Luiz Eduardo Baptista took over as Flamengo’s president in 2025 and, right from the start, had a perfect year, winning both the Brasileirão and the Libertadores, as well as achieving record revenues.
In an interview with the newspaper AS, the red-and-black president spoke about his success at the helm of the Gávea club and declared that his dream is to turn Fla into a “Real Madrid of the Americas.”
“I’ve always dreamed big. I’ve always thought about wanting to be the Real Madrid of the Americas. I look at what Real Madrid does, what City does, what Atlético de Madrid does, what Bayern Munich does, what PSG does. I try to understand what they got right, work properly on what I can adapt to Brazil’s reality, and see what I consider mistakes and how I could avoid repeating them. For example, Florentino Pérez’s ‘Galácticos’ era at Real Madrid was sensational from a marketing point of view, but from a sporting perspective, it wasn’t,” said Bap.
Bap also praised Flamengo’s management and once again rejected the idea of becoming an SAF, comparing it to Real Madrid.
“Flamengo is an island in Brazil. Our success isn’t because Flamengo is bigger. It’s because Flamengo is better managed,” he stated. “Flamengo will never be an SAF. Flamengo is like Real Madrid,” concluded Luiz Eduardo Baptista.
So, fan, what do you think of the Flamengo president’s statements?
Leave your opinion in the comments!
Check out below a summary of the interview and Bap’s full answers to the Spanish newspaper.
Success and “keeping your feet on the ground”
“It was a special year. But in sports, last year’s success doesn’t guarantee the next. We’re working for a huge 2026, even though we didn’t start the year in the best way. Football changes quickly and you need balance.”
Inspiration from Ferran Soriano’s Barcelona
Bap reveals the revolution started back in 2010. “The model and inspiration were 100% Barcelona from the early 2000s, because of Ferran Soriano’s book, ‘The Ball Doesn’t Go In By Chance.’ I saw that Flamengo’s conditions were identical to those he described at Barça, but with even more room for growth.”
‘Disney’ Model
For the president, Flamengo can’t depend only on results on the pitch:
- Diversified revenues: 60% of 2025’s growth came from commercial areas, not from prize money.
- Systemic vision: “We manage the club as if it were Disney. We sell dreams and entertainment. Even if we hadn’t won anything last year, revenue would still have grown 25%.”
Financial Fair Play (FFP) in Brazil
BAP advocates for strict rules for the league:
“Last year, Flamengo spent only 40% of its revenue on football. When Fair Play arrives, I’ll be able to double my investment and still be within the rules. There are clubs spending 80%, 100% of what they earn; that’s irresponsible.”
Signing Lucas Paquetá
Paquetá’s return is an example of the club’s health: “West Ham didn’t ask for bank guarantees because our word is gold. We pay players, agents, and employees on time. On December 26, all season bonuses were already in every club employee’s account.”
Record Numbers
Bap corrected the data from European consultancies (such as Deloitte):
- Actual revenue: In 2025, it surpassed 320 million euros (about R$1.7 billion).
- Player sales: The club maintains a high average, earning between 50 and 90 million euros annually.
- World ranking: “I believe we are between the 15th and 16th highest-grossing clubs in the world.”
Synthetic Pitch and SAFs
- Pitch: He is radically against synthetic turf. “The Maracanã is for football, not for concerts. We prioritize performance. If I bring Shakira to the Maracanã, I make money, but I don’t fulfill my obligation to football.”
- SAFs: “I have nothing against them, but Flamengo will never be an SAF. We are like Real Madrid. What’s missing is regulation; you can’t have someone buy a club, increase the debt, and not suffer sporting punishment.”
Will Flamengo leave Maracanã?
“The Maracanã is mine for 19 years. I have 19 years to wait and see if I need to build a stadium or not. I already have my own stadium for two decades, because I have the Maracanã concession. We’re not leaving it. Imagine now, if the new stadium doesn’t have a business model that brings Flamengo much more money than the Maracanã does today without any investment, why would I build it? Now, it also depends on the moment and circumstances,” said Bap.
Full interview with the Spanish newspaper As
A perfect year for Flamengo, with the Libertadores and the Brasileirão. You took over as president and have already made your mark in history...
