Infantino abandons World Cup stake sale plan

FIFA president Gianni Infantino has abandoned a proposal to sell a stake in the World Cup’s commercial operations to private investors after opposition from football authorities threatened to fracture the global game.

Infantino confirmed that the FIFA Forward Enterprise project “will not proceed”, acknowledging that it had created divisions that were no longer compatible with the governing body’s stated aim of uniting and developing football.

The reversal followed warnings of a European boycott of FIFA competitions and criticism from confederations, national associations, senior football executives and public officials. Opponents said the project had been developed without adequate consultation and could have given private capital a lasting influence over the World Cup and other major tournaments.

FIFA had explored creating a commercial subsidiary to manage and expand revenues from its competitions. The organisation proposed selling a non-controlling stake of about 20% in the venture, which was valued at approximately $20 billion. The transaction could have raised as much as $4.2 billion from external investors.

The plan was presented as a means of increasing funding for FIFA’s 211 member associations. Each association could have received about $20 million from the investment proceeds, supplementing the development grants distributed through existing FIFA programmes.

Infantino said the enterprise was intended to strengthen member associations, particularly in countries where football required greater financial support. However, he conceded that opposition had become too disruptive for the proposal to continue, regardless of the backing it might have secured from some members.

UEFA led the resistance after its 55 national associations unanimously supported a potential boycott of FIFA tournaments if the project proceeded. Such action would have placed participation by leading European teams in future World Cups and other competitions in doubt, creating an unprecedented institutional confrontation.

The European governing body argued that football competitions should not be treated as assets whose ownership interests could be transferred to outside investors. Several national associations also questioned why a project carrying major financial and governance consequences had advanced without broader scrutiny.

Opposition extended beyond Europe. Concacaf, which represents North America, Central America and the Caribbean, rejected the investment structure and called for greater transparency. The Asian Football Confederation also aligned itself with concerns raised by other regional bodies.

The coordinated response weakened FIFA’s ability to portray the disagreement as a dispute confined to European football. It instead exposed wider anxiety about private equity’s growing role in sport and the possibility that investors could demand higher returns through additional fixtures, commercial products or changes to tournament formats.

Critics feared that commercial pressure could worsen an already crowded international calendar. Players’ groups, clubs and domestic leagues have repeatedly warned that the expansion of competitions is increasing workloads and reducing recovery periods.

FIFA has expanded the men’s World Cup from 32 to 48 teams and introduced a larger Club World Cup. Those changes have substantially increased the number of matches controlled by the governing body and strengthened the value of its broadcasting, sponsorship and digital rights.

The commercial subsidiary would have allowed investors to benefit from those revenue streams while FIFA retained a controlling stake. Supporters believed private capital and corporate expertise could accelerate commercial growth and provide more money for football development.

Opponents countered that the arrangement risked creating a conflict between FIFA’s regulatory responsibilities and the profit expectations of shareholders. They also questioned whether national associations would become dependent on a large upfront payment while surrendering part of the future value generated by global competitions.

The controversy has damaged Infantino’s authority as he prepares for another FIFA presidential election in 2027. He had appeared likely to face limited organised opposition, supported by development funding and strong relationships with many smaller national associations.

That position is now less secure. Senior figures across football have called for changes to FIFA’s governance, while European officials have indicated that trust in Infantino’s leadership has been severely weakened. Discussion has also intensified over whether a challenger could enter the presidential contest before the nomination deadline later this year.