifinal with a narrow 2-1 win over Palmeiras, thanks to an 83rd-minute own goal off a deflected Malo Gusto shot. Cole Palmer had earlier opened the scoring, while Estêvão — an 18-year-old Palmeiras prodigy set to join Chelsea this summer — briefly equalized.
Tuesday's match against Fluminense now gives the London club a shot at reaching the final, although they'll be without key players Liam Delap and Levi Colwill due to suspension, and possibly captain Reece James, who missed the quarterfinal with injury.
With ticket prices now more accessible, FIFA will be hoping for a stronger turnout at the 82,500-seat MetLife — and a semifinal that lives up to its billing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
6 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Long-term policy continuity, uniformity essential for auto industry growth: Stellantis India CEO
European auto major Stellantis believes a long-term stable policy framework and its uniform roll-out across different states in India is critical for automakers to execute business plans on a long-term basis. Stellantis, which has presence in India through brands like Jeep and Citroen, feels that policy framework should work informally across the nation so that the industry is able to execute long-term business strategies. In an interaction with PTI here, Stellantis India CEO and MD Shailesh Hazela said that any investor who comes to India would like to see a little longer horizon in terms of policies. "So our wishlist for the government is that whatever they decide to put across, it should be for a longer period," Hazela stated when asked about government actions which could propel growth of Indian auto industry. It would be great if there could be uniformity in policies across the country in terms of EVs (electric vehicles) and taxation so that companies could plan nationally and not state wise, he noted. "If the government could bring uniformity, which they can, it would really enable the industry to plan in a unified and concise way," Hazela said. He cited the example of different states rolling out separate policies for electric vehicles. Hazela noted that in the past few years, the Stellantis group has created supporting infrastructure, and now it plans to scale up its presence especially for the Citroen brand. Hazela said a plan is already underway to scale up the brand's presence in the country with bolstering of sales network and new product introductions. The French automaker currently sells the C3 hatchback, the Aircross SUV, the Basalt coupe-SUV, and the electric e-C3 in the Indian market. He noted that Citroen will almost double its sales touchpoints in the next one year from around 80 to over 150, sharpening its focus on the smaller towns and semi-urban areas. "We are not sticking to one kind of format (sales touchpoints). We will have a mix of small and large ones," Hazela said. The company plans to focus on Tier III and even Tier IV markets, strategically chosen for their proximity to Tier I and Tier II cities and their potential for substantial growth. On market share aspirations, Hazela said: "We aspire to at least double our share from the last year to this year or in next 12 months, and then take it to the next number." Citroen launched its first model in India, the C5 Aircross SUV, in early 2021 and remains a small player in the over 40 lakh annual passenger vehicle market. Hazela said the brand has capability to roll out products based on multiple energy platforms and would introduce such models basis market demand. "We will continue to explore for CNG, because that's the available fuel in a sustainable way, we have our EV which will continue to grow," he added. Last year in January, Stellantis announced an additional investment of Rs 2,000 crore under the Citroen brand in Tiruvallur district, Tamil Nadu. This investment will be made over a period of the next 6 years and will take the total investment in the state to Rs 3,250 crore.
Mint
32 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump's 2018 tariffs on Indian steel and aluminium set to stay, even as trade deal deadline nears
New Delhi: The proposed India-US bilateral agreement (BTA) is not likely to resolve the fraught issue of American tariffs on Indian steel and aluminium, two people directly involved in the process said, with days to go before the deadline for the first phase of the deal. The two sides have been racing against time to dust off the deal before president Donald Trump's 9-July deadline for countries to offer lower tariffs on US goods. The duties—raised earlier this year—are set to remain in force even after the agreement is unveiled, the people cited above told Mint on condition of anonymity. 'As a formal political green signal is awaited from Donald Trump following the approval of the deal's terms by the US Trade Representative, the long-standing duties on Indian metal exports—50% on steel and 50% on aluminium—will not be rolled back in this round of negotiations,' said the first person cited above. The Indian negotiating team, led by commerce ministry secretary-designate Rajesh Agrawal, returned to New Delhi on Friday after a series of intense discussions in Washington. The team focused on achieving incremental progress in priority areas such as market access for Indian textiles, pharmaceuticals and services, while setting aside contentious issues like metals and autos for future rounds. According to the second person, the tariffs are part of a broader global regime. 'Every country is facing similar duties that have been levied on steel and aluminium. India has also imposed safeguard duties. These issues were discussed, but there is no interim relief for India on this front,' this person said. As per this person, both sides may revisit these tariffs in a future round of negotiations. The Trump administration had originally imposed tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminium in 2018, citing national security concerns under Section 232 of US trade law. On 12 March 2025, Trump removed all country-specific exemptions and raised the aluminium tariff to 25%. Less than three months later, the US further doubled these tariffs to 50% for both metals, with the revised rates taking effect from 4 June. Mint reported on 3 June that India would seek the removal of US steel tariffs through trade talks rather than opting for immediate retaliation. It also reported on 5 July that the first tranche of the India-US BTA is now on Trump's desk for final approval, after being greenlit by US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. These measures are part of a broader reciprocal tariff hike by the US under Trump's second term, including a 25% tariff on imported automobiles that came into effect on 3 April. The White House order stated that the aim is to "more effectively counter foreign countries that continue to offload low-priced, excess steel and aluminium in the US'. Trade analysts point out that while India has a limited export exposure to the US in steel and aluminium compared to other sectors, the continuation of high duties reflects Washington's protectionist stance and leaves little room for near-term relief. 