It was a special year. But, as you know, in sports, last year’s success doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll have a great year in the next season. You have to work hard every day. Not always when you win is everything good, nor when you lose is everything bad. You need humility and balance to move forward. And there are variables that change. Being very good creates a situation within the group. It can be positive or not so positive. Some remain as motivated as before, others not so much. Some have expectations regarding their personal and professional circles, which may or may not be related to the club. That’s the beauty of sports and football—things change very quickly. Going back to your question, we are working hard to have a great 2026, even though we didn’t start the year well. We will improve. No doubt.
Flamengo’s off-field work goes back a long time; today it’s one of the teams with the highest revenues in South America.
That’s an important question because it marked the start of a red-and-black revolution. It probably began in 2010. With me. Alone. I was already a club member, I was president of Sky in Brazil. And we sponsored Flamengo’s basketball at that time. We had a lot of success with that. That was the beginning of a political process and I started looking for other executives from the market who weren’t from the football club, but who were passionate about Flamengo and understood they could help us. That group grew. It took shape, we formed a ticket and won the 2012 elections at Flamengo. The model, the inspiration, was 100% Barcelona, in the early 2000s, I believe because of Ferran Soriano and his book ‘The Ball Doesn’t Go In By Chance.’ It tells the story of Barcelona, and if you want to understand what motivated me, it was because the conditions were identical to those described about Barcelona at that time. The problems may have been a bit different, but the stories are very similar. The difference is that, in terms of potential, I always saw Flamengo as a club with enormous room for growth.
A Flamengo beyond football?
Exactly! I don’t have a vision limited to football. I have a broader systemic vision. I worked in television for 27 years of my life at the head of Sky. The entire pay-per-view process in Brazil was basically led by Sky. Almost 70% of the pay-per-view football market share in Brazil was built during my management at Sky. This process always took into account the rights of open and private television. Globo was a shareholder in both businesses. It had open TV and a private equity stake. It was an unusual market situation; I had to negotiate with a competitor, but practically a brother, the rights to see who got each game. Because every time there was a peak in open TV, it weakened the pay-per-view product. I, as Sky president, wanted all the games on pay-per-view. Those on open TV wanted Flamengo’s games on open TV because they bring more audience. Their model is the advertising model. My model was the subscription sales model. For 15 years, I had to negotiate every year with whoever bought the open TV rights. Thanks to that, I had a perfect idea of which clubs had the most audience and sold the most products. Today, 15 years later, the person who works with me in this type of consultancy and commercial support is Marcelo Campos Pinto, who was precisely the person at Globo with whom I had to negotiate the rights for 15 years. So, modesty aside, the two people who best understand this process in Brazil are now working together for Flamengo.
Didn’t that create a conflict of interest?
Yes, because at a certain point I had an important position and couldn’t work at Flamengo. I always had a prominent political role at the club. The time came for my retirement from Sky and then I could run, and I was elected, president of Flamengo. This process of Flamengo’s growth and solidity began to get very strong from 2019. In 2025, Flamengo’s revenues grew by more than 40%, which is why you want to talk to me now (laughs).
Because Flamengo is the club with the highest revenue in all of Brazil, not to mention its achievements, Libertadores and Brasileirão.
Of total revenue, 40% comes from achievements and prizes, but 60% of this growth comes from other commercial revenues that have absolutely nothing to do with sporting success. A series of good commercial actions were carried out. My vision is that Flamengo should be managed as if it were Disney. We sell entertainment. We don’t have a football team that generates resources for other sports. Why? Because football’s ability to generate money is finite. In Europe, clubs play 60 matches a year. 30 home games, where they own the revenue. Stadiums usually have 70,000 seats, an average of 60,000 attendees per game, multiplied by 30 games, etc. Ticket prices are limited. Shirt sponsorship is limited. Broadcast rights are limited. So, when you have a giant club like Real Madrid, for example, and it does very badly on the field, it’s very hard to believe you’ll increase revenue if you don’t have other businesses running.
