Beyond the romance of the game, FIFA’s rejection of a 64-team World Cup is a cold, hard business decision designed to protect its golden goose. The governing body’s inner circle believes that expanding the tournament further would pose an unacceptable risk to the multi-billion-dollar business model that underpins its global operations.
The proposal from South America’s Conmebol, presented to President Gianni Infantino, was framed in terms of sporting inclusivity. But FIFA’s powerful council analyzed it through a financial lens and found it wanting. An insider was explicit, stating that a key reason for the opposition was the fear it would “risk damaging the business model.”
The financial logic is straightforward. The World Cup’s immense value is derived from selling broadcasting and sponsorship rights for a premium, high-quality product. The introduction of 64 teams would likely lead to a bloated group stage with numerous one-sided, low-interest matches. This dilution of quality could make the overall package less attractive to broadcasters, potentially lowering the value of future media rights deals.
Furthermore, a 128-match tournament presents significant logistical costs and complexities, which could eat into the event’s profitability. The current 64-match (moving to 104) format is a proven commercial success, and the council sees no compelling financial reason to tamper with that formula so drastically.
While the language of the debate may be about “quality” and “prestige,” the underlying motivation is deeply rooted in financial pragmatism. FIFA has become a commercial powerhouse, and its decision on the 64-team format is a clear move to protect the asset that lays the golden eggs.