Sell the World Cup for 29 trillion won? Is it possible? - 경향신문

This article was translated by an AI tool. Feedback Here.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino sits in the stands at Miami Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida, on the 11th, ahead of the 2026 North and Central America and Caribbean World Cup quarterfinal between Norway and England. Reuters Yonhap News

The Fdration Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) is pursuing a plan to transfer the commercial and operational rights of major competitions, including the World Cup, to a separate entity and attract private investment. FIFA says the idea is to secure resources for the development of football, but across the game, including the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), critics say it is an attempt to turn the World Cup into an investment product for private capital. Here is a Q&A summarizing FIFA’s plan and the controversy.

A. FIFA has proposed establishing a separate company called ‘FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE)’ to take charge of the commercial and operational aspects of its own competitions, including the World Cup and the Club World Cup. FFE would handle not only broadcasting rights, sponsorships, ticket sales, and licensing, but also tournament preparation and operations.

FIFA states that it would continue to retain final decisionmaking authority over football governance matters such as competition regulations, match calendars, and sporting policy. FFE’s enterprise value has been initially assessed at $20 billion (approximately 29 trillion KRW).

Q. How would private investors participate?

A. FIFA plans to raise $4.2 billion by selling a noncontrolling minority stake in FFE to longterm investors. A leading potential investor currently mentioned is an investment group linked to the U.S. firm Thrive Capital.

FIFA explained that private investors would not have management control, and that net profits generated by FFE would be reinvested in the development of global football.

Q. What benefits would FIFA member associations receive?

A. FIFA said it could provide up to $40 million (about 57.7 billion KRW) to each of its 211 member associations. Under the 2027∼2030 budget cycle, the plan is to increase the payment from $8 million to $20 million, and allow members to optionally receive an additional $20 million from private investment funds.

Gianni Infantino, the FIFA president, has reportedly set September 19 as the deadline for members to decide whether to receive the additional funding.

Q. Why has the controversy escalated?

A. The first criticism was that the decisionmaking process lacked transparency. The plan was first revealed by British media reports, after which FIFA officially disclosed the details.

The Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) and the Asian Football Confederation said there had been no prior consultation. The English Football Association also said it had not been informed about the specific terms and content of the plan.

A composite image of FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s silhouette and ‘20%’, with a rising stock price graph. Produced on the 28th. Reuters Yonhap News

Q. Why is private capital participation seen as a problem?

A. Critics worry that investors could seek to influence how competitions are run to boost returns. FIFA says the stake for sale is about 20% and that it would not cede control, but there is no guarantee private ownership will not expand further in the future.

Some also foresee pressure to expand the number of teams and matches at the World Cup or Club World Cup, or to shorten the World Cup cycle from four years to two, in order to increase investment returns.

Q. What impact could this have on players?

A. More matches would increase players’ physical load. If the World Cup and Club World Cup expand, it would also affect the calendars of existing competitions such as domestic leagues and the UEFA Champions League.

FIFPRO Europe, the European players’ union, warned that if major competitions become investment assets for private capital, the purpose and structure of the tournaments in which players compete could fundamentally change.

A. UEFA criticized FIFA’s plan as “crossing a line that football’s governing bodies must not cross.” It argued that football’s identity and its governance rights are not items for trade, nor assets that FIFA can sell at will.

UEFA also took issue with the way a deadline for receiving support funds was presented to members. It said opposition to FIFA’s plan is growing among various football stakeholders.

Q. What other objections have been raised?

A. Javier Tebas, president of Spain’s professional league La Liga, criticized that someone who combines politics, discipline, money, and power without transparency should not be leading FIFA.

The English Football Association and the European Club Association also expressed serious concerns about the decisionmaking process and governance. Officials from the UK government and the European Commission likewise stated that the World Cup should not be treated as an investment product.

A composite image of FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s silhouette and ‘FIFA’s $20 billion enterprise’, with a rising stock price graph. Produced on the 28th. Reuters Yonhap News

Q. Is there any support for the plan?

A. The Football Association of the Czech Republic indicated conditional support, saying cooperation with FIFA could provide tangible help for the development of football in the country. Associations in countries with weaker finances may positively view the chance to invest large grants into stadiums, youth systems, and grassroots football.

Many FIFA member associations assess that President Infantino has provided more support to small and midsized members than to Europe’s major football nations.

A. The plan to establish FFE is not yet finalized. It must receive approval from the FIFA Council and a majority of member associations.

UEFA will discuss countermeasures with its 55 member associations. Some have raised the possibility of boycotting FIFA competitions such as the World Cup and the Club World Cup, but the prevailing view is that it is unlikely to lead to concrete action.

CONCACAF and the Asian Football Confederation could also take separate steps. However, both confederations are placing more emphasis on the lack of consultation than on the content of the plan itself.

A. If a majority of member associations oppose it, the plan could be voted down. Should resistance from fans, the media, and football organizations spread, FIFA may revise or even withdraw the plan.

FIFA maintains that largescale investment would expand the financial base of global football. Opponents argue that if the World Cup’s commercial rights pass to private capital, the sport’s public character and governance principles could be undermined. Ultimately, the dispute is a clash over whether to regard the World Cup as a shared asset of the football community or as an investment vehicle to generate profit.