FIFA issues 'clarification' statement after UEFA and Concacaf announce opposition to partial sale of World Cup

It’s unclear what reaction FIFA leadership was expecting when it confirmed it intends to sell stakes in the World Cup to private investors. The organization still found itself issuing a statement Thursday intended as a “clarification” for what’s been reported and discussed.

Word broke Tuesday of FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s plan to spin off FIFA’s commercial and event operations into a subsidiary known as “FIFA Forward Enterprise.” That vehicle, termed FFE, would then have a minority stake sold to a group of investors led by Thrive Eternal, a permanent capital holding company helmed by Joshua Kushner, the brother of President Donald Trump’s son-in-law.

If executed, the proposal would raise a total of $20 billion for FIFA, which it would then distribute to its member associations. The first wave would increase its 2027-2030 payout from $8 million per country to $20 million, with more through 2038.

The plan has proven wildly unpopular in FIFA’s biggest markets, with two major continental confederations, UEFA and Concacaf, releasing blistering statements rejecting the idea. UEFA, which counts five of the past six World Cup winners, has already announced a boycott of all FIFA competitions until the proposal is permanently tabled.

FIFA confirmed in its statement that it “respects the feedback and concern aired in public,” then proceeded to complain its “planned consultation process was disrupted by incorrect media reports.”

FIFA did not provide any examples of such incorrect media reports.

FIFA says it will now begin its consultation process, though it didn’t indicate its timeline had changed. Infantino has set a Sept. 19 deadline for a decision, giving countries less than eight weeks to figure out where they stand.

FFE has been proposed solely to ensure that all FIFA Member Associations (MAs) 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.

Nobody is selling football. This is not something FIFA would ever entertain.

Everyone has the right to express their opposition and to seek further clarification but no single entity can claim to represent all 211 MAs around the world. Each MA should be allowed to review the proposal and have a say in shaping their own future. These are the democratic principles of FIFA.

FFE has been proposed solely to ensure that all FIFA Member Associations (MAs) 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.

Nobody is selling football. This is not something FIFA would ever entertain.

Everyone has the right to express their opposition and to seek further clarification but no single entity can claim to represent all 211 MAs around the world. Each MA should be allowed to review the proposal and have a say in shaping their own future. These are the democratic principles of FIFA.

There are essentially two levers being pulled here.

One is Infantino’s calculation that even if the European countries and some of FIFA’s largest markets in other countries oppose the idea, something he had to know would happen, he only needs a majority of the 211 member associations for his plan to go through.

The idea of selling a stake in the World Cup for an eight-figure windfall makes little sense for, say, Spain, England or Brazil, but the median FIFA member would have a lot more use for that money. Consider that the midpoint between 1 and 211 is 106, and the 106th-ranked team in the men’s FIFA rankings is currently Kyrgyzstan.

The other lever is UEFA and company’s bid to make the World Cup appear to be as toxic an asset as possible, investment-wise. A World Cup without Europe is a very different tournament, which could give pause to both investors and the countries thinking this could happen without collateral damage.

A UEFA boycott is only the start of what the confederation could do, and it has never been shy about a clash with Infantino’s FIFA.

It remains to be seen which side will win out. What is clear is that this is the biggest gamble of Infantino’s tenure, and he has decided to let whatever may come of this define his already questionable legacy.