Suddenly we see precisely how "rich" the BCCI really is

[Junaids]

To sum up for those of you are not reading between the lines:

1. The BCCI demanded $570 million.
2. The ICC offered $293 million, but with Manohar offering a compromise of $400 million.
3. THE BCCI SAYS THAT IT CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT A HANDOUT OF AT LEAST $450 MILLION.

The last point tells it all. The BCCI isn't really Richer Than Croesus at all.

In fact, the BCCI has created such an extravagant system of spending that it is not solvent in its own right and can cope only if the ICC gives it as much money as the next three countries put together.

Cricket Australia can cope on $132 million.

The ECB can cope on $132 million.

But the BCCI says that it is insolvent unless given a handout of $450 million!

So now the endgame begins.

Suddenly the BCCI is threatening to withdraw from ICC events, using the same economic blackmail it has already used against South Africa for having the temerity to elect a CEO that the BCCI did not like.

And for the first time, a united ICC is standing firm. And expressions like "expulsion" and "suspension" are being spoken behind closed doors by senior executives of the other Boards.

I'm betting that the BCCI will settle for Manohar's $400 million.

But they have now been exposed to the entire cricket world. It turns out the BCCI spends so much money that it can't function without a handout three times as big as any other country!

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Anything less than 450 millions USD is a huge loss for BCCI. Greed really has no limits these days.

 

[JaDed]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

 

[Junaids]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

Exactly.

The BCCI's spending is so out of control that without a gigantic handout from the ICC it is insolvent.

Every other country spends within its means. But the BCCI clearly isn't getting anything like the revenue from TV rights sales and the IPL that it has tried to imply.

Because without a $450 million handout, they are saying that they are actually penniless.

 

[Thomaskutty]

Internal BCCI discussions put the acceptable figure at $400-420m so that WILL be the amount everyone will ultimately agree to.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

If China decides to take cricket seriously how much money will ICC give to China based on their population?

 

[Salman]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

BCCI are a cricket board, not a social security model.

 

[shravan]

If China generates most of the revenue then let them take most of the profits.

 

[Junaids]

Internal BCCI discussions put the acceptable figure at $400-420m so that WILL be the amount everyone will ultimately agree to.

But Manohar has already offered $400 million!

The danger now is that the battle between the BCCI hardcore and the court appointed administrators leads to grandstanding and a Champions League boycott.

Just as Brexit is really an internal Conservative Party schism in the UK, the instability of the BCCI could escalate an easily-resolved situation.

 

[jusarrived]

If China decides to take cricket seriously how much money will ICC give to China based on their population?

Probably as much as India or more , assuming they reach the level of playing Tests .

 

[MenInG]

Exactly.

The BCCI's spending is so out of control that without a gigantic handout from the ICC it is insolvent.

Every other country spends within its means. But the BCCI clearly isn't getting anything like the revenue from TV rights sales and the IPL that it has tried to imply.

Because without a $450 million handout, they are saying that they are actually penniless.

Atleast its spending the money on promoting the game - so we cant really doubt them on that.

 

[Junaids]

Atleast its spending the money on promoting the game - so we cant really doubt them on that.

Very good point.

I was horrified today when I learned that Cricket Australia spends more than half its income on its own expenses, and 22.5% each on player salaries and development.

Having said that, the BCCI's spending is so vast that they have effectively admitted that without huge handouts they are broke. IPL money and TV rights sales can't keep them afloat - they spend too much.

 

[Moiza]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

Pakistan has 10 times the population that Australia has, should we get a bigger share than Aus now?

 

[ExpressPacer]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

Going by your logic, Pakistan and Bangladesh should also be given more money because these country's also have huge populations.

India is advocating in the most stupid manner. Population has nothing to do with anything.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Pakistan has 10 times the population that Australia has, should we get a bigger share than Aus now?

Yes you should if population is the criteria.

 

[Zak_Fan]

Pakistan has 10 times the population that Australia has, should we get a bigger share than Aus now?

If Pakistan could generate revenues proportional to it's population, then sure as it would mean that PCB is also spending a lot in capturing and growing that market.

 

[Junaids]

If Pakistan could generate revenues proportional to it's population, then sure as it would mean that PCB is also spending a lot in capturing and growing that market.

The evidence is that they actually are.

I've been told by a senior administrator whom I won't name that the PCB would displace Cricket Australia in a financial Big Three if India v Pakistan series took place.

But again, why should countries depend upon ICC handouts like India clearly does? They should live within their means.

 

[cricketjoshila]

BCCI is rich.But the Rich stays Rich by making sure the money keeps coming in and the expenses are kept within acceptable means.If you dont do that you become poor.

 

[Zak_Fan]

Going by your logic, Pakistan and Bangladesh should also be given more money because these country's also have huge populations.

