Chaos Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 how much would KING sachin would have gone for in IPL if he is not a ICON!! My Estimate around 5mil+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sm332 Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 nah given the limitations on caps prolly around 1.75 to 2mn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 I would put it somewhere between 1.4 to 1.6 million. Remember, its not just about cricketing talent alone, its also about brand value of the player. Of course, no team selector will be mindless enough to spend exorbitant sums for one player, thus totally jeopardizing the team's chances of winning. But my impression is that Sachin would have probably ended up as the most expensive player, but there is no way ANY team could have possibly shelled out more than $1.6 million for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desi Cartman Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 How the Fack does this selling thing works. I thought every player got signed by BCCI and then BCCI auctioned them So actually these players arent getting this money its just BCCI. Am I wrong ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 How the Fack does this selling thing works. I thought every player got signed by BCCI and then BCCI auctioned them So actually these players arent getting this money its just BCCI. Am I wrong ? Yes you are. The prices for which the players are auctioned for, is the money the players ACTUALLY get paid every year, IF they are available for all matches. The lesser matches they are available for, due to personal reasons, or professional reasons ( like having to play for their country coz of the Futures Tour pro gramme), the lesser they get paid. How does the franchise benefit out of it ? They get to use the players for their purposes like brand endorsing. For eg, a Vijay Mallaya could possibly have Dravid/Kallis to endorse his brands on T.V etc. ( Though I am not sure about this part). Besides that, there is a tournament prize winning money given by the BCCI. All that money goes to the team owner. So, if Bangalore team wins, the prize money goes to Mallaya. So, apart from the money he spent on buying the franchise and bidding for the players, he also gets to pocket the prize winning money. Now, how does BCCI get to profit from this ? - "WSG, Sony bags IPL broadcast rights for $918 mn" BCCI gets to keep all this money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desi Cartman Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Yes you are. The prices for which the players are auctioned for, is the money the players ACTUALLY get paid every year, IF they are available for all matches. The lesser matches they are available for, due to personal reasons, or professional reasons ( like having to play for their country coz of the Futures Tour pro gramme), the lesser they get paid. How does the franchise benefit out of it ? They get to use the players for their purposes like brand endorsing. For eg, a Vijay Mallaya could possibly have Dravid/Kallis to endorse his brands on T.V etc. ( Though I am not sure about this part). Besides that, there is a tournament prize winning money given by the BCCI. All that money goes to the team owner. So, if Bangalore team wins, the prize money goes to Mallaya. So, apart from the money he spent on buying the franchise and bidding for the players, he also gets to pocket the prize winning money. Now, how does BCCI get to profit from this ? - "WSG, Sony bags IPL broadcast rights for $918 mn" BCCI gets to keep all this money. Thanks for explaining. So there is no direct contract between BCCI and these players as such. So when they were talking about players signing the contracts they were actually contracts without any $? Its strange but if thats how the prices are fixed then the icon players are at disadvantage .. Like sachin could have made heaps more than just 125% of the highest bid player in the mumbai team. am I right ? Is VVS an icon player cuz if so then he made a fortune as hyderabad paid for symo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Thanks for explaining. So there is no direct contract between BCCI and these players as such. So when they were talking about players signing the contracts they were actually contracts without any $? Its strange but if thats how the prices are fixed then the icon players are at disadvantage .. Like sachin could have made heaps more than just 125% of the highest bid player in the mumbai team. am I right ? Is VVS an icon player cuz if so then he made a fortune as hyderabad paid for symo The Contract is for the player to officially allow himself to involved in the bidding process .If say, Hayden is bid over by Chennai and tomorrow, Hayden comes out and says that he has got " nothing to do with IPL, and would like to distance himself from the process" due to reasons like ICL offering him a bigger price, that would be bigger embarrassment to BCCI wouldnt it ? The Contract the players signed with the BCCI is essentially them saying - " Please go ahead and put me on the bidding list. I will play for the team which buys me and play all the matches ( fitness and international schedule, permitting). And the "Icon" tag is the BEST thing that could have happened to Indian players. Because this is the first edition of the tournament, BCCI wanted to keep it India-centric, which is why they introduced this Icon status. And make no mistake, players like Ganguly, Dravid etc stand to gain more than a million dollars each. It would hard to think franchises would have bid so much for them, otherwise, considering their cricketing talents alone, esp in 20/20. Icon status is like saying to a player - " You are our MOST valued asset, so whatever amount we pay for the highest bid player in our team, we will pay you 115% of that". With regards to VVS, yes, technically he should have got paid 1.15 x $1.35 million. But because that would mean the Hyd Franchise spending nearly spending $3 million on these two players alone, that would adversely affect their bidding power ( coz they cant spend more than $5 million to buy players.) So, the news is that, Laxman voluntarily came forward to give up his icon status, allowed himself to bought for $3,50,000, so that the Hyd franchise can now use the rest of the money to buy more players. And boy, they have gotten a good team or what ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desi Cartman Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 The Contract is for the player to officially allow himself to involved in the bidding process .If say, Hayden is bid over by Chennai and tomorrow, Hayden comes out and says that he has got " nothing to do with IPL, and would like to distance himself from the process" due to reasons like ICL offering him a bigger price, that would be bigger embarrassment to BCCI wouldnt it ? The Contract the players signed with the BCCI is essentially them saying - " Please go ahead and put me on the bidding list. I will play for the team which buys me and play all the matches ( fitness and international schedule, permitting). And the "Icon" tag is the BEST thing that could have happened to Indian players. Because this is the first edition of the tournament, BCCI wanted to keep it India-centric, which is why they introduced this Icon status. And make no mistake, players like Ganguly, Dravid etc stand to gain more than a million dollars each. It would hard to think franchises would have bid so much for them, otherwise, considering their cricketing talents alone, esp in 20/20. Icon status is like saying to a player - " You are our MOST valued asset, so whatever amount we pay for the highest bid player in our team, we will pay you 115% of that". With regards to VVS, yes, technically he should have got paid 1.15 x $1.35 million. But because that would mean the Hyd Franchise spending nearly spending $3 million on these two players alone, that would adversely affect their bidding power ( coz they cant spend more than $5 million to buy players.) So, the news is that, Laxman voluntarily came forward to give up his icon status, allowed himself to bought for $3,50,000, so that the Hyd franchise can now use the rest of the money to buy more players. And boy, they have gotten a good team or what ! WOW VVS is very very special in so many ways :two_thumbs_up: but it still confuses me that as per the aution SRT wont be getting much money .