Flamengo, the Rio de Janeiro club often hailed as the biggest in Brazilian football, has successfully blocked a payment to its own Libra bloc of clubs due to a dispute over media rights revenue shares. This move has once again destabilised the top-tier Brazilian Série A.
Flamengo filed a lawsuit against Libra, leading to an injunction granted by a Rio court last week. This action halted a payment of R$77m (€12.3m/$14.4m) due to Libra clubs from pay-per-view revenues. The disagreement stems from Flamengo’s belief that it should be earning a higher share of media rights revenues due to its larger fanbase.
Libra currently maintains an exclusive media rights agreement with Globo, which is set to expire in 2029. The revenue generated from these media rights is distributed in a specific manner. Firstly, 40% of the total revenue is equally divided among all clubs. Secondly, another 30% of the revenue is allocated based on the final league standings of each club. Lastly, the remaining 30% is apportioned according to the audience size for each club's matches. The issue lies with what Flamengo receives from this latter allocation.
Flamengo's standpoint
On September 26, Flamengo confirmed it had requested an injunction against Libra and stated its opposition towards the revenue sharing plan at two separate meetings earlier this year. According to this plan, Flamengo was set to receive only 20.4 per cent of audience revenue - an amount they believe underplays their dominance given their fan base among Libra clubs stands at 47 per cent.
Under these conditions, Flamengo claims it stands to lose over R$100m per year that it believes should rightfully be theirs.
Flamengo released statement:
“The goal is to prevent Flamengo from suffering further losses due to the establishment of revenue-sharing criteria based on viewership that fail to recognise Flamengo’s financial resource-generating power.”
“It’s terrible for Flamengo that the revenues owed for audience fees are judicially withheld. However, it cannot agree with the absurd solution that Libra tyrannically seeks to implement, to the club’s detriment. Finally, it’s not true that the judicial deposit of the funds will financially suffocate the other clubs. Remember that the process only involves 30 per cent of the audience, and nothing prevents the receipt of the remaining 70 per cent, as established in the contract.”
Furthermore, they argue that since Libra’s rules allow every club veto power and require unanimous approval for distribution criteria changes; proceeding with this plan constitutes non-compliance with its regulations.
Libra's response
Libra condemned Flamengo’s “unilateral and sudden decision” in a statement, criticising the club for blocking financial transfers enshrined in the contract and eroding group harmony by questioning already agreed upon arrangements.
The organisation also disputed Flamengo's claims of losses under a billion-dollar contract, calling it inconsistent with their financial situation. They accused Flamengo of prioritising short-term private interests over collective benefits.
Libra vowed to defend the legitimacy of collective decisions and compliance with contracts in court, aiming to protect the interests of clubs that believe in joint development, respect for agreements, and strengthening Brazilian football. Rivals Palmeiras labelled Flamengo’s actions as “predatory and vile”, adding that this behaviour was not surprising given their refusal earlier this year to sign Libra’s manifesto demanding action against racism on South American football pitches. Other Libra clubs like São Paulo and Santos also criticised Flamengo's move.
