ISL clubs propose new 2-year pilot model, refuse entry fee of Rs 1 crore

Panaji: Indian Super League (ISL) clubs have proposed the implementation of a two-year club-led league pilot model with the All India Football Federation (AIFF) receiving Rs 15 crore annually for the commercial rights of the top tier league.
The fresh proposal, emailed to AIFF deputy secretary general M Satyanarayan earlier this week, tops the Rs 12.4 crore that Genius Sports has assured to pay as administrative fees for the 2026-27 season, and attempts to find a middle ground in stalled talks with the governing body.
Through the pilot project, the clubs want to stabilise the league, improve commercial performance, increase stakeholder alignment, and maximise the long-term value of Indian football before any future strategic transaction is contemplated.
“The clubs believe that the current market conditions do not accurately reflect the intrinsic value and future growth potential of ISL,” FC Goa CEO Ravi Puskur said in an email on behalf of the clubs. “Entering into a long-term equity or rights transaction at today's valuations risks permanently undervaluing one of Indian sport's most important assets.”
Significantly, the fresh proposal comes after a series of meetings between a few club owners in Mumbai. Clubs said they were assured that the federation would summon them for a meeting on Thursday but till late on Tuesday there was no confirmation.
Between 2010 and 2025, the AIFF received Rs 50 crore annually from Reliance-owned FSDL, its erstwhile commercial partners, while the Genius proposal allocates 20% of its bid money or approx. Rs 12.4 crore in the first year. The federation hopes to cover the deficit by charging top-tier clubs an entry fee, a proposal that has not found favour with the clubs.
In a separate email, also seen by TOI, clubs have clarified that none of them are willing to pay the Rs 1 crore participation fee under a model – which has found favour with AIFF -- where Genius would have the commercial rights.
“To the best of our knowledge, this fee was proposed unilaterally by AIFF and has not been accepted by any of the clubs. As it stands, no club has agreed to this term, and we would therefore respectfully request that it not be characterised as an established or agreed element of any model under discussion,” said the clubs.