Too many T20s, too few viewers

The ICC earlier this week gave a go-ahead to US Cricket member boards to allow players in their countries to participate in Major League Cricket (MLC). (Image source: https://www.majorleaguecricket.com)

Cricket has been evolving at a rapid pace, shapeshifting between formats, embracing the club culture, figuring out what sells and what doesn’t.

But in an already-packed calendar, any further onslaught of T20 leagues in countries and continents that (i) either lack a healthy domestic cricketing culture, or, (ii) a market to cater to, or, (iii) a sustainable business model to rely on, needs thorough double-checking before being greenlighted.

Two developments that have occurred this week indicate how things are fast turning out to be a classic case of biting off more than one can chew.

1. USA Cricket, the governing body of cricket in the US, and the International Cricket Council (ICC) have been at loggerheads for some time now, with the former not being recognised by the ICC. Things got resolved earlier this week when US Cricket ‘elected’ an administrative body to run the sport. Within 48 hours, the ICC gave a go-ahead to its member boards to allow players in their countries to participate in Major League Cricket (MLC).

2. Recent news reports in Australia and west Asia claimed that there was talk of starting a brand new T20 league in Saudi Arabia.

Is there enough appetite?

Sport thrives on competition and competition thrives on two factors: 1. The talent pool, which is limited; 2. Exclusivity of the product in the market it’s catering to (which centres around the subcontinent in case of cricket). In this, T20 cricket is suffering from an overdose already.

Demand vs. supply

Starting a league is not the problem. Sustaining it is. Because sustaining a league in the long run requires a steady flow of talent and that can happen only when there’s a sizable and thriving domestic circuit.

Importing talent to make up for the exercise will not help build the circuit. Building the grassroots will.

Business models

Largely, the financial health of any T20 league, the IPL included, relies heavily on broadcast revenues. Broadcasters are willing to put money on the table when the product caters to the prime time in the sub-continent. This ensures top Dollars, which draws top players.

So far, so good. The problem arises when there are way too many leagues already and that too in regions that don’t really cater to the sub-continental prime time.

Then what happens?

America and Saudi Arabia

The proposed US T20 league, which essentially seems like a labour of love of south Asian Americans, has a good business model based on equity / partnerships, unlike some other newly-floated leagues that rely on the central revenue pool model, like IPL.

The Saudis, on the other hand, want to use cricket to drive tourism as they prepare to overtake Dubai and become the tourism capital of the middle east.

However, both lack a cricketing culture and a domestic circuit to rely on. In fact, the US is at a greater disadvantage due to the time difference, with no overlap with the Indian prime time, which is where the consumers are.