India is advocating in the most stupid manner. Population has nothing to do with anything.

It is one thing to have population, and another to serve it in ways that it becomes a huge revenue source. Whats stupid here is your inability to grasp the vast difference in board expenditure. PCB wasting it's population is not anyone's fault, and you cannot be handed out freebies just for the population argument.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The evidence is that they actually are.

I've been told by a senior administrator whom I won't name that the PCB would displace Cricket Australia in a financial Big Three if India v Pakistan series took place.

But again, why should countries depend upon ICC handouts like India clearly does? They should live within their means.

So PCB is dependent on revenue from India to become big.

 

[Zak_Fan]

The evidence is that they actually are.

I've been told by a senior administrator whom I won't name that the PCB would displace Cricket Australia in a financial Big Three if India v Pakistan series took place.

But again, why should countries depend upon ICC handouts like India clearly does? They should live within their means.

Give me numbers as I see no reason to trust your personal experience.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Pakistan has 10 times the population that Australia has, should we get a bigger share than Aus now?

Is your economy as big as Australia?Can you return the amount invested?

Your economy is 280bn and growing at less than 5%.

 

[cricketjoshila]

BCCI are a cricket board, not a social security model.

ICC is social security model? What is the logic behind the revenue sharing?

 

[Ph_11]

To sum up for those of you are not reading between the lines:

1. The BCCI demanded $570 million.
2. The ICC offered $293 million, but with Manohar offering a compromise of $400 million.
3. THE BCCI SAYS THAT IT CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT A HANDOUT OF AT LEAST $450 MILLION.

The last point tells it all. The BCCI isn't really Richer Than Croesus at all.

In fact, the BCCI has created such an extravagant system of spending that it is not solvent in its own right and can cope only if the ICC gives it as much money as the next three countries put together.

Cricket Australia can cope on $132 million.

The ECB can cope on $132 million.

But the BCCI says that it is insolvent unless given a handout of $450 million!

So now the endgame begins.

Suddenly the BCCI is threatening to withdraw from ICC events, using the same economic blackmail it has already used against South Africa for having the temerity to elect a CEO that the BCCI did not like.

And for the first time, a united ICC is standing firm. And expressions like "expulsion" and "suspension" are being spoken behind closed doors by senior executives of the other Boards.

I'm betting that the BCCI will settle for Manohar's $400 million.

But they have now been exposed to the entire cricket world. It turns out the BCCI spends so much money that it can't function without a handout three times as big as any other country!

Why do you hate India and BBCI so much?

Read your posts, your hate is borderline pathological.

 

[Ph_11]

Going by your logic, Pakistan and Bangladesh should also be given more money because these country's also have huge populations.

India is advocating in the most stupid manner. Population has nothing to do with anything.

Population should be the criteria. We have more mouths to feed.

 

[Junaids]

Why do you hate India and BBCI so much?

Read your posts, your hate is borderline pathological.

I don't hate India.

In the last week I have posted my admiration for Ajinka Rahane, Mohinder Amarnath, the Delhi Police, Sunil Gavaskar and even Mrs Gandhi.

But I do despise the BCCI. I think it is a nasty little bully which spends way beyond its means, then extorts the rest of the cricket world to pay for its overspending. And it uses gangster tactics to do so - it's a protection racket.

It's a bit like the difference between Australia and Russia as nations. We have identical GDP's, but in Australia we are a rich country of 24 million, while Russia is a dirt poor country of 145 million whose government uses comparable bullying tactics to get its own way.

Either way, the bottom line is that like too many sportsmen and pop stars, the BCCI is an organisation which in spite of its huge income is actually bankrupt because it spends far too much.

And, like Greece, the BCCI's overspending leaves it reliant upon massive handouts from the ICC to stay afloat.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Very good point.

I was horrified today when I learned that Cricket Australia spends more than half its income on its own expenses, and 22.5% each on player salaries and development.

Having said that, the BCCI's spending is so vast that they have effectively admitted that without huge handouts they are broke. IPL money and TV rights sales can't keep them afloat - they spend too much.

It's not a handout to recieve LESS of the revenues you yourself are generating.

 

[Ph_11]

I don't hate India.

In the last week I have posted my admiration for Ajinka Rahane, Mohinder Amarnath, the Delhi Police, Sunil Gavaskar and even Mrs Gandhi.

But I do despise the BCCI. I think it is a nasty little bully which spends way beyond its means, then extorts the rest of the cricket world to pay for its overspending. And it uses gangster tactics to do so - it's a protection racket.

It's a bit like the difference between Australia and Russia as nations. We have identical GDP's, but in Australia we are a rich country of 24 million, while Russia is a dirt poor country of 145 million whose government uses comparable bullying tactics to get its own way.

