👀 Club president: Brazilian side want to be Real Madrid of Americas | OneFootball

Luiz Eduardo Baptista took over Flamengo in 2025 and immediately had a perfect year, winning the Brasileirão and Libertadores titles, along with record revenues.

In an interview with the newspaper AS, the Flamengo president spoke about his success at the helm of the Gávea club and stated that his dream is to transform Flamengo into a "Real Madrid of the Americas".

"I've always dreamed big. I've always wanted to be the Real Madrid of America. 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 appropriately on what I can adjust to Brazil's reality, and what I see as mistakes and how I could avoid repeating them. For example, Florentino Pérez's 'Galácticos' era at Real Madrid was sensational from a marketing standpoint, but not from a sporting one," said Bap.

Bap also praised Flamengo's management and rejected becoming a SAF, once again comparing with Real Madrid.

"Flamengo is an island in Brazil. Our success is not because it's the biggest. It's because Flamengo is better managed," he said. "Fla will never be a SAF, it's like Real Madrid," completed Luiz Eduardo Baptista.

So, fan, what do you think of the statements from the Flamengo president?

Leave your opinion in the comments!

Check out below a summary of the interview and Bap's complete responses to the Spanish newspaper.

Success and "keeping grounded"

"It was a special year. But in sports, last year's success doesn't guarantee the next. We are working for a giant 2026, even though we didn't start the year in the best way. Football changes quickly and balance is needed."

Inspiration from Ferran Soriano's Barcelona

Bap reveals that the revolution began 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 an even greater growth margin."

'Disney' Model

For the president, Flamengo cannot rely solely on field results:

Financial Fair Play (FFP) in Brazil

BAP advocates for strict league rules:

"Flamengo only spent 40% of its revenue on football last year. When Fair Play arrives, I will be able to double my investment and still be within the rules. Some clubs are spending 80%, 100% of what they earn; that's irresponsible."

Signing of 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 staff on time. On December 26, all the season's bonuses were already in each club employee's account."

Record Numbers

Bap corrected the data from European consultancies (like Deloitte):

Synthetic Grass and SAFs

Will you leave Maracanã?

"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 won't leave it. Imagine now, if the new stadium doesn't have a business model that reports much more money to Flamengo than Maracanã does today without it investing anything, why would I build it? Now, it also depends on the moment and circumstances," said Bap.

Complete interview with the Spanish newspaper As

A perfect year for Flamengo, with the Libertadores and Brasileirão. You took over the presidency 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 need to work hard every day. Not always when you win everything is fine, and not always when you lose everything is bad. You need to have that humility and balance to move forward. And there are also variables that change. Being very good creates a situation in the group. It can be positive or not so positive. Some remain as excited 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. The beauty of sports and football is this, 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 work off the field has been going on for a long time, and to this day it is one of the teams with the most revenue in South America.

It's an important question because there was the beginning of a red-black revolution process. It probably started in 2010. With me. Alone. I was already a club member, I was the president of Sky in Brazil. And we sponsored Flamengo's basketball at that time. We were very successful with that. That was the beginning of a political process, and I started looking for other executives from the market who were not from the football club but who felt passion for Flamengo and understood that they could help us. That group grew. It took shape, we formed a candidacy, and we won the 2012 elections at Flamengo. The model, the inspiration, was 100% Barcelona, in the early 2000s, I believe by Ferran Soriano and his book 'The Ball Doesn’t Go In by Chance'. There they tell the story of Barcelona, and if you want to understand what motivated me, it was because the conditions were identical to those they tell about Barcelona at that time. The problems might have been a bit different, but the stories are very similar. The difference is that, from a potential standpoint, I always saw Flamengo as a club with a huge growth margin.

