BCCI demands bigger slice of ICC profits

[G_B_]

how are they screwing them as I said in last point, if BCCI is asking for bigger chunk in you 75% theory what is so wrong about it. Why should any other countries especially developed countries like England and Australia cash in due Indian markets.

umm the bottomline is as a result of India asking more % boards like Zimbabwe get less money. which makes some 80% of their revenue You do realise that extra % the BCCI demands has to come from somewhere? Its going to hit Zim and other associate nations hard. considering the BCCI is making huge amounts of money elsewhere in other avenues it is extremely selfish of the BCCI to ask for this. Yes they get much less than what they pay in but you need some sort of distribution system and the ICC events are there for that. Next you will be arguing why the rich in India dont pay less taxes cause the economy runs on their capital. Forget the BCCI. Even in domestic cricket. why should somebody as the Mumbai Indians share revenue with a small town team like Rajasthan Royals or even Kings 11 Punjab? Why not ask for MI to a higher % of revenue?

[putrevus]

umm the bottomline is as a result of India asking more % boards like Zimbabwe get less money. which makes some 80% of their revenue You do realise that extra % the BCCI demands has to come from somewhere? Its going to hit Zim and other associate nations hard. considering the BCCI is making huge amounts of money elsewhere in other avenues it is extremely selfish of the BCCI to ask for this. Yes they get much less than what they pay in but you need some sort of distribution system and the ICC events are there for that. Next you will be arguing why the rich in India dont pay less taxes cause the economy runs on their capital. Forget the BCCI. Even in domestic cricket. why should somebody as the Mumbai Indians share revenue with a small town team like Rajasthan Royals or even Kings 11 Punjab? Why not ask for MI to a higher % of revenue?

You still dont get it. BCCI is understood to be in favour of a sharing of ICC revenue that better reflects the size of its financial contribution to the game, rather than an equal split among all Full Member nations. This is what BCCI wants and I don't see anything wrong with it.BCCI is not asking the money going to associate nations, it is objecting to Boards like ECB and CA getting more money just for sitting on their behinds and enjoying the benefits it created what is wrong in it. MI payroll will always be higher and it revenues will always be higher than RR ,there will be avenues to work around Salary cap in IPL which big teams will use it.

[G_B_]

You still dont get it. BCCI is understood to be in favour of a sharing of ICC revenue that better reflects the size of its financial contribution to the game, rather than an equal split among all Full Member nations. This is what BCCI wants and I don't see anything wrong with it.BCCI is not asking the money going to associate nations, it is objecting to Boards like ECB and CA getting more money just for sitting on their behinds and enjoying the benefits it created what is wrong in it. MI payroll will always be higher and it revenues will always be higher than RR ,there will be avenues to work around Salary cap in IPL which big teams will use it.

no you dont get it. As things stand both CA and ECB get 7.5% along with Zimbabwe who get 7.5%. With BCCI demanding say 30% of total revenue (from the 7.5% they currently have ) the others (ECB ACB and Zimbabwe for eg will get 5%). A reduction of 7.5% to 5% for the ACB and ECB does not make much of a difference. For Zimbabwe cricket its the difference between paying their players or not. Regarding MI. Its not about salary cap at all. Why should MI take a reduction in their profits? Why should all IPL broadcast revenue be equally shared?

[Zap_Brannigan]

So the general consensus here seems to be that BCCI is selfish and its ruining the game. I, on the other hand think that all the other board are selfish, looking for a handout and taking money out of Indian cricket. I really dont care if Zim or SL players get paid as long as our cricketers get paid a lot more including our ranji cricketers. Thats how we grow the game in India. To grow the game outside India, ICC should come up with other plans. Something like just distributing 40% of its profits to Test members (Including % based on popularity) and the rest in developing the game in associate countries. This would actually mean more money to spread the game. But that wont stick well with all the other boards. Should ICC really be in charge of making revenue for boards like SL and Pak? 15 years ago, cricketers were paid a lot less. If we extrapolate to today, salary will be higher due to inflation, but not as high as it is today without Indian sponsorship money(which is money allocated to get Indian viewers eyeball). It is absolutely absurd that a Pakistani or a west Indian should also reap the benefits of this without actually participating in making it bigger. Its not like Indians get paid 60000$ just because Americans get paid 60000$ for the same job unless the Indian works in the US (Like we have the IPL). If BCCI gets bigger profits that it deserves, if they get bigger cut from away tours, which they also deserve, then our ranji cricketers will get more money. Even now, our International players are paid around what Aus and Eng players are paid even when they are worth a lot more (in terms of business). It wont kill the game. It will just move the game in the direction of football. Just because South Americans dont see a lot of money in their country compared to their European counterparts, its not like they stop playing football. They just try to get a European contract.

