Mumbai: At a time when BCCI has raised the bar for transparency by hosting the sale of Indian Premier League ,IPL) Media rights through e-auction process, international cricket council ,ICC) is asking broadcasters to submit a closing bid when the global governing body’s rights tender goes up for sale very soon.
The buzz about IPL media rights being sold for Rs 44,390 crore has still not slowed down and the time has come for another big-ticket ‘cricket rights tender’ to hit the market.
In less than 10 days from now, the ICC will issue its tender for the global rights. However, for the first time, the governing body is looking to sell off rights in individual territories from the Indian sub-continent, contrary to the common practice of coming up with a global tender.
The idea behind the move, and rightly so, is to first close the tender in a market that brings in close to 70% of the game’s global revenue.
Media broadcasters, who had pitched for the IPL auction, and even some who did not, have shown interest for the same. However, most of these broadcasters have been busy flagging certain aspects of the tender over the past few weeks and have brought them into privately held discussions with the ICC.
The broadcasters have raised the following points and their reasons behind this. times of India Spoke to ICC Chairman too Greg BarkleyHis views regarding the same are mentioned below.
a) The ICC has decided to go for closed bidding.
Broadcasters say: Why not call for e-auction? The recent sale of IPL has clearly stated that e-auction helps in achieving optimum price discovery. More importantly, the way the BCCI thinks it is important and rightly so, why is the ICC unwilling to underline the word ‘transparency’ here?
Barkley: Yes, that is the decision we have taken, because we think it is best for the ICC and basically the members of the ICC.
b) The ICC wants potential bidders to submit two separate bids – one for four years and the other for eight years.
Broadcasters say: What is the need to ask for two tenders – for four and eight years? In this day and age, it doesn’t make sense to block the rights cycle for eight years, especially for a market where there are many buyers and technology is advancing at a pace where rights are blocked for longer periods. Doing doesn’t work. , But even if it is regarded as a “personal choice” of the ICC, most broadcasters say the choice of an eight-year cycle only adds to the confusion. “We tried to ask the ICC how exactly they would determine between four and eight year bids? What are the parameters to determine the winner? – there is no clear answer, as it will be a closed bid and it will be their There will be calls,” says the broadcaster.
Barkley: Of course, there are alternative ideas that broadcasters have, I know, who would prefer to do it differently. But they are our rights and we have chosen to take them to market and as I say, it is based on some extensive research, advice and understanding of the market. So, we have decided that we will enter the market on that basis.
C) The ICC will only make the winning bid official, not the details of the others who have placed the bid and what value came.
Broadcasters say: Why Privacy? At a time when we saw BCCI doing auctions where we knew who the other players were in the room, why is the ICC not transparent about it? Does a closing quote work in today’s day and age?
Greg Barkley: Yeah, look, talk to anyone, there are too many administrators right now. His point of view will be slightly different. We are a very capable internal team, they have taken outside advice. The position the ICC has taken is in terms of leveraging the best results from the next cycle and we believe that was the best approach.
For the record, the ICC tender document mandates that after closed bids are received – broadcasters have the option of bidding for four years or eight years or both – the ICC’s internal team will study the bids and only disclose the winning bid and no other details.
Basically, this is the primary bone of dissent with broadcasters as rights come out in a matter of days from now. Event watchers say that even the BCCI had actually asked the ICC to go ahead with the e-auction.
“It’s like this: If we bid for eight years and it doesn’t really work out we’re losing out on more than just rights because we’re putting a number in there, which means we keep our next eight.” Here’s a one-year strategy. Why would a broadcaster do this? It’s okay that the ICC says it will study all the bids, but shouldn’t the bidder know what parameters will apply?” Two broadcasters told TOI.
It is learned that the ICC’s tender document has been approved by its board and is awaiting its release soon.
The buzz about IPL media rights being sold for Rs 44,390 crore has still not slowed down and the time has come for another big-ticket ‘cricket rights tender’ to hit the market.
In less than 10 days from now, the ICC will issue its tender for the global rights. However, for the first time, the governing body is looking to sell off rights in individual territories from the Indian sub-continent, contrary to the common practice of coming up with a global tender.
The idea behind the move, and rightly so, is to first close the tender in a market that brings in close to 70% of the game’s global revenue.
Media broadcasters, who had pitched for the IPL auction, and even some who did not, have shown interest for the same. However, most of these broadcasters have been busy flagging certain aspects of the tender over the past few weeks and have brought them into privately held discussions with the ICC.
The broadcasters have raised the following points and their reasons behind this. times of India Spoke to ICC Chairman too Greg BarkleyHis views regarding the same are mentioned below.
a) The ICC has decided to go for closed bidding.
Broadcasters say: Why not call for e-auction? The recent sale of IPL has clearly stated that e-auction helps in achieving optimum price discovery. More importantly, the way the BCCI thinks it is important and rightly so, why is the ICC unwilling to underline the word ‘transparency’ here?
Barkley: Yes, that is the decision we have taken, because we think it is best for the ICC and basically the members of the ICC.
b) The ICC wants potential bidders to submit two separate bids – one for four years and the other for eight years.
Broadcasters say: What is the need to ask for two tenders – for four and eight years? In this day and age, it doesn’t make sense to block the rights cycle for eight years, especially for a market where there are many buyers and technology is advancing at a pace where rights are blocked for longer periods. Doing doesn’t work. , But even if it is regarded as a “personal choice” of the ICC, most broadcasters say the choice of an eight-year cycle only adds to the confusion. “We tried to ask the ICC how exactly they would determine between four and eight year bids? What are the parameters to determine the winner? – there is no clear answer, as it will be a closed bid and it will be their There will be calls,” says the broadcaster.
Barkley: Of course, there are alternative ideas that broadcasters have, I know, who would prefer to do it differently. But they are our rights and we have chosen to take them to market and as I say, it is based on some extensive research, advice and understanding of the market. So, we have decided that we will enter the market on that basis.
C) The ICC will only make the winning bid official, not the details of the others who have placed the bid and what value came.
Broadcasters say: Why Privacy? At a time when we saw BCCI doing auctions where we knew who the other players were in the room, why is the ICC not transparent about it? Does a closing quote work in today’s day and age?
Greg Barkley: Yeah, look, talk to anyone, there are too many administrators right now. His point of view will be slightly different. We are a very capable internal team, they have taken outside advice. The position the ICC has taken is in terms of leveraging the best results from the next cycle and we believe that was the best approach.
For the record, the ICC tender document mandates that after closed bids are received – broadcasters have the option of bidding for four years or eight years or both – the ICC’s internal team will study the bids and only disclose the winning bid and no other details.
Basically, this is the primary bone of dissent with broadcasters as rights come out in a matter of days from now. Event watchers say that even the BCCI had actually asked the ICC to go ahead with the e-auction.
“It’s like this: If we bid for eight years and it doesn’t really work out we’re losing out on more than just rights because we’re putting a number in there, which means we keep our next eight.” Here’s a one-year strategy. Why would a broadcaster do this? It’s okay that the ICC says it will study all the bids, but shouldn’t the bidder know what parameters will apply?” Two broadcasters told TOI.
It is learned that the ICC’s tender document has been approved by its board and is awaiting its release soon.