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 helm 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 television and private television. Globo was a shareholder in both businesses. It had open television and had a private shareholding. It was an atypical market issue, I had to negotiate with a competitor of mine, but practically a brother, the rights to see who got each game. Because every time there was a peak in open television, it weakened the pay-per-view product. I, as president of Sky, wanted all the games on pay-per-view. Those on open television wanted Flamengo's games on open television because they get more audience. Their model is the advertising model. My model was the subscription sales model. For 15 years, I had to negotiate each year with those who bought the open television rights. Thanks to that, I had a perfect idea of which clubs had more audience and sold more products. Today, 15 years later, the person who works with me in this type of consultancy and commercial support is called Marcelo Campos Pinto, who was precisely the Globo person 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 role, from a political standpoint, at the club. The time came for my retirement from Sky, and then I was able to run, and I was elected, president of Flamengo. This process of Flamengo's growth and solidity began to be 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 most revenue in all of Brazil, not to mention its achievements, Libertadores and Brasileirão.

Of the 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 modalities. Why? Because the capacity of football itself to generate money is finite. In Europe, clubs play 60 matches a year. 30 home matches, where they own the revenue. Stadiums usually have 70,000 seats, an average of 60,000 attendees per game, multiplied by 30 games, etc. The ticket price is limited. The advertising on the shirt has a limit. The broadcast rights have a limit. Therefore, when you have a giant club like Real Madrid, for example, and it does very poorly sportingly, it's very difficult to believe that you will increase revenues if you don't have other businesses underway.

It's not for another reason that you see European clubs going to America, looking for new fans in Asia, doing pre-seasons abroad, opening new markets. This is 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 this 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 are doing this 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 by 25%. That is, if Flamengo had lost everything, it would still have increased its revenues by 25%. We are creating a management model where Flamengo's growth doesn't depend on sporting success. Thus, we will continue to grow, even if Flamengo doesn't win everything. But if we win everything, it will be great for the fans, like me, and for the club. But if we don't win, we will continue to grow. There are many commercial opportunities. It's football, but it doesn't have to be linked to football. This is the concept of having the club as Disney, where you will sell dreams, you will sell entertainment, you will 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. It's what happens with most clubs in Brazil. They spend the money and don't know if they will recover it or if they will have it later to pay. Many clubs spend thinking: 'I will spend a lot because I have a chance to win. If I win, I will balance my accounts'. Okay, perfect. The problem is if they don't win. If they don't win, they can't pay salaries, they can't pay their taxes... they can't fulfill their obligations.

Hence Flamengo's stance on Financial Fair Play (FFP)?

Yes, because then you enter a negative cycle. Financial Fair Play arises 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%, no. Flamengo last year spent 40% of its revenues from football. When FFP arrives in Brazil, I will be able to, eventually, 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 will spend just because I have more money? No, because I'm not stupid. I won't invest more money if I think that additional money is not essential to win something. It's a different way of working. This model has no secret. This is the formula of the 'red-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 guarantee letter that Flamengo will 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 conversation. What I say is this: Flamengo's word and credibility are above any other variable. We can say: 'But this contract was poorly negotiated'. That doesn't matter. If we signed, we will fulfill the contract. It's not up to you to decide if the negotiation was good or not. You can say that this deal wasn't good for Flamengo or that this agent is earning too much. We made this commitment, we will fulfill it.

A large part 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 that Flamengo is serious and will be tough negotiating. We will fulfill absolutely everything that is established 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 won million-dollar bonuses at the end of the season. The year ended for us on December 17. On December 26, Flamengo paid all the prizes that were due in the year to everyone. The players know they will receive, they know what is in the contract will be fulfilled. The clubs with which we negotiate players know we will pay. A virtuous circle is created in which we have built this credibility over the years.

A few weeks ago, we paid a bonus to all club employees. This 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 earned 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 the CBF is studying will be a watershed.

