Guest Column Guest ColumnRSS FeedFeeds  | Archives

Pass the gravy

There's a lot of silly money flying around in the IPL: Indian players will benefit, but it's a little more complicated for the franchises

Ashok Malik

March 30, 2010

Comments: 64 | Text size: A | A

Nita Ambani takes part in the IPL auction, Mumbai, January 19, 2010
How bizarre: Mumbai, a well-managed franchise in one of India's largest cities is supposedly valued lower than Rajasthan Royals © Getty Images
Enlarge

Midway into season three of the Indian Premier League, the dollar signs have got larger, the hype louder and the gossip and side stories even more complicated. This year's tournament has been almost taken over by the numbers being discussed for next year and the drama being anticipated as the IPL jumps orbits from eight teams to 10.

Two new franchises were sold on March 21. Pune went to the Sahara business group for US$370 million, and the Rendezvous Sports World consortium won the rights to Kochi for US$333 million. That aside, all IPL teams will now be allowed to spend up to US$7 million a year each to recruit players. This would include money spent on direct hiring, retaining some of the players contracted for the first three seasons - subject to rules to be framed by the IPL council - and buying new players at a razzmatazz sequel to the inaugural auction in Mumbai in February 2008. The new cap is US$2 million above the previous one.

What does all this mean for players, franchise owners and for ordinary cricket fans - if they can decipher the IPL's manic deal-making anymore? In the first place, are the massive bids by Sahara and Rendezvous realistic?

Franchises: batting for valuation
A quick assessment by the chief executive of one of the current franchises insists the two new teams will lose "at least Rs 100 crore [about US$22 million] each year for the next five years". The figure could change if the Indian economy grows exponentially and the IPL business model reaches even greater heights, and if the new teams pull in generous sponsors. Yet operational losses of a considerable nature are almost guaranteed in the near term.

So what makes an IPL franchise worth all the money? It is a combination of business and an ego trip. Whether it is football clubs in England or baseball teams in the United States, the decision to purchase a sports team is not always a rational one, driven by profit-loss calculations alone. Often well-heeled individuals or businessmen do it to announce their arrival. When their fortunes decline, they sell to the next billionaire, from the next sunrise industry. The fact that supply is limited - there will only be a finite number of football clubs or IPL franchises - keeps demand robust.

Yet there is also a strong element of business. Some of the better-managed IPL franchises are beginning to turn the corner, though not quite make huge money yet. They are exploiting a strange paradox in India. The Indian economy is today large enough to support and sustain more than one sport. Even so, India remains fundamentally a one-sport society. This means advertisers, sponsors and team-owners are simply over-invested in cricket.

Nevertheless, whatever the public claims of IPL stakeholders, in private, franchise officials offer very modest assessments of profits - if they offer any assessments at all. True, every franchise has gained from the surge in central revenues - revenues that accrue to the IPL as an institution and are divided between the League authority and the participating teams. Yet, in 2011, each franchise's share of central revenue will change from 7.5% to 6%, with the addition of two teams.

In the coming 12 months, the single largest source of income for many of the current franchise owners may well be from the sale of equity. "Every franchise," says an executive at one of the teams, "is ready to sell a stake to an interested investor. Everybody is looking for the right fit." A few franchises (King's XI Punjab is mentioned by IPL insiders) have promoters said to be looking to sell a majority stake and essentially exit the cricket business.

How do you sell a business that is not making money or is barely in the black? This is a function of Twenty20 cricket's two Vs: vanity and valuation. You tickle the potential buyer's vanity and excite him with the option of owning (or owning a part of) an IPL team. Second, you maximise that silly game called valuation. Pune and Kochi have set the benchmark on what a virgin franchise is worth. A franchise that is already established, and has brand recall, city-specific identity, player and local endorsement associations and a certain fan base, could fetch more.

In the end it will boil down to who bargains better and which valuation figure is deemed most credible. Dizzying numbers have done the rounds in recent times. It is sobering to understand that these are often notional figures, driven by what can only loosely be described as wild optimism.

A few weeks ago, the consultancy Brand Finance plc valued the IPL as an entity at $4.13 billion, up from 2009's $2.01 billion. A sports franchise's commercial value has little to do with on-field results, it is often contended. As if providing evidence of this, Brand Finance said in its report that the valuation of Deccan Chargers, the 2009 IPL winners, had declined from $34.8 million at the start of season two to $ 34.4 million at the start of season three.

