President Gianni Infantino's plan to open up part of FIFA's commercial business to investment funds has sparked an unprecedented clash in world football. The president of the governing body of football intends to transfer the commercial rights of the most important competitions - starting with the World Cup - to a new company, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), retaining 80% of it and selling 20% to private investors for around $4.2 billion.
This operation would provide FIFA with immediate liquidity, while the organization has promised to redistribute a large part of the income to its 211 member associations through a new financing program. For many federations, especially those with more limited economic resources, this would mean benefits of up to $40 million over the next four years, significantly higher than current contributions. This is precisely the strongest argument on which Infantino relies to obtain approval.
Behind this project is a group of investors led by Thrive Eternal, a company founded by Joshua Kushner, an American entrepreneur and brother of Jared Kushner, son-in-law of US President Donald Trump. Other private equity giants and sovereign wealth funds interested in entering the most profitable business in world football may also join the project.
Who can really stop Infantino's plan?
On paper, the final say lies with FIFA's national member federations, who must approve the project. But the political weight tells a different story. The first objection came from UEFA, which criticized both the manner and content of the initiative, complaining about the lack of prior consultation. Several confederations, such as CONCACAF and AFC, have also expressed strong reservations, although mainly about the lack of transparency in the decision-making process.
The problem, however, is the numbers. Infantino can count on the votes of many African, Asian, Oceanian and part of South American federations, lured by the increase in funds. For this reason, the European bloc, alone, risks not having the votes needed to block the reform.
Europe's weapon: even politics is watching
The only real lever would be an alliance between the largest European federations, the major leagues, the clubs and the world players' union. Europe continues to represent the technical and economic heart of football: most of the world's best players are formed or play for European clubs, while FIFA competitions depend to a large extent on the presence of stars who are active in the continent's championships. A common position of the federations of England, France, Germany, Spain and Italy, supported by professional leagues and clubs, could put FIFA in front of a major political and commercial problem.
There is also a second, institutional front. Several European governments have already expressed doubts about the operation, while the European Commission is examining other issues related to the relationship between FIFA and the championship organizers, following complaints filed by European leagues about alleged abuse of a dominant position. A possible intervention by European authorities could increase the pressure on FIFA's governance in Zurich.
The World Cup in the hands of private individuals: why the battle is still open
Despite the protests, no major federation has so far threatened extreme measures, such as boycotting the World Cup or leaving FIFA. And that is precisely Infantino's strongest point: he knows that it is unlikely that anyone will go to the extent of a full-scale clash.
To stop the project would require a united front involving federations, clubs, leagues, players and institutions. Until this alliance takes shape, the FIFA president will continue to have the political leverage necessary to push his plan forward and transform the World Cup business into an asset open to private capital.