Either way, the bottom line is that like too many sportsmen and pop stars, the BCCI is an organisation which in spite of its huge income is actually bankrupt because it spends far too much.

And, like Greece, the BCCI's overspending leaves it reliant upon massive handouts from the ICC to stay afloat.

Do you even have a clue how poor India is?

Cricket will not survive if India does not pay its Ranji players a decent income.

India has to pay pensions to players.

Our players did not have money to feed breakfast when we toured England. Their breakfast wwas the biscuits the ECB gave.

I have watched England play in India and there was no running water where I sat.

I can understand the hate from Pakistan and Bangla boards but do not understand this English hate.

I don't get it.

 

[Junaids]

It's not a handout to recieve LESS of the revenues you yourself are generating.

Yes, it is. Because it's not the BCCI that is generating it. It's Indian private TV stations paying to show large world events which do not belong to the BCCI.

The BBC and ITV pay $500 million EACH to broadcast each FIFA World Cup.

But the English Football Association doesn't get a huge handout from FIFA for bringing that money in. It doesn't get a cent more than any other country unless its team goes further in the tournament.

I know it's been a shocking day for Indian cricket fans - like it has been for me.

Until today, I thought that the BCCI was just being greedy and that it was already rich from the IPL and TV rights sales.

Today is the first day that I have realised that the BCCI is actually bankrupt, completely penniless, because it has lost control of its overspending on the false assumption that the Big Three model would mean that the BCCI would get a vast handout each year from the ICC.

I've seen so many washed-up footballers and pop stars who have ended up bankrupt due to overspending. But until today I didn't realise that the BCCI is in the exact same situation.

And the BCCI haven't been trying to extort the rest of the ICC because they were greedy. They have been extorting the ICC because they are desperate. Because the BCCI is essentially insolvent.

 

[Slog]

Today is the first day that I have realised that the BCCI is actually bankrupt, completely penniless, because it has lost control of its overspending on the false assumption that the Big Three model would mean that the BCCI would get a vast handout each year from the ICC.
.

LMAO

hold your horses and hold your excitement

Its not a handout when you are claiming a share in the money generated due to you.

 

[JaDed]

BCCI are a cricket board, not a social security model.

Thanks for highlighting that! So that means socialism thrown out,and the one bringing in the most revenue should get a fair amount.

 

[JaDed]

Pakistan has 10 times the population that Australia has, should we get a bigger share than Aus now?

Going by your logic, Pakistan and Bangladesh should also be given more money because these country's also have huge populations.

India is advocating in the most stupid manner. Population has nothing to do with anything.

That was for the amount they bring in and why its required for promotion throughout India which is a country that takes cricket seriously but the infrastructure is still not great in many states.Hope that clears the confusion.

 

[big_gamer007]

Wow lol would have never thought I would hear someone say BCCI is broke.. Relax mate BCCI is still the richest board I think their FD is worth more than most boards correct me if I am wrong [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION]

 

[JaDed]

BCCI is bad organization bla blah,ITs also one fo the organizations that actually takes good care of not only its existing players but under Srini it also gave money to the former players who probably at that time didn't make so much of it.

 

[Junaids]

LMAO

hold your horses and hold your excitement

Its not a handout when you are claiming a share in the money generated due to you.

Yes, it is.

Because the English, German, French, American and Mexican TV stations pay far larger sums to FIFA for the rights to show the World Cup than Indian channels pay to the ICC.

But their Football Associations would get laughed all the way out of Switzerland if they asked FIFA for a handout as "a share of the money generated due to you".

Likewise if the International Olympic Committee was asked to pay kickbacks to national associations whose TV stations pay more to broadcast the Olympics.

It's all become very clear today to anyone who has watched "Death of a Gentleman".

N Srinivasan put together a complex web of vast spending in Indian cricket to ensure patronage. The sums are colossal.

But the BCCI doesn't generate enough revenue from the IPL and TV rights sales to pay for this enormous spending.

This was covered by Srinivasan's model, which involved vast handouts from the ICC to the BCCI which would pay for this spending. He put the Big Three model together to ensure not just enormous handouts from the ICC, but to guarantee Indian control of the ICC to prevent this from being reversed.

Now it's all fallen apart. And the BCCI has realised that its enormous spending means that it is insolvent unless it receives huge handouts from the ICC.

It's extraordinary that the world's richest cricket board has turned out to be bankrupt and dependent upon enormous handouts.

If you'd told me this 24 hours ago I wouldn't have believed it!

 

[cricketjoshila]

Wow lol would have never thought I would hear someone say BCCI is broke.. Relax mate BCCI is still the richest board I think their FD is worth more than most boards correct me if I am wrong [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION]

Income from interest for the year 2015-16 was $27mn.

