FIFA's plan to carve out a portion of the World Cup's commercial operations and offer equity to private investors ran into intense opposition on Friday after a high-profile resignation and public criticism from senior officials.
The proposal called for the creation of a $20-billion unit, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), to manage the World Cup and related events, with roughly 20% of that unit offered to outside investors in an effort to raise as much as $4.2 billion. According to multiple accounts, the initiative sparked an open revolt among football officials worldwide.
That dissent was crystallised when Carlos Cordeiro, a senior adviser to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, stepped down with immediate effect, declaring the plan "a bad deal for football." Cordeiro, appointed by Infantino in 2021 to help shape FIFA's direction, said in his resignation statement that he had not been involved in the proposal and opposed it "unequivocally." He described the move as "mortgaging football’s future without any compelling justification," and said it was "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."
Separately, FIFA Chief Operating Officer Kevin Lamour said staff had been "deceived" by Infantino and characterised the project as a "project of one person." In a statement circulated to media, Lamour wrote: "Our mission ... is to serve football. Not to serve the personal interests of a person who, unfortunately, believes he embodies FIFA when he is supposed to be at its service."
FIFA response and planned consultation
Despite the public backlash, FIFA — headquartered in Switzerland — said that recent "incorrect media reports" had interrupted the consultation it intended to start with its 211 national football associations, but that it would press ahead with the process. In a statement released overnight in Europe, FIFA said it would continue consultations so each Member Association (MA) could "express its vote based on facts."
FIFA emphasised that it would not implement the plan without backing from a majority of its member associations and framed the proposal around three principles: "unprecedented development funding, truly global ownership of the commercial opportunities of our sport, and full self-determination through a democratic process for all MAs." It also stated: "Nobody is selling football. This is not something FIFA would ever entertain."
Investor interest and political context
FIFA indicated that Thrive Eternal, a fund managed by Thrive Capital — founded by Joshua Kushner — was expected to lead the group of potential investors for the stake in FFE. The statement noted that Joshua Kushner is the brother of Jared Kushner, who is a son-in-law of U.S. President Donald Trump. The president, however, said he did not speak with Infantino about FIFA offering stakes to external investors despite having a close relationship with the FIFA president after the United States co-hosted the World Cup.
Confederations and national associations react
European football's governing body, UEFA, led much of the opposition. UEFA accused FIFA of putting the sport's "soul" up for sale and, on Thursday, its 55 member nations voted unanimously to boycott all FIFA tournaments. That vote came less than two weeks after Spain was crowned world champion.
FIFA's next scheduled major event is the women's Under-20 World Cup in September. Hosts Poland said on Friday they had not been informed of any team withdrawals from that tournament.
CONMEBOL, the South American confederation, said it had asked FIFA for additional information on the plan and would continue analysing the proposal before taking a stance. CONMEBOL acknowledged that football's development requires commercial and financial decisions but said such decisions "must always serve football and never take precedence over its very essence."
CONCACAF, representing North America, Central America and the Caribbean, had rejected the proposal during a meeting on Thursday but did not follow UEFA in threatening a boycott. The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) said on Friday it "stands in solidarity" with UEFA and CONCACAF while stopping short of a boycott threat. The AFC questioned the proposal's viability and raised concerns about FIFA's decision-making processes in a statement that signalled disquiet about how the plan had been advanced.
Together, UEFA, CONCACAF and the AFC account for 143 associations, comfortably more than half of FIFA's 211 member associations.
Voices from supporters and officials
Stuart Dykes, director of European and Institutional Affairs at Football Supporters Europe, warned against closed-door decision making, saying such choices "could not be taken behind closed doors by a small group of people." Dykes urged national associations to demand "proper governance, proper consultation, proper stakeholder involvement," adding: "Football is not for sale. It's a social good. Its value is created by the fans and the players ... That value is not for FIFA to extract in the interest of private investors."
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, who had criticised the announcement earlier in the week, said on Friday that Infantino was "the wrong man to lead the organisation." Infantino, 56, is due to stand for re-election next year, and North American football chief Victor Montagliani is reportedly considering a challenge for the FIFA presidency.
Financial offer to members and next steps
In communications to member associations, Infantino outlined a financial inducement tied to support for the proposal: each MA would receive $40 million if it approved FIFA's plan by September 19. FIFA reiterated on Friday that it would not move forward without the approval of a majority of its members.
FIFA said the consultation process would allow each MA to review the details and contribute to shaping any eventual arrangement, framing that approach as consistent with the organisation's democratic principles. At the same time, the public resignations and the confederations' reactions have made it clear the plan faces uphill political and governance challenges before it could be adopted.
What remains unresolved
Several matters remain unclear based solely on the information in the statements and reports that have circulated. Chief among them is whether the consultation process will yield sufficient support among the 211 MAs for the FFE proposal, given the level of organised opposition from major confederations and the high-profile departures and criticisms. FIFA has said it will proceed with consultations to allow member associations to decide, but it has also acknowledged that recent reporting disrupted the timing of those discussions.
For now, FIFA's leadership faces public scrutiny from within its own organisation and from the regional bodies that govern football across the world. The coming weeks are likely to be dominated by further information requests, internal debate among member associations, and formal votes as part of the consultation process described by FIFA.
Whatever the outcome of those votes, the episode has already triggered a rare public rupture in FIFA's governance, with senior staff and advisors registering starkly different views on the direction and ownership of the sport's commercial future.