That’s why you see European clubs going to America, looking for new fans in Asia, doing pre-seasons abroad, opening new markets. It’s like the exploration of the world in the 15th and 16th centuries, it’s the same thing. Only instead of taking caravels and dominating the world overseas, you try to do that by taking planes and going to China with a football team. But, in reality, it’s about opening new markets for your product. Similarly, we’re doing that with Flamengo in Brazil, in South America. The result has been very positive. Of course, when you win, other revenues grow more, but if Flamengo hadn’t won the championship last year, its revenues would have grown 25%. That is, if Flamengo had lost everything, it would still have increased its revenues by 25%. We are creating a management model in which Flamengo’s growth does not depend on sporting success. So, we’ll keep growing, even if Flamengo doesn’t win everything. But if we win everything, it’s great for the fans, like me, and for the club. But if we don’t win, we’ll keep growing. There are many commercial opportunities. It’s football, but it doesn’t have to be linked to football. That’s the concept of having the club like Disney, where you sell dreams, sell entertainment, sell products, a home...
Why?
Because clubs give everything for football and, when they lose, the possibility of going bankrupt financially the following year is huge. That’s what happens with most clubs in Brazil. They spend the money and don’t know if they’ll recover it or if they’ll have it later to pay. Many clubs spend thinking: ‘I’ll spend a lot because I have a chance to win. If I win, I’ll balance my accounts.’ Okay, perfect. The problem is if they don’t win. If they don’t win, they can’t pay salaries, can’t pay their taxes… can’t meet their obligations.
Hence Flamengo’s stance regarding Financial Fair Play (FFP)?
Yes, because then you enter a negative cycle. Financial Fair Play was created because there are several clubs in Brazil that spend 80% or even 100% of their revenues. In Europe, depending on the country, because there are countries where you can spend 60%, 70%, not here. Last year, Flamengo spent 40% of its football revenues. When FFP arrives in Brazil, I’ll be able, eventually, to double my spending and investment, as long as I have recurring revenues. So, I have a lot of room to spend more money. But does that mean I’ll spend just because I have more money? No, because I’m not stupid. I won’t invest more money if I think that extra money isn’t essential to win something. It’s a different way of working. This model has no secret. This is the formula for the ‘red-and-black Coca-Cola’ (laughs).
So, the signing of Lucas Paquetá happens because of this formula...
Flamengo signs Lucas Paquetá after a very tough negotiation. West Ham didn’t ask for any bank promissory note, no letter of guarantee that Flamengo would pay. I’m very proud of that. Just like Atlético de Madrid didn’t ask with Samuel Lino. If any Flamengo employee delays a purchase we have to pay, I fire the employee. No discussion. What I say is this: Flamengo’s word and credibility are above any other variable. You might say: ‘But that contract was poorly negotiated.’ That doesn’t matter. If we sign, we’ll honor the contract. It’s not up to you to decide if the negotiation was good or not. You can say this deal wasn’t good for Flamengo or that this agent is earning too much. We made this commitment, we’ll honor it.
Much of Lucas Paquetá’s signing is explained by Flamengo’s ability to generate revenue. It’s the most expensive signing in Brasileirão history...
This aspect of Flamengo’s credibility is also important. When Flamengo starts talks with West Ham to sign Lucas Paquetá, everyone knows Flamengo is serious and will be tough in negotiations. We’ll honor absolutely everything set out in the contract. This applies to agents, who want their players to sign with us here. Players want to play for Flamengo because we pay on time.
I’ll give you an example: the team earned million-dollar bonuses at the end of the season. The year ended for us on December 17. On December 26, Flamengo paid all the bonuses due for the year to everyone. The players know they’ll get paid, know what’s in the contract will be honored. The clubs we negotiate players with know we’ll pay. A virtuous circle is created in which we’ve built this credibility over the years.
A few weeks ago, we paid a bonus to all club employees. That had never happened before. I understood that all employees had contributed to the club’s success. Normally, directors received bonuses, but not the guys who work daily at the club. Everyone got something. No one got less than an annual salary. We have no legal or contractual obligation to do this, but I understood that this collective effort, to build an absolutely sensational result, should be shared by everyone.
Flamengo’s case is almost unique in Brazil. The FFP that CBF is studying will be a watershed.
FFP will arrive in Brazil and there are already many clubs that could be punished. They’ll need a transition period to adapt. They won’t be able to spend more than 70% of their revenues. When FFP arrives, I’ll be able, practically, without much calculation, to increase my spending by 50% and be absolutely up to date. Therefore, we work for recurring revenues, regardless of sporting results, and I don’t include in my expenses what I receive as prizes for achievements. I spend 40% of what I collect without the prizes. If I included the prizes, it would be only 30%. We have a very conservative financial management, very different from what we see in Brazil and South America. That’s how the club grew in revenue, regardless of sporting results. Today it’s a rich club, a healthy club, with money to meet its obligations, buy Lucas Paquetá and, if necessary, do other deals. But as I always say: would I pay 100 euros for a Coca-Cola just because we’re rich? No, because we’re not stupid. We won’t overpay for signings just because we have money.
