Why Gianni Infantino’s new-look Club World Cup in the USA could turn into FIFA’s worst nightmare this summer | HO

Confetti descends. Music blares. Fireworks shoot off into the New Jersey sky. A bespoke trophy made by Tiffany & Co. (unlockable with a key to make components move) is presented to the winning captain as throngs of fans, sponsors, and a massive global audience watch the victors celebrate.

Somewhere, Gianni Infantino beams: his vision for a global tournament comprising the best club teams in the world is complete – a rousing success earning him plaudits and praise as the Club World Cup‘s new format goes off without a hitch.

That’s the dream, at least. The reality could be much more harsh by the time that trophy is held aloft on July 13 of this freshly-minted New Year.

The tournament’s draw was held in Miami last month. A video message from President-elect Donald Trump greeted the audience which included the 45th president’s daughter, Ivanka, and his son-in-law Jared Kushner – who is believed to have played a role in helping organize this event. Even the couple’s son, Theodore, had the honor of drawing the first team in the tournament.

But long before a ball is kicked in anger, a bevy of issues and concerns has sprung up around this tournament. Sponsorships are scant, it took forever for a television rights deal to be agreed, and dynamic pricing is set to make fans pay more than they’d hope for tickets to attend matches.

Issues about money ‘promised’ to clubs, scheduling issues for some teams, controversy about the inclusion of one particular side, and fears over player safety and health could doom any future edition of this tournament. With only a few months remaining until the Club World Cup kicks off, FIFA has plenty of things to get right – or else a whole lot will go wrong.

The Club World Cup’s new format is the brainchild of FIFA president Gianni Infantino

The fully unlocked Club World Cup trophy, made by Tiffany & Co, was revealed in December

Highlights of the first FIFA Club World Cup draw of the new format
Let’s start with the issue of money, which appears to be the biggest reason why this tournament was expanded from its original six-team, ten-day format in the first place.

One of the biggest draws for the Club World Cup, from a team perspective, is that participating clubs were promised €50million (short of $52m or £41.4m). For clubs like Manchester City and PSG, that is a healthy chunk of change, but not life-changing. Meanwhile, squads like New Zealand’s Auckland City or Tunisia’s Esperance could stand to benefit massively from that prize.

But it seems less and less likely this will happen. Spanish outlet Marca called the promise a ‘pipe dream’ and suggested the distribution of prize money would not be linear. That likely depends most on the results of the tournament, but the outlet also suggests that European clubs would ‘take the biggest slice of the cake’.

Then there’s the question of how the prize money – believed to be in the multiple billions of dollars – will be raised by FIFA.

Outside of ticket sales (more on that later), revenue streams would center around sponsorship money and television rights payments. Both those sources of income already have issues.

For the sponsorship, a lack of interested companies could be cause for alarm for FIFA. At the 2022 FIFA World Cup, the football governing body attracted seven ‘FIFA World Cup sponsors’ in addition to their seven ‘FIFA partners’ – as well as multiple companies for regional sponsorship throughout the globe.

The 2025 Club World Cup only has three ‘Club World Cup sponsors’: Hisense, Bank of America, and AB InBev (via brand Michelob Ultra). Per The Athletic, FIFA wants ten sponsors for the tournament – meaning Infantino & Co. have a lot of leg work to do.

Additionally, two of the seven ‘FIFA partners’ – Coca-Cola and Adidas – are currently in separate legal battles with FIFA over their sponsorship deals. According to The Guardian, the two companies are ‘less than thrilled’ after FIFA attempted to negotiate new contracts with them. Both companies signed deals through 2030, rumored to be worth $70m for each four-year cycle.

Clubs like Esperance (L) and Auckland City (R) likely won’t receive the €50million prize that was expected to be given to them for their participation in the Club World Cup in 2025

A Hisense branded VAR monitor at the UEFA Euro 2024 tournament. Hisense is one of only three companies who have agreed to be sponsors for the Club World Cup this summer.

Additionally, Adidas and Coca-Cola are in legal battles with FIFA over their sponsorship deals

Then there’s the television rights deal, which was only completed last month after no broadcasters were willing to pony up the rumored $4billion FIFA wanted for the rights.

Eventually, British streaming company DAZN was announced as the broadcaster for the tournament – at a price tag of only $1billion.

The two benefits of the DAZN deal are 1) the company was willing to make its broadcasts of all the matches free and 2) they have the option to sub-license the matches to free-to-air broadcasters.

Whether that’s an indicator of the streamer hoping to cash in on those sub-licenses or a fear people won’t be willing to pay the platform (which is not as well known in the USA) to watch this tournament remains to be seen.

Beyond the sponsorship and television woes, the poor attendance at this past summer’s Copa America held in the US will likely be on the minds of FIFA executives.

FIFA officially announced DAZN as their television rights partner for the Club World Cup in December. Rumors suggest the company only paid one-fourth of FIFA’s expected price.

But apparently, those concerns are not enough for the governing body to abandon the biggest barrier to filling up American stadiums: dynamic pricing.

The practice of dynamic pricing is when a company selling tickets allows prices to fluctuate based on demand.

At times, it makes sense. But as seen last summer, the outrageous prices imposed by CONMEBOL did not meet the demand of fans as stadiums across the country were rarely at capacity.

