The Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) will retain its familiar biennial format after the Confederation of African Football (CAF) Executive Committee unanimously reversed its earlier plan to move the tournament to a four-year cycle. The decision preserves AFCON’s position as the continent’s flagship football competition and, in the near term, protects a major source of revenue for African football.
CAF President Patrice Motsepe confirmed the reversal following an Executive Committee meeting, overturning a decision announced in December 2025 that would have introduced a four-year cycle after the 2028 edition. The reversal was based on the assessment that the proposed African Nations League, intended to replace the existing AFCON structure with a competition held every two years, would require several years to generate the financial resources needed to make CAF competitions and African football globally competitive and financially self-sufficient. Motsepe said the decision was intended to “advance, protect and promote the interests of African football and the 54 CAF Member Associations”.
READ ALSO: Uganda’s AFCON 2027 Visa Waiver: Opening Borders and Unlocking Africa’s Tourism Potential
CAF’s financial statements help explain why the confederation was reluctant to risk disrupting its most valuable competition. In the 2023–2024 financial year, CAF reported total revenue of US$166.4 million, up from US$109 million in the previous year, alongside a net profit of US$9.48 million, its first in several years. Competition income reached US$148.6 million, driven largely by the 2023 AFCON hosted by Côte d’Ivoire. Prize money accounted for US$81 million, while tournament organisation and football development attracted US$19 million and US$35 million, respectively. The AFCON 2023 winners received US$7 million following a 40 per cent increase in the prize, while total prize money stood at US$32 million. Removing such a dependable revenue-generating event before an alternative had demonstrated comparable financial capacity would have introduced considerable uncertainty.
The announced schedule includes tournaments in 2027, 2028, 2031 and 2033, with no edition planned for 2030, when the FIFA World Cup is scheduled. Holding the 2027 and 2028 editions in consecutive years makes the transition unusual and will require careful coordination with national leagues, clubs and FIFA’s international calendar. The 2027 tournament will be co-hosted by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda from 19 June to 17 July 2027, marking the first time East Africa has hosted AFCON in more than five decades.
CAF conducted an eight-day inspection of facilities across the three host countries in September 2026, assessing stadiums, training facilities, hotels and airports. In Kenya, the delegation visited the newly constructed 60,000-capacity Talanta Stadium and Kasarani Stadium. Uganda’s Mandela National Stadium and Tanzania’s Benjamin Mkapa Stadium were also assessed. However, BBC Sport reported concerns about Kasarani’s readiness, including the outstanding playing surface and work required on broadcast cabling, floodlights and VIP seating. Motsepe subsequently called for a “heightened sense of urgency”, insisting that “there isn’t the slightest consideration of a postponement”.
The three co-hosts are building on their experience of staging the 2024 African Nations Championship (CHAN), but the economic stakes associated with AFCON are considerably higher. Morocco’s hosting of AFCON 2025 provides a useful benchmark. The tournament generated an estimated 100,000 direct and indirect jobs across events, hospitality, logistics and security, with a multiplier effect of 1.8 to two times on revenues and investments. More than one million spectators attended matches across nine stadiums, with total attendance expected to exceed 1.25 million. Morocco also invested nearly 20 billion dirhams in stadium renovations, with 80 per cent of sports investments reportedly recouped. The tournament was credited with accelerating infrastructure and transport development, delivering what officials described as “about ten years of development in just 24 months”.
A systematic review of 16 empirical studies examining AFCON 2027’s potential impact in Tanzania identified opportunities for short-term employment, increased income for local businesses and higher tourist arrivals. However, it also highlighted challenges, including unequal distribution of economic benefits and limited human-resource capacity in some host cities. The findings emphasised the importance of effective planning, stakeholder engagement, marketing and long-term legacy programmes. For Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, the relatively short interval between the 2027 and 2028 tournaments adds pressure to deliver infrastructure that will remain useful to communities long after the competitions conclude.
Retaining the biennial format also keeps the debate over player workload alive. More frequent international tournaments can affect player release arrangements, recovery periods and domestic club schedules. The scheduling friction with European club seasons persists; AFCON’s mid-season timing forces clubs to release players during critical domestic fixtures. FIFA’s expanded 32-team Club World Cup, occupying the June-July window, has forced CAF back into hosting the continental showpiece during the middle of European domestic campaigns.
The proposed African Nations League was intended to launch in 2029 as an annual competition, with a continental format in September-October and finals in November, alongside a Pan-African tier for 24 elite teams. However, with AFCON’s restoration, the Nations League’s role alongside the biennial tournament remains unclear. CAF’s statement indicated the league would still proceed but acknowledged it would take “several years” to become financially viable. The decision “postpones the risk of removing AFCON as a regular income source while leaving the African Nations League’s future role to be worked out”.
For CAF’s 54 member associations, more frequent AFCON editions can mean continued access to competition-related programmes and support. But the value of that continuity depends on transparent financial management and resource distribution. The existence of a major revenue source does not, by itself, guarantee stronger domestic leagues, better pitches, youth development, or sustainable national federations. The challenge is to convert AFCON’s commercial reach into durable football infrastructure, coaching and referee development, youth competitions, women’s football, stadium maintenance, and stronger national and club systems.
CAF’s reversal keeps AFCON on a two-year cycle because the proposed alternative was not yet expected to replace the tournament’s financial contribution quickly enough. That protects a central competition and a revenue stream relied on by African football’s governing body and its member associations. But frequency alone will not strengthen the game.
The long-term measure of success is whether AFCON income supports better-run federations, stronger development pathways, and sustainable football institutions, while the calendar remains workable for players, clubs, and national teams. As Motsepe stated, the decision was about protecting “the interests of African football”, but the harder task of converting protection into progress remains ahead.