Many football clubs do that. We won’t. We’ll negotiate for the price we consider appropriate for the product. That’s what we did with Lucas Paquetá, with Samuel Lino and with other athletes. This credibility was built over time. The market isn’t that big, there aren’t that many clubs on the planet as serious in management as Flamengo, so you end up standing out. You end up being elite, because we keep our word. Year after year. That allows us to have a differentiated position. And, of course, this environment of credibility, tranquility, and infrastructure that we offer to those who work here potentially translates into better sporting results. Is that a guarantee you’ll win? Of course not, but it allows you to fight for titles every year. That’s my role here, as club president.
Flamengo was the highest-earning club on the continent in 2025, with 202 million euros, according to a Deloitte study, a level similar to several European clubs.
Deloitte talks about 202 million euros, but, from an accounting point of view, they exclude the sales of several players. In the last ten years, our worst year in sales was 50 million euros. Last year was the best, with 90 million raised. Today I’m talking to you and we’ve already sold 20 million euros this year… and it’s January! Those 202 million, in my opinion, are wrong. If I have a ten-year historical series in which I never sold less than 50, they should let me add that amount to my 202 million. Flamengo’s revenue last year was 320 million euros, not 202 million. We sold 85 million euros in players. When you compare with a European club, which, in general, buys more than it sells, you have to consider the club’s commercial capacity. Flamengo sells players in much greater volume than other clubs in the region. So, we’ve made more than 300 million euros in sales.
Our revenue exceeded 300 million euros in 2025. Not 202. That’s what Deloitte says, but our revenue was over 320 million euros. And this year it will again exceed 300. And Deloitte will say it’s 220 or 230. So, Deloitte is always much more conservative than reality. We’re not one of the 22 highest-earning clubs in the world. I think we’re between 15th and 16th. And, again, we only spend 40% of our recurring revenues. I think if we made a world ranking of the 20 highest-earning clubs, maybe Flamengo would be first among those who spend the least of their revenues. I have the economic capacity to spend 40 or 50% more than I spend today, and it wouldn’t affect me at all.
So why doesn’t Flamengo invest more?
Because I believe the return won’t be as effective. It won’t be proportional. Can I sign more than one Lucas Paquetá? Yes, I can. Will I do that? No, because I’m not sure that without a Paquetá I can’t win everything. It doesn’t make sense for me to sign three Paquetás. If I bring in three Paquetás and win everything, I’ll never know if I would have won with one or two. That’s a process. You’ll never invest everything in one business, because if it goes wrong, you go broke. But if it goes right, I invest a little more. If I see there’s room for Flamengo to grow and room to expand spending, will we spend the money anyway? We won’t. So, when you look at Flamengo’s debt level, maybe it owes 20% of its revenue. In football, that’s very low. It’s very common for clubs to owe 100 or 120% of what they earn. I have the possibility to increase Flamengo’s revenue, to expand my spending thanks to Fair Play, I have margin and, besides, I can get the club into debt, if I consider it appropriate, for a year or two. There’s no club in Brazil or the continent that can expand these three variables.
How do you see the current situation of Brazilian clubs before the FFP comes into force?
Complicated. Some can expand thanks to FFP, but can’t increase their revenues. Others can increase revenues, but are already at the limit of their FFP or debt. Others can’t expand any of the three. Flamengo can expand all three. I’m very conservative, I could have a club with 50% debt, but I don’t. That’s why Flamengo doesn’t borrow money. I don’t need to pay interest to anyone. I have money and generate money, generate cash. Flamengo is a very healthy company. That’s the scenario we have in Brazil.
CBF carried out a tour of Europe with representatives of Brazilian clubs to learn about FFP in Spain, Germany, and England... many clubs oppose this measure.
In this context, the club that most demands the implementation of FFP in Brazil is Flamengo. It’s a lie that, as a manager, you can’t be responsible when running a football team. What happens is this: when you don’t want to pay anything, to anyone... not even taxes... you can’t be in favor of FFP. You bought a house you know you won’t pay for. If you’re not a good payer, you don’t want FFP in football. Simple as that. We’ve been advocating for FFP for a long time.
