“Fifa Forward Enterprise, or FFE, is actually a proposal, an offer. It’s part of a democratic process – a consultation process – and, above all, it is an opportunity but not an obligation,” Infantino said in the video.
“It is a golden opportunity to turbocharge the development of the game globally. But again, it is just an offer, not an obligation.”
Infantino insisted the proposal was centred on unlocking “previously uncaptured commercial value” and was conditional on a democratic vote of Fifa’s 211 member associations and approval by the 38-member Fifa council.
“Capturing that value requires additional expertise, additional insight, distinct from governing and developing the sport,” he said.
“It would simply commercialise and organise all Fifa-owned competitions along with sponsorship, broadcast, licensing and new ventures for the benefit of Fifa’s 211 member associations.”
Infantino said the game would not change and the fans would be happier.
“Fans from everywhere in the world would gain immeasurably from this game-changing potential because it will transform football in their countries,” he said.
The Times – which broke the original story this week – reported Infantino, 56, stood to profit from the scheme by becoming commissioner of the FFE after his expected next term expires in 2031. Fifa denied that this had been discussed.
The article also said discussion had started with financial advisers and potential investors.
Those include Thrive capital, an investment company founded and led by Joshua Kushner, brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, as well as an arm of JP Morgan Chase, the US bank that attempted to finance the failed breakaway European Super League.
Continental backlash
Uefa, which has regularly criticised Infantino, said the plan “crosses a line”.
“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade – especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not Fifa’s to sell.”
The European Union made no bones about their disdain for the plan.
“Hands off our game,” Glenn Micallef, the EU commissioner for sport, posted on X.
Concacaf, which governs North and Central American football, said it was “deeply concerned by the lack of due process”.
The Asian Football Confederation said it was “disappointed” it had not been consulted.
Fifa said in an earlier statement that it “would retain sole control of FFE and exclusive authority over football governance, competitions, match calendar, and all regulatory and sporting decisions”.
It said it believed FFE would achieve an “initial equity valuation of US$20b [$35b]”.
Fifa said each of its member associations would be given the chance to take a one-off stake of US$20m ($35m) in FFE.
That represents only 0.1% of the total, but would be a significant sum for the leaderships of Fifa’s poorer or smaller members.
In June, ahead of the World Cup, Fifa, which folds competition income into revenue for the whole year, anticipated record revenues exceeding US$8b ($13.85b) for 2026.
It was the first World Cup with 48 teams and there is talk of further expanding it to 64.
The Times quoted an unnamed “senior football figure” calling the plan “potentially much worse than the European Super League”, as it would have an impact on all levels of football across the globe.
In 2019, a Fifa stakeholders’ committee rejected an Infantino-backed plan for a US$25b ($43b) private investment in an expanded Club World Cup. Reported backers included SoftBank of Japan and Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund.
Fifa did expand that competition from seven teams to 32 clubs in 2025.
– AFP