Fifa's Grand Plan for the World Cup: More Tournaments and Higher Stakes

Fifa’s latest grand plan for the future of the World Cup is laid out in black and white, and it leaves little room for doubt about the direction of travel: more tournaments, higher ticket prices, and a heavy reliance on debt.

In a 25-page sales deck titled “Fifa Forward Enterprise Member Materials”, seen by the Guardian and circulated to all 211 member associations on Wednesday night, world football’s governing body makes its pitch for a radical restructuring of its commercial arm. At the heart of it is the creation of a new company to run Fifa’s commercial operations, with 20% of that entity earmarked for sale to US investor Joshua Kushner, brother of Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law.

The document, prepared by JP Morgan – the same US bank that helped architect the doomed European Super League project five years ago – is unapologetic about how it intends to squeeze more money out of the global game. Fifa, it argues, is “undermonetized”. The solution, it says, is a “growing tournament portfolio”, aggressive “media rights monetization”, and the use of “third party sources of capital and debt financing”.

In plain terms: more football, more often, for more money.

More tournaments, more strain

One line in the deck jumps off the page. JP Morgan refers to a plan to more than double the number of global tournaments each year, from 200 to 450. If even close to realised, that escalation would place enormous pressure on an already stretched calendar and on players whose workloads are at breaking point.

Staging the World Cup more frequently is the obvious cash cow. Fifa president Gianni Infantino has already floated the idea of a biennial World Cup in the recent past. The sales pitch now frames a busier tournament schedule as central to unlocking future growth, with the World Cup at the top of that pyramid.

The bank also signals a potential shift in how fans watch the sport’s biggest events. The deck outlines a plan to “expand and optimize media rights monetization”, language that points towards pushing more rights to subscription broadcasters or streaming platforms. Free-to-air coverage of the World Cup, long treated in many countries as a public good, could find itself under threat.

The numbers behind the push

To sweeten the deal for national associations, Fifa is dangling immediate and long-term financial incentives. Alongside the previously reported $20m sign-up payment on offer to each of the 211 member associations – money that could start flowing as early as January – the prospectus projects a substantial rise in Fifa Forward payments.

According to the document, those four-year solidarity and development payments would climb to $24m per member association by the 2035–39 cycle. The message is blunt: back this structure now, and the cheques will get bigger later.

JP Morgan buttresses the case with comparisons to US major leagues. Fifa’s stated annual revenue of $3.6bn is set against the NFL’s $21.2bn, Major League Baseball’s $13.1bn and the NBA’s $12.5bn. The implication is that world football’s governing body is lagging far behind the commercial might of club- and franchise-based competitions.

Yet those comparisons jarred with some within the game. One senior figure queried why a global regulator and organiser of competitions is being measured against private, member-run leagues whose core purpose is profit, not governance.

Debt, opacity and a missing half of the game

The financial engineering sits uneasily with Fifa’s current position. The organisation has cash reserves of around $4bn and accumulated revenues of $15bn over the current four-year cycle. Against that backdrop, the prospect of loading up on debt to fund expansion has already triggered alarm.

One senior figure questioned why such a cash-rich body needs to borrow at all. Another raised concerns about the speed and structure of the proposed deal. According to the timeline set out in the deck, “Investors will be given access to a term sheet and select materials” in August – before Fifa’s members have even voted on whether to proceed.

The investor group itself is barely sketched out in the prospectus. Beyond the reference to Kushner and the 20% stake on offer, there is scant detail on who else might be involved, what returns they are targeting or how and when they might exit. For a transaction that would reshape the commercial backbone of world football, that lack of transparency is striking.

Just as striking is what the document does not say. Across 25 pages, there is not a single mention of women’s football. No projections, no strategy, no dedicated products. At a time when the women’s game is growing rapidly and delivering record attendances and viewing figures, its total absence from a blueprint for the sport’s financial future is a glaring omission.

A battle for football’s future

The sales deck has landed like a flare in a crowded dressing room. It promises richer member associations, a fatter commercial machine and a World Cup-driven juggernaut powered by private capital. It also raises fundamental questions about who controls the game, who benefits from its growth, and how much more the sport can be stretched before something gives.

Fifa has been approached for comment. The next move belongs to the 211 member associations, who must decide whether the promise of bigger payouts is worth handing a slice of the World Cup’s soul to outside investors – and whether the game can survive being played, and sold, at this relentless pace.