THE WORLD CUP HAS COME AND GONE, AND IT’S FAIR TO SAY IT WENT OFF WITHOUT A HITCH IN PHILADELPHIA. I had wanted to be an active participant in the festivities, but the mix of extreme heat, torrential downpours, and wildfire smoke wasn’t ideal for wandering down to the promised fun at the FIFA Fan Festival in Fairmount Park.

Anne Ryan, the state’s director of tourism, told City & State PA’s Harrison Cann the World Cup exceeded projections of 500,000 people. Gov. Josh Shapiro was among the match attendees. Per Politico, he attended Côte d'Ivoire vs. Ecuador, France vs. Iraq, and Curaçao vs. Côte d'Ivoire. “We’re looking at $770 million in economic impact here,” Shapiro told reporters when asked about other cities that eschewed hosting.

EXPERTS WHO STUDY THESE EVENTS ARE FAR LESS BULLISH ABOUT ECONOMIC IMPACT. They often view the numbers thrown around before the events as all addition, no subtraction in an effort to wow the public. “The most important problem lies in the incentives behind the projections themselves,” two academics wrote in a recent Governing Magazine opinion piece. 

“Cities bidding to host major events are rarely presented with neutral cost-benefit analyses. Instead, governments, tourism boards, developers and consulting firms all have incentives to produce optimistic forecasts,” they continued. “Politicians gain headlines and international visibility. Construction firms gain contracts. Hotel operators anticipate demand spikes. Even sports organizations benefit from narratives of economic transformation because it helps justify public subsidies and infrastructure spending.”