All this would seem a fair argument. However, in May 2009, a joint exercise by two companies, Intangible Business and MTI Consulting, valued Deccan Chargers at only $11 million. The variation between Brand Finance and Intangible Business-MTI Consulting was as wide when it came to valuing other franchises.

One the eve of the 2010 season, Brand Finance estimated Rajasthan Royals as having a brand value of $45.2 million, well ahead of Mumbai Indians ($40.8 million) and Delhi Daredevils ($40.5 million). By all accounts, Rajasthan Royals is not the best-run franchise. In contrast, both Mumbai Indians and Delhi Daredevils are credited with a solid management structure. Also, any cricket franchise in India's two largest cities is always going to have access to greater revenue streams than a team in Jaipur.

 
 
The Indian economy is today large enough to support and sustain more than one sport. Even so, India remains fundamentally a one-sport society. This means advertisers, sponsors and team-owners are simply over-invested in cricket
 

How then can Rajasthan Royals have a brand valuation higher than that of Mumbai Indians and Delhi Daredevils? Would any investor pay more for, say, 20% of equity in Rajasthan Royals than he would for 20% of Delhi Daredevils or Mumbai Indians?

At some point between now and season four, as franchise owners begin to sell or sell out, the IPL will have take off its billion-dollar glasses and read that googly.

Players: batting for bonuses
All in all, the two new franchises are looking at a very expensive 2011. Other than paying their licence fee to the IPL, they will have to spend enormous amounts on brand building, and recruitment of players and support staff. The eight other teams have had a three-year headstart. They will almost inevitably be allowed to retain (subject to mutual agreement) some of their current stars. If the new franchises want to buy out these marquee players, the wage bill will go up that much further.

Indeed, the biggest gainers are going to be the players. In 2008, $1.5 million a season was the highest salary for any one IPL cricketer. That was what MS Dhoni of Chennai Super Kings was promised. In 2009, Kevin Pietersen (Bangalore Royal Challengers) and Andrew Flintoff (Chennai Super Kings) were auctioned for a bit more, but neither has played an entire season.

In 2011, team managers are almost unanimous that the top player salaries will breach $2 million a year and "could even reach $2.5 million". It is also clear that the highest-paid cricketers, by a fair amount, will be Indians.

Again, there are two reasons for this. First, as an IPL team manager says, "It is apparent a franchise's brand identity is determined by local players, especially among Indian or Indian-origin audiences." Big contemporary players from abroad - Pietersen, Ricky Ponting, Michael Clarke - have either shunned the IPL or can only appear when international commitments permit. To them, this is not the priority format of the sport.

The second reason is pure demand and supply. As one franchise official explains, "Ten teams will need 70 Indian cricketers. If each player is to have a back-up, that means 140 cricketers of some quality. Where do you have such reserves?"

For the October 2009-September 2010 period, the BCCI has offered central contracts to 40 cricketers. This list includes Sachin Tendulkar and Suresh Raina, but also Abhishek Nayar, Ajinkya Rahane and Wriddhiman Saha - talented perhaps, but completely unproven at the international level.

Yet, these 40 - give or take a few - are going to corner a significant segment of the US$70 million that the 10 franchises will spend on players in 2011. The best of the lot - Dhoni, Raina (Chennai Super Kings), Yusuf Pathan (Rajasthan Royals), among other proven Twenty20 performers - could make multiples of millions. Even Manish Pandey (Bangalore Royal Challengers) and Manoj Tiwary (Kolkata Knight Riders) could be prized commodities.


Adam Gilchrist congratulates Andrew Symonds the bowler, Deccan Chargers v Delhi Daredevils, IPL, Cuttack, March 21, 2010
The likes of Symonds and Gilchrist may deliver the results, but their bargaining power is set to drop as they don't have international careers anymore © Indian Premier League
Enlarge

However, this will lead to a smaller pool of money being available for the foreign players. Some of them may already be sensing the competition. IPL 2010 has been noteworthy in that cricketers such as Jacques Kallis (Bangalore Royal Challengers), Andrew Symonds (Deccan Chargers) and to an extent even Matthew Hayden (Chennai Super Kings) are doing better (so far) than in previous seasons. At any rate, they have appeared more purposeful.