We understand there must be Financial Fair Play and Sporting Fair Play. We understand we need two years to adjust. Flamengo understands it will be necessary. We’re in a transition period. Flamengo also had such a period. It was long, it took six years to adjust things at the club. We understand it’s absolutely necessary to have a period of two or three years for clubs to make their adjustments. It’s fundamental. Now, clubs say they don’t want FFP. The only reason can be that they never wanted to meet their obligations because, if I stop meeting my obligations, I’ll win absolutely everything in Brazil and the continent. Imagine, if I take the money I pay in taxes, transfers, player salaries, agents, and if I don’t pay, for example, West Ham, what will I do with that money? I’ll bring Lucas Paquetá, I’ll bring Vinícius Júnior, I’ll bring Messi. I don’t pay anyone, I set up an absolutely sensational team and win everything. It’s absurd.
The other clubs must be professional so that the Brazilian football ecosystem is up to the five World Cups we’ve won. Flamengo is in Brazil today by chance. Because Flamengo is an island in Brazil. Our success isn’t because Flamengo is bigger. It’s because Flamengo is better managed, better run. When I hear other clubs say: ‘But if we implement FFP in Brazil, then we won’t win anything.’ And what I say is: ‘If I also stop meeting my obligations, I’ll win everything too! I could have two, three, four football teams.’
Is it reasonable for Flamengo to pay all its obligations and for other clubs not to pay anything and not suffer any kind of sanction? Is it reasonable for me to compete sportingly with someone who doesn’t pay taxes, doesn’t pay salaries, doesn’t comply with the law? No, it’s not reasonable. There must be FFP, yes. There must be sanctions. There must be consequences. Because today, as we speak here, those who don’t meet their obligations in Brazil can be punished by FIFA with a transfer ban. The current ban is related to late payments by clubs from two years ago. I don’t pay this year, compete for a title, become champion, win the prize, sign another player, and I’ll only be punished a year from now. If Flamengo decides not to pay anyone, I won’t suffer. I’ll be here until 2027. If I decide not to pay anyone this year, I’ll win everything in 2026 and 2027 and leave the hot potato for the next president. What I say to other clubs is: ‘Look, the prerequisite is to be correct, to be honest, to meet all your obligations.’
I’m not going to bring in another Lucas Paquetá now because I’m not sure I can meet all my obligations this year. I could get into debt, but I don’t think it’s healthy for Flamengo to do that. When I see other clubs signing players, because there are players who offer themselves to Flamengo, we realize that the team signing them won’t pay what they asked us. We know they won’t pay. It’s not if there will be a problem, it’s when there will be a problem. But many managers think: ‘But my term ends this year and the punishment will be left for the next president.’ This managerial irresponsibility must be fought with FFP.
Your stance is also clear regarding artificial turf in Brazil.
This is part of the Sporting Fair Play I mentioned. It’s the standardization of pitches. All teams take the field with 11 players, have to wear the uniform, games have a start time... there are rules for absolutely everything, but we don’t have standardization of pitches, of stadiums. Some clubs in Brazil have stadiums with artificial turf because they hold concerts. They do concerts! I think they’re in the wrong business. They should focus on show business and leave football. It’s another business and their job is to run a football club.
If I want, I can hold concerts at Maracanã. Many artists have already come. Frank Sinatra, the Rolling Stones… But no one will sing at Maracanã while I’m president of Flamengo. Maracanã is for playing football. Now, if I bring a big artist, Shakira, to sing at Maracanã, I’ll make a lot of money with her show, yes, but I won’t be fulfilling my obligation to Flamengo. In Brazil, you end up having top-level stadiums, but with synthetic pitches because they make money playing football and doing concerts.
From a sporting point of view, synthetic turf isn’t healthy for players. It’s not suitable for high-level football. Why does CBF allow it? Because other clubs want to make money that way? We’re the first club in Brazil to support Financial and Sporting Fair Play. We want rules. In fact, Flamengo complies with all the rules that exist today. Even those that have no commissions. Flamengo is undoubtedly a Brazilian club managed as if it were an international multinational. We’re in Brazil by chance.
