ESPN sources on Wednesday reported that FIFA posted a $100 million financialloss in 2015 thanks to the loss of key sponsors and mounting legal bills following the corruption scandal that has engulfed the organization.
While it is not unusual for FIFA’s income todrop drastically following a World Cup year, soccer’s world governing body has almost always managed to make a surplus in a non-World Cup year — the notable recent exception being 2001, thesame year its marketing partner ISL went bust, forcing the organization to take out a $176 million loan.
This year, FIFA is losing money because it has thus far been unable to attractnew sponsors after losing the likes of Emirates and Sony, former top-tier partners, as well as Castrol, Continental Tire and Johnson & Johnson, which were second-tier sponsors. Its legal bills arealso significant, with several of the organization’s current and former executives facing indictments in the U.S. on corruption charges.
ESPN’s sources claim that the deficit hasheaped pressure on FIFA’s executive committee members, who are meeting Wednesday and Thursday to accept the audit and compliance committee’s reform proposal, which includes, among otherthings, 12-year term limits for the president and ExCo members as well as financial transparency surrounding salaries and bonuses.
However, those measures may not be enough:
Amen, but what independentorganization is capable of overseeing such a transition and in what kind of (reasonable) time frame? Who would lead it, and how many partners? Are we talking about a large consultancy or accountingfirm? The United Nations? Despite the stated urgency for implementing these reforms, suggestions as to who would carry it out were, unfortunately, left out.
Meanwhile,
It makesfor astonishing reading. Of the 22, four have been banned from the game (three for life), while three—including President Sepp Blatter and UEFA President Michel Platini—havebeen provisionally suspended, one has been indicted by the U.S. department of justice, and two more are currently under police or FBI investigation. Two others were suspended for taking bribes beforethe 2018 and 2022 votes even took place; three have retired, one has been fined for failing to cooperate, and one has passed away.
One of the five current ExCo members left over from that 2010vote is Vitaly Mutko, Russia’s sports minister and head of its 2018 World Cup organizing committee, who was recently described by the World Anti-Doping Agency as “complicit”in the doping scandal that has engulfed his country. Two of the remaining four have been linked to other corruption scandals but have not been formally charged.
For a current and prospectiveFIFA sponsors, it makes for grim reading, indeed. That being said, the size and scope of the so-called “cultural change” these sponsors are seeking is almost unconscionable. It may also beessentially impossible to implement given the urgency.
Time for the Swiss authorities to put FIFA in receivership, appoint a respected businessman to straighten out its operations, and let the courts put the bastards in jail where they belong.
Just scrap the whole thing and start over with a new organization.
When an organization has been engaged in widespread criminal behavior, corrections should be immediate. Periodic reviews by independent auditors is a common practice for law-abiding large corporations handling billions of dollars in revenue, so there is no excuse for delaying implementation of at least an interim program.
A corporation is a fictional person. It is not real, so replacing the fictional person accomplishes nothing. The problem is large amounts of money and human nature, and the problem still remains even if you replace the fictional person with another.