World Cup meets Wall Street? What to know about FIFA’s proposed World Cup rights selloff

After one of the greatest FIFA’s proposed World Cups ever, news has surfaced around a week and a half later, bringing FIFA and its president Gianni Infantino back to reality after their spectacular victory in North America.

The world soccer governing body revealed plans on Tuesday to establish a distinct organization that would oversee the economic and operational rights to one of the largest sporting events in the world. This organization would include private investors.

This plan, nevertheless, has been under severe scrutiny and condemnation from many around the world, including European governing body UEFA saying the “soul and governance” of the game are under threat.

But what is it about the idea that has prompted such anger among soccer bodies and officials, members of the media and fans? Why are so many saying that FIFA is putting soccer up for sale.

What is FIFA’s proposal?

FIFA says it would own and have “sole control” of this subsidiary, which it says has an initial equity valuation of $20 billion, and have “exclusive authority” over the sports side of things, including tournaments, governance, match schedules and regulatory/sporting decisions. The governing body said all net gains of FFE would be returned back into the worldwide game.

Private investment in the game is one of these plans; according to FIFA, it will raise $4.2 billion by collaborating with specific “long-term investors who will purchase minority, non-controlling interests in FFE.

FIFA would be able to give all 211 of its member associations up to $40 million with the funds produced by the proposal: $20 million for the upcoming budget cycle of 2027–2030 (up from the $8 million now projected) and an immediate, optional $20 million from the $4.2 billion in private investment. The Associated Press reports that Infantino has given the member associations until September 19 to accept the optional payment.

Similar organizations now exist in sports. For instance, the motorsport regulating organization FIA oversees the sporting aspect of Formula One, while Liberty Media controls the commercial and operational rights. As seen by the private equity investments made in the NFL, NBA, MLB, and PGA Tour, the relationship between Wall Street and sports is not new. However, the trend appears to be accelerating into international sports.

However, the proposal as a whole is just that—a suggestion. It still requires approval from the FIFA Council and the majority of FIFA’s member associations, as FIFA stated in a statement.

So what’s potentially controversial about the proposal?

First, there was a lack of clarity in the proposal’s development. Before FIFA verified it, it was first reported in the Times of London.

Soccer authorities have now criticized the proposals, claiming they were not consulted at all before they were made public. The Asian Football Confederation and CONCACAF both issued statements claiming they were not consulted, and the North and Central America and Caribbean governing body expressed its “deep concern by the lack of due process.

Second, the inclusion of private investors in the FFE project has drawn a lot of criticism. This is especially true of Thrive Eternal, the primary proposed investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of US President Donald Trump.

Although FIFA claims it will retain exclusive control of the subsidiary, the sale of about 20% of FFE may not seem like much at the moment. However, FIFA’s announcement on Tuesday makes no mention of investors being restricted to 20% indefinitely.

It is feared that investors may try to influence issues outside of their purview in order to maximize their profits because they are looking for a return on their investments.

For instance, hydration breaks allowed broadcasters to air more advertisements if they so desired, and the recently expanded men’s World Cup allowed for much more revenue through additional games. Expanding the World Cup and Club World Cup to accommodate more teams and offer more games for higher cash would be even more motivating. This is what Infantino already suggested during the 2026 edition, not conjecture. Would investors also put pressure on FIFA to host the World Cup every two years rather than every four.

Player welfare and events outside of FIFA’s purview, like domestic leagues and continental club competitions like the Champions League, would then be impacted. With more games, players are already getting close to their physical limits; will this result in more injuries and have a greater impact on the product.

The World Cup and other competitions could become “investable assets for private capital, a move that would fundamentally and irreversibly reshape the incentives underpinning the competitions in which players work, compete, and build their careers,” according to a statement from the European soccer player union FIFPRO Europe, which expressed “deep concern” about the FFE proposal.

FIFA has been contacted by CNN Sports to discuss the recommendations.

Who has spoken out and what are they saying?

With its forceful statement on Tuesday, UEFA is spearheading the criticism, claiming that the proposed rights sale “crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross.

“Football’s soul and governance are not tradable assets, especially when there is no financial transparency.” Football is not owned by any of us. The European governing body went on, “FIFA is not to sell.

“We have learned of FIFA’s deadline to associations to support their proposals or have the one-time payout offer withdrawn,” UEFA continued today. Everything you need to know about this plan is stated here.

UEFA is aware that there is strong and increasing opposition to FIFA’s plan after speaking with numerous stakeholders in the game. FIFA can’t keep using our sport to benefit themselves and their pals. We can properly expand the game.

Javier Tebas, the president of La Liga in Spain, went even farther, stating that the plan “didn’t seem like a reform” and that “whoever mixes politics, disciplinary measures, money and power without transparency shouldn’t lead anything.” FIFA’s governance cannot be solved by Infantino. He is the issue.

FIFA has been contacted by CNN Sports about the objections to its suggestions.

One of the most powerful national associations in the world, the FA of England, stated that “we were completely unaware of this proposal and have no substantive details, including what the proposition actually is, and what conditions are attached.

“Based on the limited information, we are deeply concerned about the apparent substance and principles involved, as well as the lack of process and governance to get to this point,” the statement continued.

The autonomous organization for European club teams, European Football Clubs, expressed “serious concern” over the proposals.

Additionally, UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has stated on X that “the World Cup is not a product” and “football does not belong to investors.