 

[big_gamer007]

Income from interest for the year 2015-16 was $27mn.

Wow so if interest was $27mill can figure out much that FD is worth for..BCCI is far from poor it's FD is worth more than most of the boards..

 

[cricketjoshila]

A compromise may yet be possible if the figure is closer to 445mn and certain clauses in constitution changes are removed.

 

[Bengaluru]

Yes, it is. Because it's not the BCCI that is generating it. It's Indian private TV stations paying to show large world events which do not belong to the BCCI.

The BBC and ITV pay $500 million EACH to broadcast each FIFA World Cup.

Whom are the broadcasters paying the money to? To the BCCI and FIFA in the above cases right? So how can you say BCCI is not generating the money? You are contradicting yourself.

Also, where is the breakdown of how much money FIFA gives to each of its members? 1.3 million per year (SOURCE)?

In comparison, Zimbabwe Cricket will get 11.75 million per year from ICC that is 10 times as much as FIFA is giving the FA. However, the EPL which generates the billios is separate from the FA or FIFA so really you are really comparing Apples with Biscuits - in other words, there is no comparison at all.

 

[Junaids]

Whom are the broadcasters paying the money to? To the BCCI and FIFA in the above cases right? So how can you say BCCI is not generating the money? You are contradicting yourself. Also, where is the breakdown of how much money FIFA gives to each of its members?

1.3 million per year (SOURCE).

In comparison, Zimbabwe Cricket will get 11.75 million per year from ICC that is 10 times as much as FIFA is giving the FA. However, the EPL which generates the billios is separate from the FA or FIFA so you are really comparing Apples with Biscuits - in other words, there is no comparison at all.

You have made my point really eloquently for me, so thank you.

The International Olympic Committee and FIFA don't go around paying money to national boards or federations. They spend the money on the game.

I think it's disgusting for any cricket board to get a cent from the ICC at a time when some series don't even have Snicko or Hot Spot or DRS at all.

The ICC should spend its money on the game, not give it to national cricket boards which haven't got the discipline to live within their means.

The BCCI is doing a good impression of Greece but also is doing a good job of reminding me of Imelda Marcos' spending on her shoe collection.

 

[jagatk]

Yes, it is. Because it's not the BCCI that is generating it. It's Indian private TV stations paying to show large world events which do not belong to the BCCI.

The BBC and ITV pay $500 million EACH to broadcast each FIFA World Cup.

But the English Football Association doesn't get a huge handout from FIFA for bringing that money in. It doesn't get a cent more than any other country unless its team goes further in the tournament.

I know it's been a shocking day for Indian cricket fans - like it has been for me.

Until today, I thought that the BCCI was just being greedy and that it was already rich from the IPL and TV rights sales.

Today is the first day that I have realised that the BCCI is actually bankrupt, completely penniless, because it has lost control of its overspending on the false assumption that the Big Three model would mean that the BCCI would get a vast handout each year from the ICC.

I've seen so many washed-up footballers and pop stars who have ended up bankrupt due to overspending. But until today I didn't realise that the BCCI is in the exact same situation.

And the BCCI haven't been trying to extort the rest of the ICC because they were greedy. They have been extorting the ICC because they are desperate. Because the BCCI is essentially insolvent.

Again you take stats and garble them beyond context and put out your view, Sony paid $90 mn to broadcast FIFA world cup 2014 and rights for 2018, thats $45mn each for a world cup and india does not even get to qualifying group stage, do you think AIFF will get anything out of it, you have a penchant to compare cricket with without heeding to the fact that cricket is not football.

Football is popular round the world, india, pakistan, usa, china take any country and they watch it, most of these countries either don't qualify or don't really go far but people still do watch.

Cricket is different, take india out of the equation and cricket loses majority of its viewerbase, its not handout if we are ones who put bums on the seat for tv, it isn't handout when you see that ICC changed formats to make sure that india plays majority of the tournament or it means a big loss to broadcaster, do you even understand what hand out means?

I get you like stats and nos, but look at them with some context don't just blindly put out nos without understanding what they really indicate.

 

[Junaids]

Again you take stats and garble them beyond context and put out your view,


Cricket is different, take india out of the equation and cricket loses majority of its viewerbase, its not handout if we are ones who put bums on the seat for tv, it isn't handout when you see that ICC changed formats to make sure that india plays majority of the tournament or it means a big loss to broadcaster, do you even understand what hand out means?.

Sorry, but a handout is precisely what the BCCI is dependent upon.

The inflated quadruple -sized ICC handout that the BCCI is demanding is just a welfare payment.

The BCCI is spending far beyond its means and has managed to make itself dependent upon ICC handouts to pay its bills.