'This signals that the US is prioritizing domestic industrial revival and employment over trade concessions, especially in politically sensitive sectors like metals,' said Abhash Kumar, a trade export and assistant professor of economics at Delhi University. The no-change in tariffs on Indian metals stands in contrast to the deal the Trump administration has struck with the UK. Under their existing bilateral trade framework, metal imports from the UK continue to face a 25% tariff, while both sides work towards a resolution involving quotas and adjusted duties. Indian industry groups had been hoping that the BTA would offer at least partial relief on these duties, especially since high tariffs erode the price competitiveness of Indian exporters in the US market. 'While metals are not among India's top exports to the US, the principle of reciprocity and fair treatment matters. Our manufacturers are competing against suppliers from countries with more favourable terms,' said Arun Kumar Garodia, former chairman of the Engineering Export Promotion Council (EEPC) and director of Corona Steel, manufacturers of light engineering goods and trading. Meanwhile, India has challenged the legitimacy of these tariffs at the World Trade Organization (WTO), arguing that they constitute safeguard measures—temporary restrictions allowed under WTO rules to protect domestic industries from import surges. In a notification to the WTO in May, India conveyed its intention to suspend concessions under the Safeguards Agreement in response to the US action. However, Washington rejected India's position. In a communication circulated to WTO members on 23 May, Washington reiterated that the tariffs were imposed under Section 232 for national security reasons and not as safeguard measures under WTO provisions. Experts believe that WTO proceedings may not yield quick results. 'India's legal pushback at the WTO is important to maintain multilateral discipline, but realistically, dispute resolution takes time and won't immediately help exporters,' said Ajay Srivastava, a former Indian Trade Service official and co-founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI). Queries sent to the commerce ministry remained unanswered at press time. As per the GTRI report, in FY2025, India exported $4.56 billion worth of iron, steel, and aluminium products to the US. This included $587.5 million in iron and steel, $3.1 billion in articles of iron or steel, and $860 million in aluminium and related articles. These products now face sharply higher tariffs, that could make it difficult for Indian exporters to remain competitive.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
After Rs 36,500 Cr Jane Street Scam Saga, Can SEBI Plug The Gaps In Derivatives Market?
Jane Street, a US-based algo trading company, was alleged by the Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in its 115-page report for market manipulation and misleading investors. The company was alleged to make profits in billions through unethical strategies. SEBI has now barred Jane Street from accessing the Indian stock market and ordered to pay Rs 4,840 crore in alleged unlawful gains. Gaurav Goel, Founder and Director at Fynocrat Technologies told The Economic Times that the damage isn't just financial – it erodes faith in the system. 'This kind of manipulation, if proven true, not only distorts the market but also harms retail investors who trade with trust and limited capital," he added. Goel told ET that several regulatory gaps need to be filled in. He said 'manipulators often trade in both stock and options markets to create fake price moves. Sebi should build systems that track both markets together and raise alerts when something looks suspicious." Dinesh Thakkar, Managing Director, Chairman and the Founder of Angel One while sharing his PoV on the future of India's proprietary trading, said India's market opportunity is ????????????????????????????????????????, ???????????? ???????????????????????????????? ???????????? ???????????????????????????????????? ???????????? ???????????????????????????????????? ???????? ???????????? ???????????? ????????????????. He said that India's macroeconomic foundation remains solid. ???????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????, ???????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????, ???????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????, ???????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????? ???????????????????? ???????????? ???????????? ???????????????????????????????????? continue to support high liquidity and sustained market participation Siddhart Bhamre, head of institutional research at Asit C Mehta said Jane Street is one of the largest traders contributing to India markets. He added that when big players are banned for wrongdoing, others become cautious and reduce activity, leading to lower volumes. The impact may extend beyond SEBI's jurisdiction, with tax authorities expected to examine Jane Street's structure under India's General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR). A large chunk of profits was reportedly routed through its Singapore-based FPI arm, leveraging treaty-based tax benefits, while Indian entities allegedly carried out intraday trades—something FPIs are not allowed to do. 'Considering the observations in the interim order, GAAR could potentially be applied to shift profits to entities liable to pay tax in India," said Harshal Bhuta, partner at PR Bhuta & Co, in a statement to The Economic Times. Jane Street Fraud Saga: Full Explained The regulatory action comes after an extensive investigation into alleged manipulation of the Indian stock market through index derivatives, particularly Bank Nifty options, which earned the company massive profits of over Rs 36,500 crore between January 2023 and March 2025. Advertisement In India, it operated through four firms — JSI Investments Pvt Ltd, JSI2 Investments Pvt Ltd, Jane Street Singapore Pte Ltd, and Jane Street Asia Trading Ltd. How Did Jane Street Earn Rs 36,500 Crore By Allegedly Tricking Indian Stock Markets? Between January 2023 and March 2025, Jane Street entities made over Rs 43,289 crore in profits from index options, particularly Bank Nifty (BANKNIFTY) using various strategies that allegedly manipulated markets. These profits were partly offset by losses in other segments like stock futures and cash equity, resulting in a net gain of Rs 36,502 crore. In a 105-page order, Sebi highlighted two key manipulative strategies — 'Intraday Index Manipulation Strategy' and 'Extended Marking the Close Strategy'. Read Those Market Manipulation Strategies : Explained: What Is Jane Street, How It Earned Rs 36,500 Cr From F&O Trades In India, Why Has Sebi Banned It? Sebi noted the following: A staggering Rs 17,319 crore was earned from BANKNIFTY options alone. advetisement Profits were disproportionately high on expiry days, when options contracts expire and price influence can be most potent. Trades were concentrated in short bursts, often aligned with expiry timings. 'JS Group made a total profit of Rs 36,502.12 crores across all segments," Sebi said in the order. SEBI has accused Jane Street of: Violating the Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices (PFUTP) Regulations Misleading market participants, especially retail traders who rely on index movements