[putrevus]

no you dont get it. As things stand both CA and ECB get 7.5% along with Zimbabwe who get 7.5%. With BCCI demanding say 30% of total revenue (from the 7.5% they currently have ) the others (ECB ACB and Zimbabwe for eg will get 5%). A reduction of 7.5% to 5% for the ACB and ECB does not make much of a difference. For Zimbabwe cricket its the difference between paying their players or not. Regarding MI. Its not about salary cap at all. Why should MI take a reduction in their profits? Why should all IPL broadcast revenue be equally shared?

BCCI once it takes 30% more, it can always compensate by touring those countries and I am sure it will more than 2.5%. and those boards will happily sign off to that deal. It will be win win situation for everyone.Indian B teams will get more match practice and improve their bench strength. Regarding MI what exactly is MI doing more to deserve more of the broadcast money if you can establish that fact then we will proceed further on that issue.

[Zap_Brannigan]

no you dont get it. As things stand both CA and ECB get 7.5% along with Zimbabwe who get 7.5%. With BCCI demanding say 30% of total revenue (from the 7.5% they currently have ) the others (ECB ACB and Zimbabwe for eg will get 5%). A reduction of 7.5% to 5% for the ACB and ECB does not make much of a difference. For Zimbabwe cricket its the difference between paying their players or not. Regarding MI. Its not about salary cap at all. Why should MI take a reduction in their profits? Why should all IPL broadcast revenue be equally shared?

So Zim gets 10 million $ every year, yet they cant seem to pay their players. What is happening to that money? Does ICC know? Zim cricket is in this state (as are WI,SL,Pak) due to their own ineptitude and bad decisions. Should BCCI pay for these bad decisions?

[Zap_Brannigan]

= Regarding MI what exactly is MI doing more to deserve more of the broadcast money if you can establish that fact then we will proceed further on that issue.

More people watch MI, CSK, RCB, KKR than the likes of RR,Pune. So in essence, since MI bring in more people into the tournament and hence more money. But it cannot be compared with BCCI here because its too soon to say that MI, CSK etc can keep the numbers high and its not completely lop sided like it is in the international scene. But MI or CSK getting more will happen sooner or later just like Man U gets more in EPL than a lot of lesser sides.

[Precambrian]

Love bcci...

[putrevus]

More people watch MI, CSK, RCB, KKR than the likes of RR,Pune. So in essence, since MI bring in more people into the tournament and hence more money. But it cannot be compared with BCCI here because its too soon to say that MI, CSK etc can keep the numbers high and its not completely lop sided like it is in the international scene. But MI or CSK getting more will happen sooner or later just like Man U gets more in EPL than a lot of lesser sides.

I did not deny MI along will few other teams bring more eyeballs, his point was about just MI. It is not just MI but it is also other big franchises can have same issue. Till now IPL is still in its infancy who know these issues still might crop up later and it might come to a stage where bigger teams will have more say in how money is distributed. The buying power of these team already is different.

[G_B_]

More people watch MI, CSK, RCB, KKR than the likes of RR,Pune. So in essence, since MI bring in more people into the tournament and hence more money. But it cannot be compared with BCCI here because its too soon to say that MI, CSK etc can keep the numbers high and its not completely lop sided like it is in the international scene. But MI or CSK getting more will happen sooner or later just like Man U gets more in EPL than a lot of lesser sides.

actually in EPL revenue is split 21 ways (FA and the 20 clubs) Even in American sports revenue is shared.

[G_B_]

So Zim gets 10 million $ every year' date=' yet they cant seem to pay their players. What is happening to that money? Does ICC know? Zim cricket is in this state (as are WI,SL,Pak) due to their own ineptitude and bad decisions. Should BCCI pay for these bad decisions?[/quote'] you need money to also run domestic cricket. Zim has 6 sides locally or clubs with about 25 players each. Thats 150 players + coaches. + money has to be spent on stadium upkeep. Travel of players for tours and keeping opposition players in hotels etc. Yes there is an issue of corruption in Zim cricket. But you want to further put them under the knife? Zimbabwe cricket needs about $20 million per year IMO to stay afloat. Irresponsible to cut the bulk of their revenue. @putrevus Like thats going to happen. India barely tour BD and Zim as things stand. The BCCI can make more money by not touring Zim and Ireland and playing more of England and Australia. If anything the BCCI needs to play their cards properly. If WC revenue is enough to keep the likes of Zim BD Ireland etc affloat then the BCCI have fullfiled their obligation and can tour England and Aus making more revenue. They dont need to tour these countries. With world cups there is always a risk like WC 2007 of underperfoming. Not such a case with bilaterals.