They budgeted in the expectation that it would be a $570 million handout but they have been allocated $293 million.

And so now they have a major problem.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

It might be true but in the end India does produce more money the reason the ICC always gave in. India just pushed it too far otherwise they had everything in hand.

 

[Bengaluru]

You have made my point really eloquently for me, so thank you.

The International Olympic Committee and FIFA don't go around paying money to national boards or federations. They spend the money on the game.

I think it's disgusting for any cricket board to get a cent from the ICC at a time when some series don't even have Snicko or Hot Spot or DRS at all.

The ICC should spend its money on the game, not give it to national cricket boards which haven't got the discipline to live within their means.

The BCCI is doing a good impression of Greece but also is doing a good job of reminding me of Imelda Marcos' spending on her shoe collection.

Wait, what? Now your argument is not against the BCCI but the way ICC distributes funds? And for that you are giving FIFA, the most corrupt sporting board in the world, as an example? If ICC should spend its money on the game, what have they done in the last 100 years?

Also, doesn't the IOC give more money to the US Olympic Committee due to the higher TV revenue generated in America? If I remember correctly the USOC gets 20% of the overall marketing revenues from the IOC, the other 80% is split between the rest of the ~100 countries. How is that different from what the BCCI is asking for?

Imagine you work in a job where you will get commission for your sales along with 9 other colleagues. Now imagine you make the highest sales but your employer says lets distribute the commission equally among all 10 of you. In fact in your argument above, if your employer says: I am not even give you any commission at all and instead use the money to develop my business. Will you still be in that job?

 

[Bengaluru]

Sorry, but a handout is precisely what the BCCI is dependent upon.

The inflated quadruple -sized ICC handout that the BCCI is demanding is just a welfare payment.

The BCCI is spending far beyond its means and has managed to make itself dependent upon ICC handouts to pay its bills.

They budgeted in the expectation that it would be a $570 million handout but they have been allocated $293 million.

And so now they have a major problem.

Where is the source for all the above in bold? Inside Your head?

 

[Slog]

Whom are the broadcasters paying the money to? To the BCCI and FIFA in the above cases right? So how can you say BCCI is not generating the money? You are contradicting yourself.
.

if you are correct here then game, set and match. Junaids arguments (which are usually out of thin air at the best of times) have no case.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Where is the source for all the above in bold? Inside Your head?

All this after BCCI declared a surplus in excess of USD 260mn 2015-16. Even if you deduct the one time payment received for CLT20 the surplus was 17million plus. This after paying 750crore(118mn) to state associations for the year.The interest alone was $27mn.


The BCCI is budgeted to make a surplus close to 80mn.The expected income from ICC is expected to be only 50crore or less than even 10mn.

The BCCI TV rights deal for IPL and International cricket together for 5 years is expected to beat the 2.5bn total revenue that ICC will make in 8 years.Add to that the sponsorships BCCI has.

 

[dildildalwalla]

To sum up for those of you are not reading between the lines:

1. The BCCI demanded $570 million.
2. The ICC offered $293 million, but with Manohar offering a compromise of $400 million.
3. THE BCCI SAYS THAT IT CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT A HANDOUT OF AT LEAST $450 MILLION.

The last point tells it all. The BCCI isn't really Richer Than Croesus at all.

In fact, the BCCI has created such an extravagant system of spending that it is not solvent in its own right and can cope only if the ICC gives it as much money as the next three countries put together.

Cricket Australia can cope on $132 million.

The ECB can cope on $132 million.

But the BCCI says that it is insolvent unless given a handout of $450 million!

So now the endgame begins.

Suddenly the BCCI is threatening to withdraw from ICC events, using the same economic blackmail it has already used against South Africa for having the temerity to elect a CEO that the BCCI did not like.

And for the first time, a united ICC is standing firm. And expressions like "expulsion" and "suspension" are being spoken behind closed doors by senior executives of the other Boards.

I'm betting that the BCCI will settle for Manohar's $400 million.

But they have now been exposed to the entire cricket world. It turns out the BCCI spends so much money that it can't function without a handout three times as big as any other country!

great post!

I've been saying this for years: the BCCI loses out if it drops out from tournaments. Let them do it.

 

[zn426]

So PCB is dependent on revenue from India to become big.

We can play that game the other way.
Australia is dependent on India to become big.

Joshila, what you're failing to realize here is that the Pakistan-India series is one of the most valuable rights in sports. Such a series would guarantee viewership well beyond the NFL Super Bowl, the NBA, MLB, or Stanley Cup Finals, and easily on par with the FIFA and EPL finals.

Not only that, the fact that the series is so underplayed means that when it is played, it's worth even more. The scarcity would make such a series worth several hundred million for a full series whether it's in UAE, Pakistan, or India. That is why despite getting slapped across the face multiple times, Sethi and co go after it.