FFP will arrive in Brazil, and there are already many clubs that could be punished. They will need a transition period to adapt. They won't be able to spend more than 70% of their revenues. When FFP arrives, I will be able to practically, without doing many calculations, increase my expenses by 50% and be absolutely up to date. Therefore, we work for the recurrence of 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 took the prizes into account, it would be only 30%. We have a very conservative financial management, very different from what we see in Brazil and South America. Thus, the club grew in revenues, regardless of sporting results. Today it is a rich club, it is a healthy club, which has money to fulfill its obligations, buy Lucas Paquetá, and, if necessary, make other operations. But it's what I always say: would I pay 100 euros for a Coca-Cola because we are rich? No, because we are not stupid. We won't overpay for signings because we have money.

Many football clubs do this. We won't. We will 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 has been built over time. The market is not that big, there aren't that many clubs on the planet that are as serious from a management standpoint as Flamengo, so you end up standing out. You end up being elite because we keep our word. Year after year. This 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 this a guarantee that you will 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 continent's club with the highest revenue 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 standpoint, 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 collected. Today I'm talking here with you, and we've already sold 20 million euros this year... and we're in January! Those 202 million, in my opinion, are wrong. If I have a ten-year historical series where I never sold less than 50, they should allow me to incorporate that amount into my 202 million. Flamengo's revenue last year was 320 million euros, not 202 million. We sold 85 million euros in players. When compared to a European club, which generally buys more than it sells, it's necessary to consider what the club's commercial capacity is. Flamengo sells players in a much larger volume than other clubs in the region. Therefore, we made more than 300 million euros in sales.

Our revenue surpassed 300 million euros in 2025. Not 202. That's what Deloitte says, but our revenue was more than 320 million euros. And this year it will again surpass 300. And Deloitte will say it will be 220 or 230. Therefore, Deloitte is always much more conservative than reality. We are not one of the 22 clubs with the highest revenue in the world. I think we are among the 15th or 16th. And, again, we only spend 40% of our recurring revenues. I think if we made a world ranking of the 20 clubs with the highest revenue, maybe Flamengo would occupy the first place 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 that 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 it? 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 three Paquetás and win everything, I'll never know if I would have won with one or two. This is a process. You never invest everything in one business because if it goes wrong, you break. But if it goes well, I invest a little more. If I see there's room for Flamengo to grow and there's room for us to expand spending, will we spend the money anyway? We won't. So, when you look at Flamengo's level of indebtedness, maybe it owes 20% of its revenues. In the football world, this is 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 revenues, to expand my spending thanks to Fair Play, I have room, and, moreover, I can indebt the club, if I consider it appropriate, for one or two years. There is no club in Brazil or on 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. There are some that can expand thanks to FFP, but they have no way to increase their revenues. There are others that can increase their revenues, but they are already at the limit of their FFP or their indebtedness. There are others that 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 I generate money, I generate cash. Flamengo is a very healthy company. This is the panorama we have in Brazil.

The CBF conducted a tour of Europe with representatives of Brazilian clubs to learn about the FFP from 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 you, as a manager, can't be responsible when managing a football team. What happens is this: when you don't want to pay anything, not even taxes... you can't be in favor of FFP. You bought a house that 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 that there must be Financial Fair Play and Sporting Fair Play. We understand that we need two years to adjust. Flamengo understands that it will be necessary. We are in a transition period. Flamengo also had such a period. It was long, it took six years for us to adjust things at the club. We understand that 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 reason can only be that they never wanted to fulfill their obligations because if I stop fulfilling my obligations, I will win absolutely everything in Brazil and on the continent. Imagine, if I take the money I pay in taxes, the transfers, the players' salaries, the 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 anything, I set up an absolutely sensational team and win everything. It's absurd.