To some extent, this could be because they have finally got a hang of the IPL. It is more likely that they are taking the whole tournament much more seriously because they realise it's not a one-off, Allen Stanford type circus but in some senses the future of cricket, with real pay cheques. Their performances this year - not the successes or failures of 2008 and 2009 - will decide how badly franchises will want them in the upcoming auction.

Particularly worried and vulnerable are players who are done with international cricket or are close to the end of their careers. In 2008, Symonds went for $1.35 million, Sanath Jayasuriya (Mumbai Indians) and Kallis earned close to a million dollars each, and Adam Gilchrist (Deccan Chargers) signed on for $700,000. In 2011, it is conceivable that all of them may have to settle for less. With no alternatives to the IPL and no Test/ODI career - or only a short one in the case of Kallis - their bargaining power will decline sharply. The fact that there are simply so many foreign players competing for four slots per playing XI will not help. In the mini-auction of 2010, the Pakistani players realised the consequences of this when the franchises ignored them - fearing political tensions - and instead bought alternatives from New Zealand, the West Indies and South Africa.

In 2011, the Pakistanis will be back in contention. They will join a queue of non-Indian cricketers trying to break down the door and get into the IPL living room. All this will make the foreign-player auction even more of a buyer's market.

The same principle will probably hold true for some of the older Indian cricketers who are not quite built for Twenty20. VVS Laxman never does seem to be part of Deccan Chargers' plans. Rahul Dravid would patently be happier doing something else. The probable exception is Sachin Tendulkar. Sahara has indicated it wants him to captain its team and Tendulkar could trigger a bidding war between Mumbai Indians and the yet-unnamed Pune franchise.

Overall, however, a situation where a Yusuf Pathan gets well over a million dollars, maybe close to $2 million, and a Laxman goes unsold is a frighteningly real possibility. The IPL has changed this game and its verities forever.

Ashok Malik is a writer in Delhi

RSS Feeds: Ashok Malik

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by srini_cric on (April 2, 2010, 21:16 GMT)

I love watching IPL no doubt about that. But every time I watch a game I feel sorry for the bowlers and it gets me frustrated at how IPL is putting a dent in the quality of cricket that is being played. Boundaries are being brought in and free hit for a No ball , I feel IPL is creating a biased game of cricket just to raise its commercial value. I think the emphasis is purely on big hitting and big scores to sustain the viewers interest in the game but the fact that is being forgotten is that a good competitive game always is a great entertainment.

Posted by TenRajesh on (April 2, 2010, 10:39 GMT)

The article is clearly insignificant considering the IPL is in nascent stage. It will certainly take time for the IPL management , team owner , broadcaster etc to find out the best business model. Like it or not IPL will find a way to make it profitable in its own way.

Posted by MasterClass on (April 2, 2010, 7:04 GMT)

@inswing - TY for the correction. But even if the franchise is only for 10 years, the fact is that $35 mil/year doesn't seem a lot to pay compared to what the owners are getting. BTW the population of Milwaukee is less than 1/10 that of even the smallest IPL team city, with some being close to 50 times more. You mentioned NFL ticket prices in relation to IPL ticket prices, and concluded that advertising was the main revenue source. I concur. However you failed to realize that the IPL advertising revenue (which is based on viewership) is actually similar to NFL than to MLB. That is to say: IPL games have a national viewership, just like NFL games, and thus command much higher advertising revenue unlike MLB or NBA which have only regional or city viewership. When the Lakers when not in the finals or playoffs I didn't reallly care who played. Most casual sports viewers are like me. Bcuz of the lake of sports viewing options in India (and other factors) all IPL games get national audience.

Posted by RonG on (April 2, 2010, 1:32 GMT)

Superb article - hope to see more such articles that dissect the business of cricket in India.

Posted by shrastogi on (April 1, 2010, 14:01 GMT)

Informative article. IPL should have 60% of 7 million as salary cap rest 40% should be available to franchisees to be given as performance bonus. This would benefit younger/lesser known talent who for three years get lesser money inspite of giving performance.For a player $2 -$2.5 million is a high number. If a sought after player also performs well he would anyway get performance bonus. For 45 day IPL window if sought after players earn Rs 10-15 lakh a day it is definitely juicy for even CEO & Chairmans of the companies supporting IPL teams would not be earning that much as salary.