 

[cricketjoshila]

We can play that game the other way.
Australia is dependent on India to become big.

Joshila, what you're failing to realize here is that the Pakistan-India series is one of the most valuable rights in sports. Such a series would guarantee viewership well beyond the NFL Super Bowl, the NBA, MLB, or Stanley Cup Finals, and easily on par with the FIFA and EPL finals.

Not only that, the fact that the series is so underplayed means that when it is played, it's worth even more. The scarcity would make such a series worth several hundred million for a full series whether it's in UAE, Pakistan, or India. That is why despite getting slapped across the face multiple times, Sethi and co go after it.

Thing is that BCCI makes money without that series.Its not dependent on one marquee series for any money.PCB is dependent on that series for big revenues.Its not happening as the govt has stopped it.No foreign court can or will direct a Sovereign Govt to do anything.BCCI doesnt come under UK.So how will the court enforce any ruling?

 

[zn426]

Thing is that BCCI makes money without that series.Its not dependent on one marquee series for any money.PCB is dependent on that series for big revenues.Its not happening as the govt has stopped it.No foreign court can or will direct a Sovereign Govt to do anything.BCCI doesnt come under UK.So how will the court enforce any ruling?

They are dependent on that series? No, they're not. True, PCB has been struggling, but they've kept the bills paid with the PSL and LOI series in the UAE. With India, the rates would be much higher, but if Pakistan hosted it's matches in England or Bangladesh instead they would be getting sell-out crowds every time with or without India.

 

[leg-side-flick]

BCCI is not bankrupt, they are just greedy but yeah they have raised the living standards of all current and Ex Indian cricketers and some foreign ones, pak players would have benefited as well but politics got in the way....
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION], I seriously want to know if you have any proof of Tendulkar wanting to play in County and showing interest but getting no proposals from there......

 

[Nil Dhumrojal]

Aus can function because they don't have 1/10th of our population.

Also united ICC wouldn't exist if it wasn't for one of BCCI'S own administrator an Indian mind you betraying the association.

And yeah bcci need to feed 120 crore people to make 11 players team

 

[Nil Dhumrojal]

If ind can't run without icc'450 md money but all other country can live with 100md then bcci is most begger team.

 

[Specialisttailender]

If China generates most of the revenue then let them take most of the profits.

Bro UAE and USA generates tons of money than WI and Zimbabwe for ICC. Should we give money to UAE and USA ?

 

[Specialisttailender]

BCCI wants a better deal out of this. I don't agree that BCCI can't function without $450 Million per 8 years.

 

[Cryin Out Loud]

To sum up for those of you are not reading between the lines:
............HANDOUT

.................handout

handout ....

Other countries are being allocated money by the ICC, only India gets a handout.

Then the word 'handout' itself should be applied in a proper context. A handout is something given as charity, for free, to the multiple family dole scammers in the UK, for example. In this case, you may argue the amount, but no one in the world can claim that the BCCI provided no value.

 

[Junaids]

If ind can't run without icc'450 md money but all other country can live with 100md then bcci is most begger team.

Yes, we learned that yesterday.

All this nonsense about India as cricket's economic superpower.

The BCCI is the economic equivalent of Mike Tyson, or Erin Moran (the "Happy Days" TV star who died penniless in a trailer park last week).

The BCCI earned huge money, but wasted it on the cricketing equivalent of drugs and fast cars.

And now it is spending money faster than the IPL or TV rights are earning it.

So the BCCI now demands a triple-sized ICC welfare handout to pay their bills.

It's very sad. Poor management has brought the world's highest earning board to its knees, and the BCCI is reduced to begging Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and the rest of us for bigger welfare handouts.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Yes, we learned that yesterday.

All this nonsense about India as cricket's economic superpower.

The BCCI is the economic equivalent of Mike Tyson, or Erin Moran (the "Happy Days" TV star who died penniless in a trailer park last week).

The BCCI earned huge money, but wasted it on the cricketing equivalent of drugs and fast cars.

And now it is spending money faster than the IPL or TV rights are earning it.

So the BCCI now demands a triple-sized ICC welfare handout to pay their bills.

It's very sad. Poor management has brought the world's highest earning board to its knees, and the BCCI is reduced to begging Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and the rest of us for bigger welfare handouts.

This is so false and inflammatory I'm not even responding. Just archiving this so I can show people how stupid you've been on this particular topic.

BCCI is not asking for welfare it's asking for money it has earned.

 

[Junaids]

Wait, what? Now your argument is not against the BCCI but the way ICC distributes funds? And for that you are giving FIFA, the most corrupt sporting board in the world, as an example? If ICC should spend its money on the game, what have they done in the last 100 years?