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 is not because Flamengo is bigger. It's because Flamengo is better managed, better administered. When I hear other clubs say: 'But if we implement FFP in Brazil, then we won't win anything'. And what I say is this: 'If I also stop paying my obligations, I will also win everything! So 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 there is no sanction? Is it reasonable for me to compete sportingly with someone who doesn't pay taxes, who doesn't pay salaries, who doesn't comply with the laws? No, it's not reasonable. It's necessary to have FFP, yes. It's necessary to have sanctions. There must be consequences. Because today, while we talk here, those who don't fulfill their obligations in Brazil can be punished by FIFA with a transfer ban. The current ban is related to clubs' delayed payments from two years ago. I don't pay this year, I compete for a title, I am champion, I win the prize, I sign another player, and I will only be punished in a year. If Flamengo decides not to pay anyone anything, I won't suffer. I stay here until 2027. If I decide not to pay anyone anything this year, I will 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 that you are correct, that you are honest, that you fulfill all your obligations'.

I'm not going to bring another Lucas Paquetá now because I'm not sure I can fulfill all my obligations this year. I could indebt myself, 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 this team that is 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 grass in Brazil.

This is part of the Sporting Fair Play I was telling you about. It's the standardization of fields. All teams enter the field with 11 players, they have to wear the uniform, the games have a start time... there are rules for absolutely everything, but we don't have a standardization of fields, of stadiums. Some clubs in Brazil have stadiums with artificial grass because they do shows. They do shows! I think they are in the wrong business. They should dedicate themselves to show business and abandon football. It's another business, and their job is to manage a football club.

If I want, I can do shows at Maracanã. Many artists have already come. Frank Sinatra, the Rolling Stones... But no one will sing at Maracanã while I'm Flamengo's president. Maracanã is for playing football. Now, if I bring a great artist, Shakira, to sing at Maracanã, I will make a lot of money with her show, yes, but I won't be fulfilling the obligation I have to Flamengo. In Brazil, you end up having top-level stadiums, but with synthetic fields because they make money playing football and doing shows.

From a sporting standpoint, synthetic fields are not healthy for players. They are not suitable for high-level football. Why does CBF allow it? Why do other clubs want to make money this way? We are 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 don't have commissions. Flamengo is undoubtedly a Brazilian club managed as if it were an international multinational. We are in Brazil by chance.

Here in Spain, Saúl's or Neymar's complaints about the state of the fields in Brazil had a lot of repercussion. A topic, for them, concerning...

Yes... and see that here at Maracanã we have a partner, Fluminense. If you take Santiago Bernabéu, Metropolitano, or Camp Nou, you will have, maybe, 30 games a year. We have 75 a year at Maracanã. We hired a FIFA specialist to improve the stadium's grass. He managed, despite having 75 games at Maracanã. We are investing 2 million euros in equipment to improve it. Our challenge is to have the best grass in Brazil, which today I think is Corinthians'. I understand it's fair to pay more to have the best grass in Brazil. We will invest in this improvement of Maracanã. It's not CBF that is forcing Flamengo, it's not any league that is forcing Flamengo. It's Flamengo that understands it's good for business. Now, we understand that CBF should define this, and it has already accepted that it will 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 this trip you mentioned that CBF made now, taking several clubs to Europe. They went to Germany, they went to Spain... So, what did they hear in Europe? Exactly what we are 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 its management, it gave a 30% margin per game. With our management, Maracanã's revenues 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 won't leave it. Imagine now, if the new stadium doesn't have a business model that reports much more money to Flamengo than Maracanã does today without it investing anything, 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 would have to pay, in interest, almost two Lucas Paquetás a year. Why would I do that having Maracanã?

I have land, but if someday the interest rates in Brazil return to 2 or 3% per year, as they were a few years ago, during the pandemic, maybe it makes sense to build a stadium. With the current ones, it's better to have money in the bank, play at Maracanã, which is giving us very good results — we are 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, surely there won't be the Samuel Linos or Lucas Paquetás, but I could have a new stadium. The goal is to make money. It's a financial and economic decision. I can't compromise the future of our team because I'm going to build a stadium that is a 50-year project. We have to balance these variables.

Flamengo is very attentive to CBF's management, as I understood...