Posted by libinbond on (April 1, 2010, 13:10 GMT)

I agree with redneck.. Most people are just calculating present cash flows and are completely disregarding present worth of future cash flows. Basically means, if Sahara is willing to shell out $370 mil for a team, with the amount of premium they are paying over a team like Mumbai which was worth $150 mil 3 years ago, it is because it takes into account the brand value that has built up, and the future cash flows look stronger due to bigger brand building each year... The first timers were risk takers, with future cash flow being just a paper calculation.. 3 years later, Sahara knows that Reliance played it correctly and the Mumbai franchise will, aboslutely without any sense of doubt, WILL make money.. Nobody here actually doubts the business acumen of Mukesh Ambani, do they ? $370 mil is not the price of Pune now, but the buyers believe the price after 10 years will be much higher. This will get clearer when franchises offload stakes bit by bit for humongous returns on investements..

Posted by EuropeanSummer on (April 1, 2010, 11:17 GMT)

Can someone help me understand the player fee payment structure?

Question 1: In case Player X has been bought by a Franchise for $1 million. Will he be paid $1 million every season irrespective of the number of matches he actually plays? If he joins mid way through the tournament or if he on bench for 10 out of 14 league matches, will he be paid the entire contract amount of $1 million? or is the match fee pro-rated based on the number of matches actually palyed by the player?

Question 2: Are players paid extra for playing in the Champions league?

Question 3: For example if someone like Gibbs plays for both Cape Cobras and Deccan, and if these two teams clash in the Champions league, which team is he obliged to select? obviously it can't be his choice, because both of them pay him money and would want him to play.

Posted by Jiteendra on (April 1, 2010, 7:07 GMT)

A gud attempt depicting the effect of money on IPL.... But it's not appropriate to say dat it's affecting the quality of cricket being played in any way... Rather than in a country like India... where the sports is hailed as a religion, it's a fantastic opportunity for players as well as investers to showcase their skills.... The pin pointing on IPL is just not correct as it is helping the game reach to a larger share of audiences which will surely result in the popularity of the game worldwide in years to come...

Posted by   on (April 1, 2010, 3:33 GMT)

I really feel that IPL is a ggod business and player are not given respect what they should get.

Posted by jadedfan on (March 31, 2010, 22:36 GMT)

Nice write up, however, Ashok is wildly off the mark w.r.t Matty Hayden - he was the orange cap winner the last time round, remember???!!! For me, Aussie cricketers have demonstrated their professionalism in the IPL as no one else has - with the exception of Ponting, who should have never signed up in the first place. Examples: Warne, Watson, Marsh, Warner, Hayden, Gilly and Symonds. Even the ones who haven't had massive success are putting in 100% when called upon.

Comments have now been closed for this article

FeedbackTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Ashok MalikClose

    'Like a ballet dancer'

My XI: Martin Crowe on Mark Waugh's lazy elegance and batsmanship that was easy on eye

    Sea, sun, scandal

Diary: Our correspondent takes in the sights and sounds of Galle and Colombo, and reports on a tampering controversy

    Worst keepers, and honours at Lord's

Ask Steven: Also, most keeping dismissals on debut, seven-for at HQ, and youngest ODI centurions

    From swinging London to Maco country

Diary: Our correspondent walks and buses the streets of the English capital, and then heads for the coast

Cook's Brearley lesson

Jon Hotten: Mike Brearley was an outstanding captain despite his repeated failures with the bat

News | Features Last 7 days

Vijay rediscovers the old Monk

The leave outside off stump has been critical to M Vijay's success since his India comeback last year. Contrary to popular opinion, such patience and self-denial comes naturally to him

Bhuvneshwar on course for super series

Only 15 times in Test history has a player achieved the double of 300 runs and 20 wickets in a Test series. Going on current form, Bhuvneshwar could well be the 16th

Ugly runs but still they swoon

Alastair Cook did not bat like a leading man but the crowd applauded him for simply not failing

India come full circle

India's wretched run away from home began at Lord's in 2011. A young team full of self-belief may have brought it to an end with their victory at the same venue three years later

Ishant's fourth-innings heroics in rare company

In India's win at Lord's, Ishant Sharma took the best bowling figures by an Indian in the fourth innings of a Test outside Asia. Here are five other best bowling efforts by Indians in the fourth innings of Tests outside Asia

News | Features Last 7 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!