Also, doesn't the IOC give more money to the US Olympic Committee due to the higher TV revenue generated in America? If I remember correctly the USOC gets 20% of the overall marketing revenues from the IOC, the other 80% is split between the rest of the ~100 countries. How is that different from what the BCCI is asking for?

Imagine you work in a job where you will get commission for your sales along with 9 other colleagues. Now imagine you make the highest sales but your employer says lets distribute the commission equally among all 10 of you. In fact in your argument above, if your employer says: I am not even give you any commission at all and instead use the money to develop my business. Will you still be in that job?

This is a really good post, although I disagree with it!

In terms of FIFA, I have to say that it is better run than cricket, believe it or not. I especially like the "No Government Interference" rule and the fact that FIFA directors are not allowed to act in their own country's interests.

You are right about the Olympics, or to be precise you were. Under the discredited old model, the US Olympic Committee got 12.75$ of TV revenue and 20% of sponsorship revenue until 2012. But the scandal that created led to that arrangement ending.

But again:

1. The BCCI is not the Indian TV market. It likes to pretend it is, but it isn't.
2. Shouldn't the ICC money be first used to ensure that there is a full home-and-away cricket calendar, with full DRS, rather than on providing welfare payments for economically-incompetent Boards?
3. Indeed, wouldn't ICC money be better used contracting the world's players on equitable central contracts rather than given to the boards as handouts for them to do what they want with?

 

[Junaids]

This is so false and inflammatory I'm not even responding. Just archiving this so I can show people how stupid you've been on this particular topic.

BCCI is not asking for welfare it's asking for money it has earned.

No, the BCCI is asking for money that Indian TV and other sources paid to the independent governing body of cricket.

It's not the BCCI's money any more than the English FA can turn up in Switzerland and ask FIFA's bank to pay it the money that the BBC and ITV pay FIFA for TV rights.

I don't for a second dispute the amounts of money that private Indian broadcasters pay for TV rights.

But it has become very obvious that the BCCI expected a huge welfare handout from the ICC, and budgeted for it, and is spending far more than the world-leading amounts of revenue that it, the BCCI, actually earns.

That's sad, but the hints have been there for some time. I'm embarrassed that I didn't join the dots when I watched "Death of a Gentleman" but at least I understand what's going on now.

The extraordinary thing is that - if Death of a Gentleman is to be believed in terms of how the BCCI spends its money - every other Full Member cricket board is expected to allow the BCCI to get somewhere between 2 and 4 times as big a handout from the ICC as itself, to allow the BCCI to pay the people it needs to in India to maintain votes and patronage.

 

[Hitman]

To sum up for those of you are not reading between the lines:

1. The BCCI demanded $570 million.
2. The ICC offered $293 million, but with Manohar offering a compromise of $400 million.
3. THE BCCI SAYS THAT IT CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT A HANDOUT OF AT LEAST $450 MILLION.

The last point tells it all. The BCCI isn't really Richer Than Croesus at all.

In fact, the BCCI has created such an extravagant system of spending that it is not solvent in its own right and can cope only if the ICC gives it as much money as the next three countries put together.

Cricket Australia can cope on $132 million.

The ECB can cope on $132 million.

But the BCCI says that it is insolvent unless given a handout of $450 million!

So now the endgame begins.

Suddenly the BCCI is threatening to withdraw from ICC events, using the same economic blackmail it has already used against South Africa for having the temerity to elect a CEO that the BCCI did not like.

And for the first time, a united ICC is standing firm. And expressions like "expulsion" and "suspension" are being spoken behind closed doors by senior executives of the other Boards.

I'm betting that the BCCI will settle for Manohar's $400 million.

But they have now been exposed to the entire cricket world. It turns out the BCCI spends so much money that it can't function without a handout three times as big as any other country!

Anyone wants to join me in ROFL? ) )

 

[fawad_wellwisher]

Anyone wants to join me in ROFL? ) )

Is it because of this? Does BCCI collect all this money?

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...n-record-USD-944-million-deal-Update-Post-169

 

[cricketjoshila]

Is it because of this? Does BCCI collect all this money?

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...n-record-USD-944-million-deal-Update-Post-169

Yes thats all bcci revenue.

 

[fawad_wellwisher]

Yes thats all bcci revenue.

OK thanks. Didn't look at the other thread.

 

[Junaids]

Anyone wants to join me in ROFL? ) )

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

 

[Hitman]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

Looking to, not yet finalized. Got it? Good! Oh by the way, $2.55 billion for IPL media rights for 5 years

 

[rhony]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

You seem to have ignored the 2.5 bil IPL deal in the side. So, BCCI netted 3.5 bil whereas CA is projected to receive 4 times less at 800 mil. There you go

 

[Gubol123]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

So changing the goal post now... You spend your life hating all India and Indian. Not good for quality of life

 

[cricketjoshila]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

Only you forgot to add that that $850mn will also include BBL rights.

