Fifa scraps proposal to sell off stakes in World Cup after widespread backlash
Fifa president Gianni Infantino has abandoned plans to sell stakes in the commercial rights to the World Cup and other major tournaments after intense opposition from football bodies worldwide. The proposal’s collapse matters because it exposed serious divisions within Fifa, prompted threats of a European boycott and has increased pressure on Infantino’s leadership.
The proposed Fifa Forward Enterprise would have raised hundreds of millions of dollars by selling a significant stake in the men’s and women’s World Cups and Club World Cup to private investors, with more than $10bn promised for distribution to Fifa’s 211 member associations. Participating associations were offered an optional $20m, with a 19 September deadline, but Uefa, Concacaf and the Asian Football Confederation opposed it; a senior adviser resigned and Fifa’s chief operating officer criticised the limited consultation. Fifa holds roughly $4bn in reserves, which may now be considered as an alternative funding source.
- Fifa dropped its World Cup investment plan after global opposition.
- Uefa had threatened a boycott of future Fifa tournaments.
- The reversal intensifies pressure on Gianni Infantino.
New here? Start with this
Fifa is the international body that runs football’s major national-team tournaments, including the men’s and women’s World Cups. Its 211 member associations represent football around the world, while regional bodies such as Uefa in Europe and Concacaf in North and Central America organise and oversee the game in their regions.
The proposed Fifa Forward Enterprise would have sold private investors a share of the commercial rights to several tournaments. Those rights cover income from things such as broadcasting and sponsorship; Fifa said the plan would fund payments to member associations, which rely on the body for support to develop football.
The dispute raised questions about how Fifa should fund that support and how much say its members should have in major decisions. Fifa has substantial reserves, so the debate also concerns how it uses money it already holds.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Those supporting the proposal viewed it as pragmatic global development. The distribution of over $10bn across 211 member associations would enable poorer nations to invest in grassroots football, training facilities and women's programmes that otherwise lack adequate funding. With Fifa already managing tournaments successfully, bringing in experienced private investors could enhance operational efficiency and innovation. Private investment in sports is standard practice globally, and given the World Cup's existing commercial nature, this represents a logical extension of established practices.
The case against
Opponents were justified in resisting because the World Cup serves a global public interest that shouldn't be subordinated to private profit motives. Fifa's $4bn in reserves made this sale unnecessary—the organisation could distribute funds without surrendering long-term control to investors whose priorities may diverge from football's development. The rushed consultation process, with a September deadline and limited member input, revealed poor governance; a senior adviser's resignation and the COO's public criticism demonstrated that even Fifa's own leadership questioned the approach. Surrendering stakes risks future tournament decisions being influenced by investor interests rather than sporting integrity.