FIFA presses ahead with World Cup stake sale plan despite major confeder…

FIFA has announced its intention to press ahead with a controversial plan to sell stakes in a commercial entity responsible for managing the World Cup, despite widespread opposition from major football confederations. The proposal, which involves the creation of FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE), a new entity to oversee the organization’s commercial operations, has drawn sharp criticism from the Asian Football Confederation (AFC), the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), and the Confederation of North, Central America and the Caribbean Associations Football (Concacaf). These bodies have rejected the plan, with UEFA vowing to boycott all FIFA competitions unless the proposal is abandoned.

The AFC, UEFA, and Concacaf represent 137 of FIFA’s 211 member associations, and their combined opposition has intensified scrutiny of FIFA’s governance and decision-making processes. The AFC expressed “serious concerns” over the consultation process, stating that the proposal risks undermining the “unity and universal character” of the World Cup. It called for a reevaluation of the plan, arguing that the “fundamental weaknesses” in FIFA’s approach must be addressed before any decision is made.

FIFA’s proposal ties the creation of FFE directly to a partial stake sale to private investors. The organization has stated that member associations (MAs) will receive $20 million in the 2027–30 cycle if they oppose the plan, with incremental increases to $22 million and $24 million in subsequent cycles. However, MAs that support the FFE proposal would receive $40 million in the 2027–30 period, with the same annual increments. This financial incentive has been a focal point of debate, as it effectively forces members to choose between accepting the stake sale or forgoing a significant revenue boost.

The proposal has also sparked controversy over FIFA’s governance. The AFC criticized the lack of transparency and early engagement, stating that major stakeholders were “confronted with significant initiatives after the direction of travel appears to have already been determined.” It emphasized that meaningful democracy in football governance requires “transparent governance, timely consultation, and genuine participation,” rather than a vote after decisions are already set.

UEFA’s response has been particularly emphatic. The organization stated that the plan “crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” arguing that the “soul and governance of football are not assets to trade.” It warned that the proposal risks “undermining the authority of its statutory bodies” and called for a reevaluation of FIFA’s approach. UEFA’s 55 member associations have since pledged to boycott all FIFA competitions until the proposal is withdrawn, a move that could have far-reaching implications for global football.

FIFA’s plan also involves a $20 billion valuation of FFE by JPMorgan Chase, with a 21% stake to be sold to external investors. Thrive Capital, a firm founded by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investor group. The organization has defended the proposal, stating that it aims to “ensure that all FIFA member associations have the opportunity to take meaningful ownership of the commercial opportunity of football in their respective countries.” However, critics argue that the tie between FFE’s creation and the stake sale is a strategic move to force member associations into accepting private investment.

The proposal has been met with skepticism over its financial viability. While FIFA claims that FFE could generate $4.2 billion in revenue for members between 2027 and 2030, some experts question whether the entity would achieve such figures without external expertise. A source familiar with FIFA’s thinking told The Athletic that the revenue increases would depend on hiring commercially focused staff, a move that could be achieved without selling a stake. Nevertheless, FIFA has framed the stake sale as a prerequisite for the entity’s creation, leaving members with no alternative but to accept the deal or forgo the financial benefits.

The controversy comes amid broader criticism of FIFA’s leadership, particularly under President Gianni Infantino. The organization’s recent World Cup, marked by inflated ticket prices, commercialized halftime shows, and political interventions, has fueled public discontent. Infantino’s decision to push forward with the stake sale plan, despite the backlash, has further eroded confidence in the organization’s ability to govern football transparently.

As the consultation period continues, the outcome of the proposal remains uncertain. The AFC has called for a “catalyst for strengthening institutional reform,” while UEFA’s boycott threat underscores the deepening rift within global football governance. For now, FIFA’s plan to sell stakes in the World Cup commercial entity remains a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over the future of the sport’s financial and political structure.