Here in Spain, complaints from Saúl or Neymar about the state of pitches in Brazil had a big impact. A worrying issue for them…
Yes… and see that here at Maracanã we have a partner, Fluminense. If you take the Santiago Bernabéu, the Metropolitano or Camp Nou, you’ll have, maybe, 30 games a year. We have 75 a year at Maracanã. We hired a FIFA specialist to improve the stadium’s pitch. He succeeded, despite us having 75 games at Maracanã. We’re investing 2 million euros in equipment to improve it. Our challenge is to have the best pitch in Brazil, which today I think is Corinthians’. I understand it’s fair to pay more to have the best pitch in Brazil. We’ll invest in improving Maracanã. It’s not CBF forcing Flamengo, it’s not any league forcing Flamengo. It’s Flamengo that understands it’s good for business. Now, we understand that CBF should define this, and they’ve already agreed that they’ll have to regulate this aspect. Maybe it won’t happen this year, but it will certainly happen next year. There will be news about this, as a result of the trip you mentioned that CBF made now, taking several clubs to Europe. They went to Germany, to Spain... So, what did they hear in Europe? Exactly what we’re preaching here in Brazil.
How is the project to leave Maracanã? Is it viable for Flamengo?
We have land that the previous administration acquired at Maracanã for 19 years. The previous administration had Maracanã and, under their management, made a 30% margin per game. With our management, Maracanã’s revenue doubled and our margin went from 3% to 72%. Maracanã is mine for 19 years. I have 19 years to wait and see if I need to build a stadium or not. I already have my own stadium for two decades, because I have the Maracanã concession. We’re not leaving it. Imagine now, if the new stadium doesn’t have a business model that brings Flamengo much more money than Maracanã brings today without any investment, why would I build it? Now, it also depends on the moment and circumstances. Today, Brazil, as a country, has one of the highest interest rates in the world. So, if we decide to build a stadium for Flamengo, that stadium should cost more than 500 million euros. The interest on that would be 75 million euros a year. I’d have to pay, in interest, almost two Lucas Paquetás a year. Why would I do that having Maracanã?
I have land, but if one day interest rates in Brazil go back to 2 or 3% a year, as they were a few years ago, during the pandemic, maybe it makes sense to build a stadium. With today’s rates, it’s better to have money in the bank, play at Maracanã, which is giving us very good results—we’re making a lot of money at Maracanã—and have the money to sign Lucas Paquetá. If I build a stadium, without a doubt, all this structure I created will be affected. Every choice is a renunciation. If I decide to build a stadium, there certainly won’t be Samuel Linos or Lucas Paquetás, but I’ll be able to have a new stadium. The goal is to make money. It’s a financial and economic decision. I can’t compromise our team’s future because I’m going to build a stadium that’s a 50-year project. We have to balance these variables.
Flamengo is very attentive to CBF’s management, as I understand...
Let me tell you something because I have to be fair. This CBF board has done more for Brazilian football in the last six months than I’ve seen anyone do in the last 20 years. It’s been a serious management, they made very strong immediate adjustments, made very difficult decisions, and normally, in the football world, tough decisions tend to be postponed. They faced the problems and are making changes. Journalists are very critical of CBF and the Brazilian federations, but you have to give Caesar what is Caesar’s. We have to be fair. This CBF management has done more for Brazilian football in the last six months than any other management in the last 20 years. After Ricardo Teixeira, this management is by far the best we’ve ever had. They’re making the right decisions, but it’s like when you plant coffee. You plant coffee and sometimes it takes five years to see results. So, much of what’s being done now will have immediate results, already in 2026, but most measures will see their results in the long term. Brazilian football will return to the level it had five or ten years ago.
How is the SAFs discourse at this moment? Do you believe they’ll bring more competitive football to the competition or will it be a bigger problem in the long run?
That’s an excellent question. I have absolutely nothing against SAFs. Nothing. What I believe is this: what’s the principle of SAF? You have a football club that can’t pay its debts, a bankrupt club, from a management point of view, and someone decides to take over. They take on the debts and make new investments. That’s the principle. I’m absolutely in favor of that. No problem. Flamengo will never be an SAF. Flamengo is like Real Madrid, it doesn’t need to become an SAF.
