29.07.2026, 16:04 Uhr
FIFA’s proposals to sell stakes in its major competitions could win support from smaller nations tempted by a major increase in funding, according to a football finance expert.
The world governing body on Tuesday announced plans to create a private company to run its biggest events, including the World Cup, with external investors invited to buy shares.
The move comes after this summer’s tournament in North America generated record revenues of $15 billion, up from $8 billion at Qatar 2022, underlining the commercial appeal of football’s global showpiece.
The proposals, which would drive up revenues further, have been met with criticism, notably from European governing body UEFA.
However, given the reported sums involved – with individual member countries potentially entitled to an initial windfall plus a huge uplift in annual payments to $20 million per year – there could be a strong incentive for member countries to support them.
Kieran Maguire, Professor of Football Finance at the University of Liverpool, told the Press Association: “This will be what we call a special purpose vehicle. The initial money that goes into it is estimated to be somewhere in the region of $20 billion.
“That will be then distributed to the individual members of FIFA. There’s 211 of those. They would have to get a majority vote in favour of it.
“If you take some of the smaller nations of FIFA, them getting 20 million a year compared to $1 million historically, you can see the benefits to them.”
Maguire believes the commercial incentives could make an expanded and more frequent World Cup more likely.
The possibility of increasing the number of teams involved to 64 from the current 48 already appears to be on the agenda, while the previously rejected idea of a biennial tournament could soon resurface.
“Given that it will be mainly focusing on making money, I think we’d expect there to be an increased World Cup,” Maguire said.
“Having it every two years and having it even bigger than it is now – more matches, more tournaments – means more money, and a lot of people will do well out of that, except people who have grown up on a four-year cycle of World Cups.”
Such a move would be controversial. Plans for a biennial World Cup have been explored before but met with fierce opposition.
It would require major changes to the football calendar and there would be significant concerns over player welfare.
Maguire said: “If I’m an investor putting money in, I want to get my money out as quickly as I can.
“So therefore increasing the cycle of World Cups makes sense from the investor point of view.
“How it’s going to fit in on the calendar, I don’t know. If it’s expanded further the clubs won’t be happy because their players have missed out on the pre-season training.
“I can assure you the players’ union will be opposed to it as well.”
Source: Dpa-international.com