[putrevus]

@GB Not all the revenues are shared in american sports and just some common pools of revenues are shared and there is not just one major team there but they have few major teams so no one team can lay a claim to be the major revenue generator by itself. India is the major revenue generator and it can claim it without any doubt. Indians played in Zim in 2010 and again in 2013 which is not bad at all they also made SL tour there in 2010.What else you want BCCI to do in three years. It is only Pakistan which India has not played much recently and we all know why. BCCI is run by much more shrewd guys than you give them credit for.

[Zap_Brannigan]

Basically subsidizing a country like Zim which has no prospect of sustaining itself in the near future might be the biggest reason cricket growth is not quick enough in other countries. Instead of paying 7.5 million to Zim,SL,Pak,WI etc. and only 25 million for the associates (out of every 100 million made), maybe ICC should increase the associate percentage to a large amount. Atleast we might see some self sustaining countries take up the game and not be a burden towards spreading the game.

[cowboysfan]

Basically subsidizing a country like Zim which has no prospect of sustaining itself in the near future might be the biggest reason cricket growth is not quick enough in other countries. Instead of paying 7.5 million to Zim' date='SL,Pak,WI etc. and only 25 million for the associates (out of every 100 million made), maybe ICC should increase the associate percentage to a large amount. Atleast we might see some self sustaining countries take up the game and not be a burden towards spreading the game.[/quote'] interesting point.I do hope they pour more money into Associates such as Afghanistan and Nepal where they seem to have passion for cricket but I feel ICC is not doing enough for SL and WI where the are struggling to bring out new players into the international game,i think a good balance may be found for this situation.

[Scarves]

If anything one could point out that ever since BCCI got major power, the amount of tests that the Windies and Zimbabwean team played has decreased but we know that is just a coincidence. Zimbabwe is a corrupt country and the Windies are just plain weak. However in saying that with the Ashes is that they were moved not because they want to keep it, it is because of 2012 there was going to be the London Olympics, so you can't have the Ashes during that period and nor could you have it during the Cricket World Cup period because it is a 5 test series. It has nothing to do with money and hating on India, it is a series tradition that has been going on since 1876 and the only thing atm keeping interest in cricket around the world. Next you point out that India doesn't need to sustain the game, well enjoy your lone sport because if Australia doesn't have cricket they have other sports and ditto England, South Africa, New Zealand and the Caribbean nations but what does India have other than cricket? Nothing because the Government doesn't do anything to help the other sports. Also you point that England and Australia change the schedule however they want but I do recall a certain West Indies series just played and a cutting down of a South African series because of someone they don't like and you call England and Australia bad? At least their toured countries a lot back in the day. A guy from US cricket told me that BCCI is doing a lot more harm to associate nations because of the control and power they wield in the ICC. Back 10 years ago and a lot of associate nations were playing the game quite frequently as part of trophies or tour matches with other teams. Why would he say that? He has no issues with the BCCI but he does have a point because even if you were to say that BCCI were to have more money, do you honestly think they give a **** about the other countries? No, not at all. More money to them = less money for others which impacts their grassroots cricket and hurts the game. They want more money because they see it as a business more which is fair but it damages the sport.

[Zap_Brannigan]

If anything one could point out that ever since BCCI got major power, the amount of tests that the Windies and Zimbabwean team played has decreased but we know that is just a coincidence. Zimbabwe is a corrupt country and the Windies are just plain weak. However in saying that with the Ashes is that they were moved not because they want to keep it, it is because of 2012 there was going to be the London Olympics, so you can't have the Ashes during that period and nor could you have it during the Cricket World Cup period because it is a 5 test series. It has nothing to do with money and hating on India, it is a series tradition that has been going on since 1876 and the only thing atm keeping interest in cricket around the world. Next you point out that India doesn't need to sustain the game, well enjoy your lone sport because if Australia doesn't have cricket they have other sports and ditto England, South Africa, New Zealand and the Caribbean nations but what does India have other than cricket? Nothing because the Government doesn't do anything to help the other sports. Also you point that England and Australia change the schedule however they want but I do recall a certain West Indies series just played and a cutting down of a South African series because of someone they don't like and you call England and Australia bad? At least their toured countries a lot back in the day. A guy from US cricket told me that BCCI is doing a lot more harm to associate nations because of the control and power they wield in the ICC. Back 10 years ago and a lot of associate nations were playing the game quite frequently as part of trophies or tour matches with other teams. Why would he say that? He has no issues with the BCCI but he does have a point because even if you were to say that BCCI were to have more money, do you honestly think they give a **** about the other countries? No, not at all. More money to them = less money for others which impacts their grassroots cricket and hurts the game. They want more money because they see it as a business more which is fair but it damages the sport.