FIFA saw the problem and decided to choose four smaller venues – Orlando’s Inter&Co Stadium, Nashville’s Geodis Park, Cincinnati’s TQL Stadium, and Washington’s Audi Field – but didn’t abandon the practice which made those bigger venues seem under-attended.

Even in the smaller stadia, dynamic pricing could lead to low attendances. The group stage’s biggest matches (PSG-Atletico Madrid in Los Angeles, Bayern Munich-Boca Juniors in Miami) should have no problem selling tickets.

The same can’t be said for the trio of games in Nashville (Club Leon-Esperance, Auckland City-Boca Juniors, Al Hilal-Pachuca) or Washington, DC (Al Ain-Juventus, Salzburg-Al Hilal, Wydad-Al Ain).

Lineups of a Copa America game this past summer held at Q2 Stadium in Austin, Texas

A young United States fan awaits kickoff of a match between the USA and Uruguay at last summer’s Copa America Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City, Missouri. The match above had an announced attendance of 55,460 – which is about 72 percent of the stadium’s capacity.

Finances aside, disruptions to the global football calendar will force some teams to halt play in their respective leagues. Of the 32 clubs involved in the tournament, ten of them will have their seasons interrupted.

This includes the most controversial inclusion into the tournament – Inter Miami CF of MLS. According to FIFA, Inter Miami was selected because the host nation of the Club World Cup gets one spot in the tournament.

However, the mechanism for Miami’s inclusion has been intensely scrutinized. Since inception, MLS has determined its league champion through a knockout tournament – MLS Cup. The LA Galaxy won the 2024 MLS Cup, defeating the New York Red Bulls.

Rather than give the Galaxy the spot, Inter Miami was included for the stated reason of winning the Supporters’ Shield – a trophy handed out to the team which finishes with the best regular season record. In any other league in the world, the Shield winners would be crowned champions.

But the Supporters’ Shield was invented in MLS’s fourth season, it’s an award handed out by a foundation of supporters (not the league itself), and it has largely been ignored by the league in terms of its legitimacy in crowning a champion.

But FIFA, surely needing a way to ensure Lionel Messi would be in its new tournament, decided to grant Inter Miami the host nation spot long before the MLS Cup Playoffs reached their conclusion. It was a decision which drew strong criticism from American soccer fans and media.

Lionel Messi will be playing in the tournament because FIFA awarded Inter Miami a host spot for the Club World Cup due to them winning the Supporter’s Shield trophy

MLS decides their champions with a playoff cup tournament, while the team with the most points wins the Shield – viewed as a minor prize (pictured: MLS commissioner Don Garber)

Lastly, we arrive with the players themselves. This was done with intention, as surely the concerns of the athletes seems to be the last thing FIFA cares about.

For those competing in the tournament, participation in the Club World Cup means a loss of crucial vacation and recovery time after months of seemingly-endless training and matches. A FIFA spokesperson told the BBC, ‘The FIFA Club World Cup is not responsible for calendar congestion,’ while adding the governing body ‘cares about the welfare of the players.’

But multiple players – including Liverpool’s Alisson Becker and Manchester City’s Rodri – have voiced concerns over hosting this tournament at the end of a long and grueling club season.

FIFPRO – the players union for footballers – has previously voiced concerned over the saturation of the global football calendar. Man City midfielder Kevin de Bruyne remarked: ‘It seems that money speaks louder than the players’ voices.’

Players aren’t the only ones concerned: City manager Pep Guardiola already asked for a late start to the Premier League season. Real Madrid manager Carlo Ancelotti said they could ‘forget about’ his squad taking part and it wasn’t just a money issue. Those comments were later addressed by Los Blancos, who insisted they would participate.

As much as FIFA may think it’s not responsible for the calendar, playing in the Club World Cup puts players under serious strain in a season where footballers may play upwards of 60 matches.

It also puts clubs that aren’t competing in the tournament at a distinct competitive advantage.

Take the Premier League for example: while Manchester City and Chelsea are competing, other top clubs like Liverpool and Arsenal will be able to fully rest their players – allowing them to take vacation and recover before working their way back to match fitness over the summer. Meanwhile, only three weeks separate the final of the Club World Cup and the current start of the Premier League season.

Players, like Liverpool’s Alisson (L) and Manchester City’s Rodri (R) have voiced their concerns over match fixture congestion which the Club World Cup would make worse for players

Kevin de Bruyne remarked: ‘It seems that money speaks louder than the players’ voices’

Managers Pep Guardiola (L) and Carlo Ancelotti (R) have also raised their concerns

MetLife Stadium, the host of the 2025 Club World Cup final, during the 2024 Copa America

In spite of the stated concerns, there’s no indication the tournament will be shelved if the inaugural edition of the Club World Cup goes awry. In fact, according to The Athletic, FIFA is already considering granting the United States the hosting rights again when the tournament is set for a 2029 edition.

Maybe by then, these issues will be a thing of the past. Maybe by then, the Club World Cup will have proven itself to be a spectacle worth aspiring to. Maybe by then, Gianni Infantino’s dream will be viewed as a global benefit for the beautiful game.

But that’s for then, and this is now. In six months, a ball will roll to kick off the tournament in its new incarnation with the goal to crown a world champion of the club game.

There’s still so much work to be done. FIFA has the obligation to meet – and surpass – expectations for this tournament to prove the doubters wrong.

If it doesn’t, then it’ll be viewed as what so many already believe it to be: a shameless money grab that endangers the athletes playing the game which no one will want to take part in come four years’ time.