McDonald’s exits 32-year World Cup deal after missed expectations

By Grace Kim

McDonald’s will end its 32-year FIFA World Cup sponsorship after a campaign reaching 110 countries underperformed internal expectations, according to comments CFO Ian Borden made on the Q2 2026 earnings call.

The fast-food company has marketed through what the analysis calls the world’s most popular sporting event since 1994. On the call, Borden said the latest campaign performed below “Mickey D’s expectations.” The analysis calls it McDonald’s biggest campaign ever, although it provides no spend, audience, sales or brand-lift figures to define that comparison.

This confirms two things: the sponsorship is ending, and senior management viewed the latest campaign as disappointing. It does not show why performance fell. The source also omits the exact end date, contract terms and which campaigns, assets or markets will be affected.

What should founders change about marketing spend?

The practical answer is to judge rented attention by what it adds to a business you control, rather than by reach alone. Kimanzi Constable, founder of Ubora Advisory and author of the analysis, argues that results on platforms the brand does not own will always be limited.

McDonald’s used marketing spend to sponsor the World Cup, alongside thousands of other places it advertises. The same logic drives influencer campaigns and paid ads, which can reach prospective customers but require payment for access. Constable’s warning to other brands is straightforward: a sponsor or creator can control the placement, not the audience relationship that follows it.

When a campaign ends, he says, “the audience remains loyal to the brand you paid — not necessarily you.” That means a founder should separate short-term campaign response from durable customer acquisition. Sponsorships, influencer partnerships and ads can still work; they simply require evidence that customers remain useful after the placement disappears.

The source does not name which measures McDonald’s used, nor does it show that World Cup exposure caused customer losses. So the campaign’s “underperformance” should not be rewritten as a failure of the World Cup itself. Nor can one company establish that other global brands are cutting the same kind of spend.

The source frames the move within a reassessment by globally known brands, but shows no industry-wide pullback. What the episode supports is Constable’s recommendation: reassess marketing investment, return on spend and client acquisition, even when a company can absorb a large budget. McDonald’s fits that test: it reached 110 countries, yet internal expectations still mattered.

That distinction matters for smaller brands, which have less room for expensive missteps. A founder comparing a sponsorship, creator campaign or paid ad should ask what remains after the fee stops: direct customer relationships, repeat business and an audience the company can reach without paying the platform. No benchmark or comparison table sets that threshold, so each business must establish its own baseline.

The analysis also promises refreshed leadership advice from CEO Stephanie Mehta, but the text names no organization or recommendation and provides no supporting evidence. It would be unsafe to present her views as part of McDonald’s decision without more reporting.

The accompanying photograph shows Folarin Balogun, No. 20 for the United States, scoring his team’s third goal against Paraguay in a Group D match at Los Angeles Stadium on June 12, 2026. It supplies tournament atmosphere, not evidence about McDonald’s results.

For practitioners, the takeaway is not that borrowed platforms stop working. It is that rented audiences carry a measurement problem: the brand pays for access but cannot assume loyalty follows. Before renewing any sponsorship, creator deal or ad buy, founders should demand evidence that rented attention becomes a durable relationship their own channels can retain.