If IPL rights are included then BCCIs rights revenue stands at $3.5bn usd. 4times of CA.

That 850mn deal is not yet signed though.

If only your wishes could bankrupt Bcci.

 

[jagatk]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

The mail by CA chief tell me they aren't going to get that and funny how you bring your usual economics ** without any relation to subject.

Last i remember you were so firm on the BCCI are bankrupt bandwagon, shouting BCCI need ICC handouts in every single thread you could find, but since the IPL and TV deal nos are out you have done a houdini off that bandwagon, I wonder why

 

[Princejain191]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

That Australia deal, which is not yet done, also includes Big Bash rights. IPL rights alone captured more than $2 billion. And this does not include the revenue the boards get from ticket prices, other sponsors (Vivo, Nike, etc), etc where BCCI again gets much more that Cricket Australia.

And I am not even commenting much on the first post on this thread. Please read more before posting whatever gibberish it is that you do. The hate for everything Indian is strong with you.

 

[bujhee kom]

Obviously BCCI nets more from rights - its market is 1.25 bn people. But CA's 850 take on 25m people is more impressive.

 

[AMSS]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

1) CA has been badgering networks in Australia, asking them to resubmit bids, and even sent an abusive email to CBS head about their non interest in cricket.

2) Aussie dollar is not the same as USD. Even if CA manages to get a quote close to 850 million AUD, which is highly UNLIKELY, it's equal 650 million USD.

3) BBL would likely fetch CA an amount in the region of 300 million AUD for 5 years. That's less that 250 million in real money.

4) Collectively, CA stands to earn less that 900 million USD in its BEST CASE SCENARIO. BCCI, in contrast, has ALREADY firmed up and guaranteed income of USD 3.5 billion. In other words, 4 times what CA would make if its best case scenario comes to fruition.

 

[Indiafan]

Only you forgot to add that that $850mn will also include BBL rights.

If IPL rights are included then BCCIs rights revenue stands at $3.5bn usd. 4times of CA.

That 850mn deal is not yet signed though.

If only your wishes could bankrupt Bcci.

He doesn't even know that Australian dollars and US dollars are different. He is quoting Australian dollars and comparing with US dollars

 

[jaguarjack]

Obviously BCCI nets more from rights - its market is 1.25 bn people. But CA's 850 take on 25m people is more impressive.

Per capita nominal GDP is approx $60k in AUS and $2k in India. Even if talking in PPP terms, per capita is 7 times higher in Australia. That leaves a lot of dough for spending on non-essential items which is what advertisers, and in turn broadcasters, are looking for.

 

[AMSS]

I'll have to edit my post above if the CA's asking price of 850 million AUD also includes BBL. In that case, CA's best case scenario would have them earning 6 times less than BCCI.

 

[USofA]

Actually every word I wrote turned out to be true.

The BCCI did settle with the ICC for Manohar’s $400 million.

You are confusing the new BCCI Indian rights deal of $944 million with this.

But for an identical five year period, Cricket Australia is itself looking at netting an $850 million domestic rights deal.

So India’s 1.2 billion people generate $944 million from a GDP of $2.64 Trillion.

Australia’s 24 million people generate $850 million from a GDP of $1.6 Trillion.

First question is, does the potential $850 million include BBL? If it does, then you are being disingenuous as you are not including the IPL deal of $2.6 Billion in your comparison.

Sencondly, is the comparison apples to apples? As in US$ to US$?

 

[aniket1911]

OH boy! Was I living under the rock to not stumble upon this legendary thread earlier.

)

And to think, someone would have the sheer audacity to claim he was right and frivolously quoting fudged up figure like 850 million USD, to save the last shred of dignity and keeping his succulent desire to berate India - reminds me of Major Major holding onto his moustache, when he was beaten to pulp by his squadron members because they disliked Major Major and it was fantastic opportunity to beat him pretending he is someone else, just so he could pretend he wasn't Major Major.

 

[Hitman]

OH boy! Was I living under the rock to not stumble upon this legendary thread earlier.

)

And to think, someone would have the sheer audacity to claim he was right and frivolously quoting fudged up figure like 850 million USD, to save the last shred of dignity and keeping his succulent desire to berate India - reminds me of Major Major holding onto his moustache, when he was beaten to pulp by his squadron members because they disliked Major Major and it was fantastic opportunity to beat him pretending he is someone else, just so he could pretend he wasn't Major Major.

That's why I bumped this up so that posters who haven't had their opportunity of ROFL could be given a second chance

And it's not $850 USD, it's $850 AUD. Even that's not finalized yet.