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 WOW VVS is very very special in so many ways :two_thumbs_up: but it still confuses me that as per the aution SRT wont be getting much money .. Wont be getting much money ? SRT for now, will get around get around $1.1 million, which isnt a small amount by any means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chamatkar Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Ah.. I'd originally thought that when VVS decided to forgo his icon status, it meant he was leaving out the extra 15% .. but now I realize that it means he'll just take his base price! Amazing man, that VVS.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kartikey Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Dont know exactly how much but definitely more than Dhoni. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bumper Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 With regards to VVS, yes, technically he should have got paid 1.15 x $1.35 million. But because that would mean the Hyd Franchise spending nearly spending $3 million on these two players alone, that would adversely affect their bidding power ( coz they cant spend more than $5 million to buy players.) So, the news is that, Laxman voluntarily came forward to give up his icon status, allowed himself to bought for $3,50,000, so that the Hyd franchise can now use the rest of the money to buy more players. And boy, they have gotten a good team or what ! Thats BS! Laxman is on par with Munaf as a T20 batsman. There was even a chance that he may not even get a bidding. BCCI denied Laxy his icon status before Laxman volunteered the same. Instead of looking like a silly whiner, Laxy decided to play gracious, by agreeing to forego the hypothetical millions which he never had, in the first place. This is like saying, Raina has graciously agreed to give up his ODI spot to Dhoni in the best interests of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Thats BS! Laxman is on par with Munaf as a T20 batsman. There was even a chance that he may not even get a bidding. BCCI denied Laxy his icon status before Laxman volunteered the same. Instead of looking like a silly whiner, Laxy decided to play gracious, by agreeing to forego the hypothetical millions which he never had, in the first place. This is like saying, Raina has graciously agreed to give up his ODI spot to Dhoni in the best interests of the team. Not sure what's with the hate and mockery for one of India's finest batsman ever, tests, ODIs or whatever format. Anyways, here is some piece of news and quote for your amusement: It was no surprise that VVS Laxman was bought by the Hyderabad team for US $3,75,000, who also announced that the stylish right-hander, also the captain of the team, had given up his iconic status so the team could have a bigger budget. "It was a great gesture from Laxman. He put the team ahead of him and gave away his iconic status so the team could have a larger budget. He told me the team comes first and the iconic status doesn't matter to him," P K Iyer, Managing Director, Deccan Chronicle said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 how much would KING sachin would have gone for in IPL if he is not a ICON!! My Estimate around 5mil+ ok. If you say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suraj Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 I would not pay too much for Sachin in 20-20 of course the brand value counts for a lot of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Thats BS! Laxman is on par with Munaf as a T20 batsman. There was even a chance that he may not even get a bidding. BCCI denied Laxy his icon status before Laxman volunteered the same. Instead of looking like a silly whiner, Laxy decided to play gracious, by agreeing to forego the hypothetical millions which he never had, in the first place. This is like saying, Raina has graciously agreed to give up his ODI spot to Dhoni in the best interests of the team. As far as i know, Laxy was the Icon player of Hyd, after which he came forward and gave up that tag. Whether he is worth his spot in the T20 side or not, thats an entirely different discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bumper Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Not sure what's with the hate and mockery for one of India's finest batsman ever, tests, ODIs or whatever format. Anyways, here is some piece of news and quote for your amusement: Nah, i am not mocking Laxman. I consider him one of our all time great test bats (top 5) & perhaps the greatest 2nd innings Indian test bat. That aside, theres no denying that Laxman's stock in the T20 variety is as low as it can possibly be. I find it funny that this is being spun by the media as some kind of gracious gesture from Laxman, when all this is, is a choice enforced on Laxman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Nah' date=' i am not mocking Laxman. I consider him one of our all time great test bats (top 5) & perhaps the greatest 2nd innings Indian test bat. That aside, theres no denying that Laxman's stock in the T20 variety is as low as it can possibly be. I find it funny that this is being spun by the media as some kind of gracious gesture from Laxman, when all this is, is a choice enforced on Laxman.[/quote'] I dont entirely agree to that. When guys who cant even get selected for the ODI squad ( Saurav and Dravid) and a player who is in the squad, but cant make it to the team ( Sehwag), retaining the Icon player tag, VVS would have definitely not looked out of place even if clung on to his position. Yet, he chose not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Nah' date=' i am not mocking Laxman. I consider him one of our all time great test bats (top 5) & perhaps the greatest 2nd innings Indian test bat. That aside, theres no denying that Laxman's stock in the T20 variety is as low as it can possibly be. I find it funny that this is being spun by the media as some kind of gracious gesture from Laxman, when all this is, is a choice enforced on Laxman.[/quote'] Well, you compared his batting to Munaf's in this or some other thread. No one is spinning anything. Everyone is just going by what the team has said which you have conveniently ignored from my quote. If you think the team is spinning, why should they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts