upvote
CONCACAF join UEFA and reject FIFA's World Cup sell-off plan. https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/49488584/uefa-boycott... . By the end of this Gianni Infantino will only be left with the Africans .I am African and these Federations will do anything to keep him around because of the unprecedented amounts of corruption...
reply
reply
This statement is weak and wishy-washy compared to the blunt UEFA statement. Kudos to Europe. Here’s hoping CONCACAF can get brave enough to take the moral stance as well.
reply
While the football business is horrible it's nice that this may fail like the Super League.

Now if only that could put a dent in Infantino reelection...

reply
I am not sure a replacement for Infantino is enough. It seems like FIFA has a culture of corruption and Infantino is merely the latest manifestation of said culture. Some serious reform and restructuring seem needed.
reply
Fifa is a reflection of the world. All members (nations) get a vote. Most countries are corrupt. Thank go there is still a bastion of democracy/fairness left in Uefa.
reply
> unprecedented amounts of corruption...

Yes I hear about that a lot. Yuk

But I also hear that FIFA puts a lot of resources into developing the game in African countries.

I am asking: Is that true in your experience?

reply
Who told you that? FIFA?
reply
The experience interacting with FIFA is so terrible already. I can only imagine how much worse it would be if it turned into a profit machine.
reply
Agreed, the tickets to the tournament this year were just outrageously priced. Football is historically a working class sport, but $1,000 to watch a team like DR Congo in the group stage is next level criminality. And it's only going to get worse from here.
reply
FIFA looked at this World Cup as an experiment. They wanted to see whether turning the monetization knob all the way to 11 would encounter significant resistance or whether fans would still watch/attend. The US, with its plethora of expensive stadiums and lax regulatory environment for price gouging compared to Europe, was the perfect testing environment. They upped the number of teams to 48 to get more games, used dynamic ticket pricing, added hydration breaks for more commercials in markets that would allow it and added a few other income streams. All this more than doubled their profits because, and this is the important part going forward, fans didn’t push back. They complained, but the still came/watched.

So this will now be the new norm. Host countries will be ones where laws don’t prohibit gouging fans. They’ll come up with creative solutions to meet the rotation requirement like the upcoming host a couple games in South America farce that’s allowing them to go to Saudi Arabia after that. They’ll continue to push the boundaries of decency until they get sufficient pushback.

reply
There was pushback if you look at per-team attendance situations, but there's more than enough people living in the US making a ton of money that can easily afford the crazy prices. It did lower how many people from some big football nations decide to follow their team around. Not just due to the prices, but the travel distances. Just consider the practical logistics for, say, Spain's run. 2 games in Atlanta (Cabo verde and Saudi Arabia), then go play Uruguay in Guadalajara, then Austria in SoFi/L.A, then Portugal in the Dallas metro, back to SoFi for Belgium, again to Arlington for France, and New Jersey for Argentina: That's a lot of travel and hotel changing, because there's no reasonable way to go to a game and come back in the same day.

For all the problems in Qatar's world cup, a fan could watch two games a day, live,because the stadiums were that close. The 2026 bid maximized distances about as much as one could, vs, say, at least limit it all to the west coast, which would still be a lot by normal standards, bout would mean fewer huge metros where you could dip your toe in and ask for a ton of money, as there'd be very few games there.

And again, we are talking a team that won, and was among the favorites to win from day 1, just not being able to fill 1/3rd of the stadium, or anything close.

reply
Like for live music tickets prices it's hard to collectively do the right thing and boycott. There's just too many people.

But there's always a breaking point... hopefully.

reply
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying but I said before any of this mess, and just dealing with the ticket purchasing experience, that this would be the last World Cup I attend.

It’s sad though. The World Cup, while imperfect, remains an event that brings the world together. We don’t have many of those left.

reply
For Infantino, they reckon his salary can go from 6M to 60M under this new org…
reply
deleted
reply
They also got so greedy that even EA couldn't deal with them anymore and they ended up destroying the Fifa videogame franchise
reply
Imagine being more money hungry than EA - a company which makes billions from gaslighting children into gambling money on getting their favourite players.
reply
FIFA is also a terrible employer

Got friends working for them as developers. They ran away. In months

reply
Based on the quality of their World Cup ticketing website, I’m not surprised. That was the worst ticketing experience I’ve ever endured.
reply
Are you talking about EA or FIFA?
reply
They just made $15bn.
reply
Which is clearly not enough.
reply
The point is not how much it made, it is how to transfer that wealth (whether 6B or 60B) out of a non-profit into someone else's account without looking like, or literally being, a criminal.
reply
A nonprofit can be questioned about how it pays people.

A private company answers only to shareholders.

reply
These people looked at OpenAI and went "Hey, I can run corruption like that too!"
reply
> and many others

Trump and Kushners

"Joshua Kushner is now the kingpin in driving the sale of the World Cup to investors and family ties are tight around the project"[1]

1. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/jul/30/fifas-sale-...

reply
> UEFA

They are no strangers to certain aspects of it. /s

reply
deleted
reply
What's new? I thought it has been known as a big-money thing for some time now.
reply
The new thing is trying to take the organization from a non-profit to a corporation. Mainly so the executives can increase their already large compensation apparently.

Interesting parallels to OpenAI.

reply
FIFA made $~15 billion USD this World Cup, roughly double what they made in Qatar in 2022. There are many low-hanging fruit that can be optimized to increase that revenue by 10x.
reply
I didn't realize the commercial-block-sized "hydration breaks" were that profitable.

For a second, I thought the Americanization[1] of fùtbol would be done gradually and no one would complain as we'd be slowly boiled. I'm glad the corrupt bastards got greedy/impatient and took a big swing.

1. Sports primarily as a business, catering to owners first, sponsors second, broadcasters third, and then lastly, fans. IMO non-profit sports organizations are the best model for fans, who I identify the most with.

reply
Per-ticket prices were a big factor too. By turning it into an open bidding process, every ticket sold at close to its market value, and many above that.
reply
And they took a 15% commission on both sides of every aftermarket transaction. I’ve never seen such an overtly avaricious “marketplace”.
reply
Off in the distance, an app store rings its 30% bell.
reply
The difference that FIFA ran the whole tournament now. There was no Local Organizing Committee (LOC) like with every single previous event.
reply
> There are many low-hanging fruit that can be optimized to increase that revenue by 10x.

The $15 billion figure is for FIFA's ENTIRE 2023-2026 revenue cycle, so not just this World Cup. But the obvious "low-hanging fruit" was making the tournamenta lot larger (104 matches instead of Qatar's 64), so a lot more tickets, hospitality sales, ads etc

Also two 3 minute hydration breaks per match, giving broadcasters additional advertising windows.

That's your "optimization".

reply
FIFA has announced they plan to officially sell off everything to private investors, dropping all pretense of being a steward of a common good.
reply
What's wrong with making billions? Will this hurt the game somehow?
reply
We've seen the start with "hydration breaks" and a 30 minute half-time.
reply
Investors calling to change red cards because the best players should play, etc
reply
Instead of just various penis challenged nation leaders doing so...
reply
Yes.

The game was already hurt this world cup with the flow destroying „hydration breaks“ to sell more ads.

reply
Yes it will hurt the game. Americans already have the NFL if they want to watch commercials. Leave soccer alone.
reply