Fifa President Gianni Infantino faces mounting opposition after proposing to sell stakes in the World Cup to private equity investors, a plan that has sparked widespread criticism and threats of boycott from multiple football confederations. The proposal, which reportedly involves a £3.1 billion deal with New York-based venture capital firm Thrive Capital, led by Joshua Kushner, has drawn sharp rebuke from European football associations, government officials, former Fifa leadership, and parts of the football community worldwide.
The proposal would see private investors acquire ownership interests in the tournament, which Infantino and his supporters argue could unlock significant new financial resources for the sport. To encourage backing, Infantino’s administration offered each of Fifa’s 211 member associations £30 million, payable in two installments, as an incentive to approve the plan by a September 19 deadline.
However, the reaction from European football’s governing body, Uefa, has been decisive and unified. All 55 Uefa member nations voted to oppose the initiative and have threatened to boycott the men’s and women’s World Cups as well as the Club World Cup should the plan advance. Top European national teams, including England, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, as well as Spain and Portugal, the hosts of the 2030 World Cup, indicated they may withdraw from the competition if the sale proceeds.
In a statement, Uefa condemned the proposal as a “profound failure of leadership” and described the World Cup as part of the “cultural heritage of world football” that must not be treated as a commercial asset for private investors. Uefa expressed concerns that private equity involvement could increase pressure to expand the tournament and lead to more frequent competitions, disrupting the existing football calendar and raising ticket prices.
Support for Infantino appears to be substantial among federations outside Europe. Confederations in Africa, Asia, and the Americas have generally backed Infantino in the past, appreciating the increased financial benefits and the World Cup expansion to 48 teams under his leadership. Notably, Concacaf, representing North and Central America and the Caribbean, also rejected the proposal but did not explicitly threaten boycott measures. South America’s Conmebol, which has historically supported Infantino, has yet to publicly comment, and Oceania’s OFC has deferred a decision pending further discussions.
The backlash has drawn criticism not only from football organizations but also from political figures and former Fifa officials. Among the critics is Sepp Blatter, Infantino’s predecessor, who emphasized that the World Cup should not be controlled by a “handful of executives,” and UK politician Andy Burnham, who described the plan as a “sell out” of a competition considered the pinnacle of sports.
Calls have intensified for Infantino’s resignation amid accusations that the scheme undermines the integrity of the game. Some commentators argue that the plan risks dividing world football and represents a significant power struggle between Infantino and Uefa President Aleksander Ceferin.
A critical vote on the matter is anticipated later this year. The upcoming Women’s World Cup qualifiers in October are seen as the first potential test of Uefa’s boycott stance. With no consensus among the continental confederations, and significant resistance from key stakeholders, the future of Infantino’s plan remains uncertain, and the governance of world football faces one of its most significant challenges in recent years.