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 has been a serious management, they made very strong immediate adjustments, made very difficult decisions, and normally, in the football world, difficult decisions tend to be postponed. They faced the problems and are making changes. Journalists are very critical of CBF and Brazilian federations, but we 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 are making the right decisions, but it's like when you plant coffee. You plant coffee and sometimes it takes five years to see results. Therefore, much of what is being done now will have immediate results, already in 2026, but most of the measures will see their results in the long term. Brazilian football will return to the level it had 5 or 10 years ago.

How is the SAFs discourse at this moment? Do you believe they will attract more competitive football within the competition, or will it be a bigger problem in the long run?

It's an excellent question. I have absolutely nothing against SAFs. Nothing. What I believe is this: what is the principle of SAF? You have a football club that can't afford its debts, a broken club, from a management standpoint, and someone decides to take over the direction. Takes over the debts and makes new investments. That's the principle. I'm absolutely in favor of that. No problem. Flamengo will never be a SAF. Flamengo is like Real Madrid, it doesn't need to become a 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 a 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 Brasileirão and Libertadores in 2024. You get millions, don't pay anyone anything, and increase the previous debt. There needs to be regulation! If someone comes with a lot of money and uses that money just to sign players and doesn't fulfill any of their obligations, what's the purpose? There was a distortion of the SAF concept. Flamengo is against this kind of situation where there is no punishment. There must be a sporting punishment, there must be a loss of points. You bought the club with an 80 million debt, assumed you would solve it, increase the debt to 160 million, don't pay anyone anything, and there is no sporting or financial punishment. This is wrong.

It's not what is done in the market, but how SAFs are being implemented. It's not like this: 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 of 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 wanted to be the Real Madrid of America. 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 appropriately on what I can adjust to Brazil's reality, and what I see as mistakes and how I could avoid repeating them. For example, Florentino Pérez's 'Galácticos' era at Real Madrid was sensational from a marketing standpoint, but not from a sporting one. PSG had a dream attack and nightmare results. They won absolutely nothing and spent a fortune on Messi, Neymar, and Mbappé. Often hiring the best players, from a conceptual standpoint, doesn't mean you'll hire a great team, that you'll have great sporting performance.

I look at Flamengo based on the best examples that exist in Europe. I think very big. I think of Flamengo as if Flamengo were a European club in Brazil. In all the decisions I make, I think: 'If Flamengo were in Europe, what decision would it make?'. Then I adjust that decision to Brazil's reality, but without conditioning my decision. It's a different way of seeing the business. It has given us results. They are there. But today, if I had to talk about a 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 Santiago Bernabéu and not at another restaurant. I replied that because they recommended the meat of the place to me, without convincing her completely. 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, I want to see if the glass is crystal, I want to see what cutlery they use, I want to see the profile of the people in the stadium...'. In the end, she understood that we came here to get ideas for Flamengo and Maracanã (laughs).

In which club will Flamengo mirror itself? In the one with the highest revenue in the world. Now, will we stop looking at other good ideas? Absolutely not. The fan membership program in Germany is absolutely sensational. They always fill the stadiums, regardless of the result. How do they manage to do such a business? I think if Flamengo reached a situation of being in the relegation zone in the middle of the championship, the fans would break Maracanã. I couldn't even go to Maracanã. It would be a civil war (laughs). They sell tickets, sell season tickets, sell ticket packages, make sales to corporate companies that bring people to the stadiums. These are very good ideas.

And from the rest of the neighboring clubs?

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 different things. We learned things on this trip, one of our vice presidents went and brought an excellent idea he saw at the Eintracht game. So, we don't just do benchmarking with Real Madrid, but with everyone. For example, we went to a Fulham game in London and got a good idea of 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 that is very similar to Real Madrid's, at 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. In one way or another, we will keep learning, we will keep improving, we will keep incorporating this into this concept of Flamengo. I'm sure we will have a very good 2026 from a financial standpoint. I hope also from a sporting standpoint. But we don't control that. We are 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.

📸 Hector Vivas - 2025 Getty Images