FIFA is facing fresh scrutiny after one of its most senior executives left the organisation following his public criticism of President Gianni Infantino’s controversial plan to bring private investors into the commercial business behind the World Cup and other competitions.
Chief Operating Officer Kevin Lamour’s departure was confirmed on Monday, 17 August, weeks after he openly challenged the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal, which would have created a new commercial subsidiary valued at about $20 billion (£15 billion) and sold a minority stake to outside investors.
The development adds to the fallout from a plan that FIFA has already abandoned following strong opposition across international football.
However, questions over the proposal have not disappeared. The Financial Times reported that FIFA had discussed the project with potential investors, including Thrive Eternal, an investment vehicle associated with US investor Joshua Kushner.
No binding investment agreement was ultimately announced, and FIFA withdrew the proposal before it reached the approvals originally required from its member associations and FIFA Council.
Read related news:
Wenger declares FIFA world cup stake sale withdrawal absolutely necessary
FIFA faces global backlash over plan to sell world cup stake
Rodri crowned Golden Ball winner after inspirational 2026 FIFA World Cup campaign
Lamour leaves FIFA after public criticism
Lamour had become an unusually prominent internal critic of the project.
FIFA confirmed his departure but did not publicly attribute it to his criticism of Infantino. According to Reuters, FIFA Secretary General Mattias Grafström told staff that Lamour’s departure was by mutual agreement and thanked him for his contribution.
Some media reports have characterised the departure as a dismissal. FIFA itself has not publicly provided detailed reasons, meaning claims that Lamour was removed specifically because of his opposition to the investment plan should be treated cautiously.
Lamour had previously accused FIFA’s leadership of misleading staff over the project and raised concerns about the way it was being developed.
His exit is significant because he occupied one of the most senior operational positions within world football’s governing body.
It also follows the departure of former US Soccer president Carlos Cordeiro, who had served as a senior adviser to FIFA and opposed the proposed commercial restructuring.
What FIFA originally proposed
The controversy began when FIFA unveiled plans for FIFA Forward Enterprise, known as FFE, on 28 July.
Under the proposal, FIFA would have transferred a wide range of commercial and operational activities into a separate subsidiary.
These would have included broadcasting, sponsorship, licensing, ticketing and hospitality rights, alongside the operational delivery of FIFA competitions.
FIFA said it would retain at least 80% of the company and maintain overall control, while up to 20% could be sold to long-term minority investors.
J.P. Morgan valued the proposed business at about $20 billion. FIFA said the minority investment could raise up to $4.2 billion.
The governing body argued that the additional money could significantly increase development funding for its 211 member associations, including investment in football infrastructure, training facilities and grassroots programmes.
The proposal was not an outright sale of the World Cup itself. Rather, it involved selling a minority interest in a company that would control major commercial activities connected with FIFA competitions.
That distinction became important as opposition intensified.
FIFA abandons proposal after backlash
FIFA initially said the project would proceed only if a majority of its member associations supported it and the FIFA Council approved the necessary regulatory changes.
But the plan quickly ran into resistance.
European football authorities and other stakeholders raised concerns about governance, consultation and the potential influence of private capital over football’s most valuable competitions.
Infantino subsequently withdrew the proposal, saying the divisions surrounding the project meant it was no longer serving its original purpose.
That effectively stopped the FFE structure from moving forward.
The withdrawal also meant there was no final approval for the proposed company, no completed sale of a 20% stake and no binding investment transaction announced by FIFA.
Potential investors come under spotlight
Attention has nevertheless turned to who could have invested had the proposal survived.
The Financial Times reported that discussions around the project had involved Thrive Eternal, an investment vehicle led by Joshua Kushner.
Earlier reports had also connected Kushner-related investment interests with the proposed commercial structure.
The involvement of potential investors matters because one of the central criticisms of the FFE project concerned transparency around how investors would be selected and what rights they would receive.
FIFA’s published proposal said investors would hold only minority, non-controlling interests and that FIFA would retain sole control through majority representation on the company’s board.
No final investor list or binding contractual terms were publicly announced before the project collapsed.
Pressure grows on Infantino
Lamour’s departure means the consequences of the dispute are now extending beyond the abandoned investment proposal.
Infantino is facing questions over internal governance, consultation and his leadership of FIFA as the organisation approaches another presidential election cycle.
The original commercial plan was presented as a way of generating billions of dollars for football development. Its opponents, however, questioned whether selling an equity stake in FIFA’s commercial operations could give private investors too much influence over assets ultimately belonging to world football.
The debate is therefore larger than the fate of FFE itself.
It concerns who should control the commercial value generated by the World Cup, how FIFA should finance future growth and how much influence private investors should be permitted to have over the business surrounding international football.
For now, the proposed $20 billion FIFA Forward Enterprise has been abandoned and no minority stake has been sold.
But the departure of a senior executive who publicly opposed the project ensures that the controversy surrounding one of the most significant commercial proposals in FIFA’s recent history is unlikely to disappear quickly.