If he says that then he is an idiot. The money pouring into associate nations have increased manifold over the last few years thanks to the growth in India. I have personally played cricket against S.Korean national team(they beat Japan) funded mostly by ICC. Dont get your hopes high on these 2 nations as they will lose to any team playing in our gullies. The funding wouldnt have been possible if it wasnt for BCCI. BCCI never took over ICC, it just lobbies for votes to get results it wants regarding Indian cricket. It has nothing to do with associate nations. Blame these inept associate nations who get more and yet do less. Test cricket as a whole is dying slowly. Not that its viewers are decreasing but that its viewers now pale in comparison to the limited over format. When Test cricket ruled the roost players got peanuts. They had to get a desk job to sustain themselves. The only reason test cricket is still being seen as a revenue stream is because players and some boards feel that its the purest form of the game. It basically is piggy backing on ODI and T20 popularity. They are all sold as a package. Thats the reason why WI and SL are playing lesser test cricket. Dont blame BCCI.

[Scarves]

If he says that then he is an idiot. The money pouring into associate nations have increased manifold over the last few years thanks to the growth in India. I have personally played cricket against S.Korean national team(they beat Japan) funded mostly by ICC. Dont get your hopes high on these 2 nations as they will lose to any team playing in our gullies. The funding wouldnt have been possible if it not was for BCCI. BCCI never took over ICC, it just lobbies for votes to get results it wants regarding Indian cricket. It has nothing to do with associate nations. Blame these inept associate nations who get more and yet do less. Test cricket as a whole is dying slowly. Not that its viewers are decreasing but that its viewers now pale in comparison to the limited over format. When Test cricket ruled the roost players got peanuts. They had to get a desk job to sustain themselves. The only reason test cricket is still being seen as a revenue stream is because players and some boards feel that its the purest form of the game. It basically is piggy backing on ODI and T20 popularity. They are all sold as a package. Thats the reason why WI and SL are playing lesser test cricket. Dont blame BCCI.

I disagree with the bolded statement because it is more to do which country. Australians rather go to Test matches as evident of the massive crowds in recent times and ditto for England. The rest I would say is ODI and T20 though. I dunno why the ICC uses the money t boost T20 around the world instead. No way I'm blamng BCCI for the ineptitude of the WICB and SLCB

[Zap_Brannigan]

I disagree with the bolded statement because it is more to do which country. Australians rather go to Test matches as evident of the massive crowds in recent times and ditto for England. The rest I would say is ODI and T20 though. I dunno why the ICC uses the money t boost T20 around the world instead. No way I'm blamng BCCI for the ineptitude of the WICB and SLCB

Sure, thats just 2 out of the 10 test playing nations. Lets not even get into the associate nations. ICC is spreading T20 because it is the easiest to spread. Do you think that it is easy for a cricket illiterate to get into a 5 day, 8 hour per day game that might result in a draw if he doesnt understand the nuances of test cricket? The only way to spread test cricket is to get a fotthold with T20 and then maybe try ODIs and then tests.

[saurabhg1]

No surprise ... everyone already knows Indians are cheap and greedy :giggle:

Oh that's so sweet, I mean a Pakistani talking about cheapness :hysterical:

[BlackMamba]

So Zim gets 10 million $ every year' date=' yet they cant seem to pay their players. What is happening to that money? Does ICC know? Zim cricket is in this state (as are WI,SL,Pak) due to their own ineptitude and bad decisions. Should BCCI pay for these bad decisions?[/quote'] That is exactly the question I have? 10 Million Dollars and players don't even get to eat dinner during match days. WTF ? I have always said this -- Put Zimbabwe, Pakistan and Possibly Sri Lanka and BungleDesh under Independent Auditors.