FIFA confirmed on Friday it will proceed with consultations on a plan to sell up to a 21% stake in a new commercial subsidiary, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), despite widespread condemnation from soccer’s governing bodies worldwide.
FFE would be valued at $20 billion, with private investors—led by Thrive Capital, a firm associated with Joshua Kushner—expected to acquire a minority stake. The proposal requires approval from a majority of FIFA’s 211 member associations, with voting still pending.
FIFA stated that incorrect media reports had disrupted initial consultations but reiterated its commitment to an "open and democratic consultation" process. The organization emphasized that no single entity can claim to represent all member associations and that each federation should review the proposal independently.
FIFA’s plan in brief
- New subsidiary: FFE would control commercial operations for the World Cup and other FIFA tournaments, including broadcasting, sponsorships, licensing, and ticketing.
- Investor stake: Up to 21% of FFE would be sold to private shareholders, with Thrive Capital identified as the lead investor.
- Valuation: The subsidiary is valued at $20 billion, with FIFA aiming to raise $4.2 billion from third-party investors.
- Distribution incentives: FIFA proposed an immediate $20 million payment to each member association upon approval, followed by an additional $66 million per association by 2038.
Global backlash intensifies
The proposal has drawn unanimous opposition from key soccer federations, including:
- UEFA: Europe’s governing body, representing 55 member associations, voted unanimously on Thursday to boycott all FIFA tournaments if the plan proceeds. UEFA stated, "The World Cup cannot be treated as an investment product. No part of it should ever be surrendered to private investors."
- CONCACAF: The North and Central American federation, with 41 member associations, rejected the plan, citing concerns over lack of due process and the absence of governance review.
- Asian Football Confederation (AFC): Issued a statement expressing "deep concern" and standing in solidarity with UEFA and CONCACAF.
A senior FIFA adviser, Victor Cordeiro, resigned in protest, calling the plan a "bad deal for football" and arguing that FIFA already possesses sufficient financial resources without selling a stake in its marquee competitions.
FIFA’s defense and counterarguments
FIFA dismissed claims that it is "selling football," asserting that FFE would not alter the governance or spirit of the sport. The organization framed the proposal as a way to ensure member associations benefit from commercial opportunities without compromising FIFA’s core mission.
In a statement, FIFA said: "FFE has been proposed solely to ensure that all FIFA Member Associations have the opportunity to take meaningful ownership of the commercial opportunity of football in their respective countries, and that this does not come at the cost of either the spirit or the governance of FIFA or football itself."
Potential voting dynamics
FIFA requires 106 votes from its 211 member associations to approve the plan. UEFA and CONCACAF together represent 96 associations, which appear set to vote against the proposal. The remaining 115 associations would need to provide the necessary support for passage.
Background: The origins of the dispute
The controversy erupted less than two weeks after the 2026 World Cup final, where Spain defeated Argentina in a widely celebrated tournament hosted across the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. FIFA reported record revenue of $15 billion from the event, fueling discussions about expanding commercial opportunities.
Critics argue the plan represents a fundamental shift in FIFA’s governance model, moving away from its non-profit origins toward a more corporate, investor-driven structure. Supporters, including FIFA leadership, contend that the proposal would democratize financial benefits for smaller member associations while maintaining FIFA’s majority control.
Next steps
FIFA has stated it will continue consultations with member associations, though the timeline for a vote remains unspecified. The organization has not indicated whether it will modify the proposal in response to the opposition.
The plan’s future hinges on whether FIFA can secure enough votes to overcome the unified resistance from Europe, North America, and Asia, or if the backlash will force a reconsideration of the proposal entirely.