FIFA scraps plans to sell a stake in the World Cup as Infantino’s job teeters

By ADAM CRAFTON and DAN SHELDON / The Athletic

FIFA, the governing body for global soccer, and Gianni Infantino have performed a dramatic U-turn on a plot to sell a stake in the organization’s commercial and event operations after widespread condemnation of the plans.

Infantino, the under-fire FIFA president, said in a statement late last week: “Having listened carefully to all the views, it has become clear that the project has created divisions of a nature that, regardless of the level of support, are no longer in the interest of the objective set out in the first place.

“Our purpose has always been — and will always be — to unite and improve. As a result, this proposal will not proceed.”

Infantino’s proposal attracted major opposition from the confederations that govern the game, including UEFA, in Europe; CONCACAF, in North and Central America; and the Asian Football Confederation.

The European confederation announced Thursday that all 55 of its members would boycott FIFA competitions, including World Cups, if the plans remained on the table. CONCACAF members then met Thursday afternoon and released a statement that it was rejecting FIFA’s proposal.

FIFA responded with a statement early Friday in Europe in which it insisted that “nobody is selling football” and that while it “acknowledges and respects feedback and concern aired in public,” it would press on with the proposals, adding that it “reaffirms its commitment to an open and democratic consultation.”

But soon after FIFA released that statement, the Asian federation followed up with its own statement saying that it stood in solidarity with UEFA and CONCACAF.

Infantino was then dealt two seismic internal blows.

First, his adviser Carlos Cordeiro quit his role, eviscerating the plan in a statement that called it “a bad deal for FIFA’s member associations, a bad deal for football, and a bad deal for the long-term future of the game.”

Then FIFA’s chief operating officer, Kevin Lamour, told The Associated Press that staff had been “deceived” by Infantino and that he would sleep better after speaking out on the matter, even if it cost him his job.

“It is the project of one person,” Lamour said. “Not only must this project not go ahead … but the time has now come for football political leaders to ask themselves the right questions and make the right decisions.”

Those developments forced Infantino into a corner, and by Friday afternoon, many within the organization, speaking to The Athletic on the condition of anonymity to protect their jobs, believed it was a matter of when, not if, the plan would be rescinded.

Joshua Kushner’s venture capital firm Thrive had not pulled out of the deal as of Friday night, but that became moot once FIFA leadership ultimately decided before midnight to pull the plug.

FIFA had announced Tuesday that it wanted to set up a new private entity — FIFA Forward Enterprises — that would run its main events, such as the World Cups and Club World Cups, and that it was looking to sell a 21% minority stake to outside investors.

That sale would have aimed to bring in $4.2 billion, which FIFA said could have been immediately released to its 211 member associations as part of a new funding stream called the FIFA Fast-Forward Program.

Under the plan, FIFA’s total development funding would have topped $10 billion over the next four years. Despite the mounting criticism as the days passed, FIFA confirmed that if member associations were opposed to the plan but the proposal passed, those opposed would still receive $20 million each in the 2027-30 cycle (followed by $22 million in 2031-34 and $24 million in 2035-38), irrespective of whether any stake had been sold to private investors.

However, if that member association had agreed to the proposal, it would receive $40 million in 2027-30, with the subsequent payments to remain the same.

The three federations that went on record against FIFA’s plan represent 137 of the 211 FIFA member associations. FIFA had said it would need a majority of associations and approval from its 37-member FIFA Council — which includes Infantino and the eight FIFA vice presidents — for the proposal to advance.

Conmebol, South America’s soccer confederation, issued a statement late Friday that did not reject the plans but said that financial and commercial decisions “must always serve the interests of football and never take precedence over its essence.”

FIFA’s statement a few hours later then took everything off the table.

The Athletic reported that Infantino’s future leadership of FIFA was questioned during the meetings of UEFA and CONCACAF on Thursday.

Infantino has been FIFA president since succeeding Sepp Blatter in February 2016 and had been expected to stand unopposed in the next election in March 2027.

“My clear impression at the moment is that he has lost a great deal of trust,” Lise Klaveness, president of the Norwegian Football Federation, told the newspaper VG.

“We didn’t vote for him last time, and we’ve been skeptical about this,” Klaveness said. “There are many good things about FIFA, but if you take a lax approach to governance principles and rules, you quickly lose trust.”

This has been a humbling experience for Infantino. He began the week as the FIFA president who oversaw $15 billion in revenue from the just-completed men’s World Cup, and many within the game were resigned to his securing another term as president in next spring’s election. Many federations had even submitted their letters committing support to him.

To see him publicly rebuked by several major confederations represented a stunning development. UEFA’s threat to boycott carried weight, but once CONCACAF and the Asian federation joined in, Infantino was vulnerable to being outvoted.

Then his own team turned on him, first Cordeiro, then Lamour. A battle for ideas had become a battle to save his job. Infantino has prioritized the latter, but he may yet face challengers in the 2027 elections. Nominations must be made by November.