I understand that, for the good of football, SAF is indeed a solution for other clubs. What can’t happen is what we’re seeing with a centenary club like Botafogo. You create an SAF, allow someone to buy the club, and it gets worse than it was. Botafogo owed, I believe, 100 million euros. Someone buys the club. They were champions of the Brasileirão and Libertadores in 2024. You get millions, pay no one, and increase the previous debt. There needs to be regulation! If someone comes with a lot of money and uses that money only to sign players and doesn’t meet any of their obligations, what’s the point? The SAF concept has been distorted. Flamengo is against this kind of situation where there’s no punishment. There must be sporting punishment, there must be point deductions. You bought the club with an 80 million debt, said you’d solve it, increase the debt to 160 million, pay no one, and there’s no sporting or financial punishment. That’s wrong.
It’s not about what’s done in the market, but how SAFs are being implemented. It’s not like that: there were problems with Vasco da Gama’s SAF, there were problems with Botafogo’s SAF… there were problems with several SAFs. Flamengo is against the lack of control and management in the club ownership process. Now, against SAFs? Absolutely not.
To conclude this more local part of the interview, Flamengo is the most “European” South American club outside Europe along with Palmeiras, River Plate and even Independiente del Valle… Who does Flamengo look up to?
I’ve always dreamed big. I’ve always thought about wanting to be the Real Madrid of the Americas. I look at what Real Madrid does, what City does, what Atlético de Madrid does, what Bayern Munich does, what PSG does. I try to understand what they got right, work properly on what I can adapt to Brazil’s reality, and see what I consider mistakes and how I could avoid repeating them. For example, Florentino Pérez’s ‘Galácticos’ era at Real Madrid was sensational from a marketing point of view, but from a sporting perspective, it wasn’t. PSG had a dream attack and nightmare results. They won absolutely nothing and spent a fortune on Messi, Neymar, and Mbappé. Many times, signing the best players, conceptually, doesn’t mean you’ll have a great team or great sporting performance.
I look at Flamengo based on the best examples in Europe. I think big. I think of Flamengo as if it were a European club in Brazil. In every decision I make, I think: ‘If Flamengo were in Europe, what decision would I make?’ Then I adjust that decision to Brazil’s reality, but without letting it condition my decision. It’s a different way of seeing the business. It’s worked for us. The results are there. But today, if I had to name one club I look up to in the world, if I had to say just one, it’s Real Madrid.
Any example that comes to mind?
I was in Madrid a few months ago and invited my wife to dinner at the Bernabéu. She liked it, but asked why we were at the Santiago Bernabéu and not another restaurant. I replied that I’d been recommended the meat there, without fully convincing her. We finished dinner and I couldn’t hide it anymore, I told her: ‘I want to see what time the service leaves, I want to see what the service is like, if the glass is crystal, what cutlery they use, what the profile of the people in the stadium is…’ In the end she understood that we came here to get ideas for Flamengo and Maracanã (laughs).
Which club will Flamengo mirror itself on? The highest-earning club in the world. Now, will we stop looking at other good ideas? Absolutely not. The German membership program is absolutely sensational. They always fill the stadiums, regardless of results. How do they manage to do such a business? I think if Flamengo got into a situation of being in the relegation zone in the middle of the championship, the fans would destroy Maracanã. I couldn’t even go to Maracanã. It would be civil war (laughs). They sell tickets, season tickets, ticket packages, make sales to corporate companies that take people to the stadiums. These are very good ideas.
And from the rest of the clubs around?
When you’re not in a strong club, you need to be more creative. Real Madrid is an example for big actions. But in terms of creativity, less wealthy clubs are much more creative than Real Madrid. They need to do things differently. We learned things on this trip, one of our vice presidents went and brought back an excellent idea he saw at an Eintracht game. So, we don’t just benchmark with Real Madrid, but with everyone. For example, we went to a Fulham game in London and took a good idea from what was happening there. It’s an exchange of seeing something good and trying to replicate it in your country.
The best example is the VIP boxes. We made a box very similar to Real Madrid’s at the Santiago Bernabéu, as a spectacle. We spent money, made a sensational box and replicated the experience here. So, on each of these trips we make, we try to bring something important to Flamengo. This learning process never ends. It will always happen. One way or another, we keep learning, keep improving, keep incorporating this into Flamengo’s concept. I’m sure we’ll have a very good 2026 financially. I hope also from a sporting point of view. But that we can’t control. We’re working to have an even better year than we had in 2025.
This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.