“It is not FIFA’s to sell.” That sentence, from a UEFA statement issued on July 28, 2026, set the tone for one of the shortest and sharpest revolts in the recent history of world football.
The cause was a plan reported that day by the Financial Times and The Times. FIFA wanted to create a commercial subsidiary called FIFA Forward Enterprise, or FFE, to handle broadcasting, sponsorship, ticketing and licensing, along with the running of its tournaments. Outside investors would buy minority, non-controlling stakes. FIFA hoped to raise up to $4.2bn this way, putting the value of the new company at around $20bn. Sky Sports reported that J.P. Morgan was acting as financial adviser and that Thrive Capital, whose chief executive is Josh Kushner, brother of Jared Kushner, was expected to lead the investor group.
A statement with no diplomacy in it
UEFA did not hide its anger. “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade,” its statement said, adding that this “crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross” and complaining of “zero transparency as to who gains financially.”
The English Football Association said it had been “completely unaware” of the proposal. Relations were already poor. UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin had stayed away from the World Cup final in protest at a series of FIFA governance issues, Sky Sports noted. FIFA had not raised the plan at its meetings with national associations in New York on the eve of that final.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham weighed in on X: “Football does not belong to investors.”
FIFA argued the money would help its members. The proposal needed approval from member associations, and FIFA said it could deliver more than $10bn in “football development funding” over four years. Infantino also wrote to all 211 associations on July 29 with a September 19 deadline to secure an initial $20 million payment. UEFA’s reply was blunt: “FIFA cannot continue to use our sport to enrich themselves and their friends.”
Why Europe pushed back
Outlook India reported that European federations feared investors would demand more matches, bigger tournaments and further expansion to maximise returns, which could hurt domestic leagues and the Champions League. Wealthier federations such as England, Spain, Germany and France were far less convinced than smaller nations that stood to gain from the extra development money.
On July 30, UEFA’s 55 member associations voted to boycott FIFA World Cups and other FIFA competitions if the plan went ahead. Concacaf announced the same day that its members had rejected it too. The Asian Football Confederation then declared solidarity with the two. Between them, UEFA, Concacaf and the AFC represent 136 of FIFA’s 211 voting associations, well above the 106 votes needed to block the plan.
The pressure came from inside FIFA as well. Carlos Cordeiro, a senior adviser to Infantino, resigned, calling the proposal “a bad deal for football.” Chief operating officer Kevin Lamour said FIFA’s own administration had been “deceived” and called it “the project of one person.”
Withdrawn within days
On August 1, Infantino confirmed the plan was dead. “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,” he said. “As a result, this proposal will not proceed.”
Sources
- World Cup: UEFA hits out at FIFA and Gianni Infantino amid plans to sell minority stakes linked to competition | Sky Sports
- How Global Backlash Triggered The Collapse Of FIFA World Cup Investment Plan – Timeline Of Gianni Infantino's Proposal | Outlook India
