facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube StumbleUpon

Home | Forum | Chat | Tours | Articles | Pictures | News | Tools | History | Tourism | Search

 
 


Go Back   BanglaCricket Forum > Cricket > Cricket

Cricket Join fellow Tigers fans to discuss all things Cricket

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old March 17, 2015, 06:29 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigerblood99
No no i completely understand brother. I gave you DOLLAR FIGURES.

You keep saying we have the numbers, we have the numbers.

What is that number? What is the dollar figure contribution of BCCI to the total revenue pool? Say the last year? Last 2 years? Last 5 years?

Its a very simple question.

I asked you a very numbers based question.

You keep giving a rah rah speech about finance n economics.

You cant even tell me how much revenue BCCI makes
I can definitely research on the numbers more extensively for you.

Just one logical question: If BCCI didn't contribute the most to ICC, why are the other boards not taking a stand against the BCCI? Also, I am working on the approx $ number that you asked for.
Reply With Quote

  #27  
Old March 17, 2015, 06:36 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajfar
You are kidding right? Forget it. Its not even worth having a decent discussion. I won't be responding anymore.

I'll just say this much. Let me get this right, so when it comes to making money BCCI gets the bigger share because they make the money. But when BCCI who are clearly in control makes a decision, that is not so popular (like leaving out the associates for example) its everyone else should stand up and take responsibility. Hypocrite much.
Ajfar, calm down. No intention to put you or anyone down but think about it sensibly, everyone had a choice. BCCI did what it does best, flexed its muscles and the other boards if they disliked the idea, could have walked away. Don't you think that was an alternative?

The reason I said everyone needs to take responsibility is because everyone acted to the best of their interest, BCB included. Do you think BCB would be open to including associates, if they were told that the associates will take a part of their revenue?

See I don't understand, why are you so emotional about the whole thing. I aint getting a penny from the BCCI, pinky promise. Its not you v/s me. Its logic v/s logic.

Also, I hope you will respond, you don't have to be upset. Again, neither you nor I are getting any money from any of the boards.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old March 17, 2015, 06:44 PM
Tigerblood99 Tigerblood99 is offline
Club Cricketer
 
Join Date: February 6, 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Favorite Player: sabbir, soumya
Posts: 190

Quote:
Originally Posted by be_friend_13
I can definitely research on the numbers more extensively for you.
Please take your time. BCCI has no tax receipts with the government because it pays NO Taxes. They found the loophole.

Since there are no released data from the Board itself, you are more than welcome to make up your own numbers with that MBA brain of yours.

Just make sure the number you come up with is greater than $550 million cuz thats the chunk you are taking out.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old March 17, 2015, 06:53 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

________________________________________________

"Without elaborating on their methodology of calculation, the document says that during the last ICC media rights sale, the “value contribution” of India was more than 80 per cent while the contribution of other full members ranged from 0.1 per cent to 5 per cent."

about 80%

At the current level of ICC revenues – on rights sold for US$1.5 billion (Dh5.5bn) – the report works out that the BCCI will earn 4.2 per cent of the revenue, the ECB 0.9 per cent and CA 0.6 per cent (Pakistan get 0.3 per cent, South Africa 0.2 per cent, West Indies, New Zealand and Sri Lanka all 0.1 per cent and both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh 0 per cent).


BCCI- 4.2%, ECB-0.9%, CA-0.6%

If the BCCI didn't contribute 80% and the article is biased and false than why is that the Australian board and the English board are okay with a much smaller revenue share? BCCI must be really good at cooking up numbers.


Source: http://www.thenational.ae/sport/indi...-reforms#page2

UAE based news paper, tried to avoid English, Australian and Indian sources.
__________________________________________________ _______________

And yes, I know their legal status stands as a "co-operative society". And since they are technically non-profit, they don't have to pay taxes making my task much harder as they don't necessarily have to disclose revenues either and I also knew the reason you wanted me to come up with a "$ number". As a banker, this is what I do, day in day out.

I get your point of it being a loophole and your skepticism surrounding the revenue percentage but if some other board is contributing more, do you think they will be willing to let go just because BCCI said so? And if you think BCB is contributing more then they must really suck at math & diplomacy. As for the $550 MM number, if BCCI got 4.2% and its ally ECB got a mere 0.9%, which is about $50 MM, why do you think the English felt the need to let go of their larger share? Whats the reason they agreed to take just 0.9% home?

Since there are no actual numbers, you can be all emotional about it and deny everything as untrue but if logic prevails, we will be ending this discussion after this post. Its a no brainer that BCCI contributes the most, how much exactly ($ number) is subject to ones ability to understand.

BTW, you live just 2 hours north of me.

Last edited by be_friend_13; March 17, 2015 at 07:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old March 17, 2015, 07:37 PM
BengaliPagol's Avatar
BengaliPagol BengaliPagol is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 4, 2012
Location: Meherpur, Kushtia
Favorite Player: Imrul "The Don" Kayes
Posts: 7,206

Quote:
Originally Posted by be_friend_13
I can definitely research on the numbers more extensively for you.

Just one logical question: If BCCI didn't contribute the most to ICC, why are the other boards not taking a stand against the BCCI? Also, I am working on the approx $ number that you asked for.
Because if you add up all the revenue generated by all the boards and multiple it by about 50 then you will get the amount of revenue BCCI generate. And in this day and age money talks...
__________________
Check out our podcast channel and also our episode with Dr Mohamed Ghilan!
facebook.com/boysinthecave
boysinthecave.libsyn.com
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old March 17, 2015, 07:42 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengaliPagol
Because if you add up all the revenue generated by all the boards and multiple it by about 50 then you will get the amount of revenue BCCI generate. And in this day and age money talks...
Exactly my point, not sure what were you trying to say.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old March 17, 2015, 07:47 PM
BengaliIndia BengaliIndia is offline
Club Cricketer
 
Join Date: June 17, 2014
Posts: 108

Well if you really want to make money out of successful franchise based sports you don't need any international participation... NFL, NBA and MLB prime example....... so from a pure economics standpoint the number of participation has to be balanced against the duration of the tournament and nodding from the broadcasters and advertiser---everything eventually is linked to money--- as far as promoting the sports is concerned --- there can be tours by the A teams of test nations to associates --- just a different school of thought
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old March 17, 2015, 08:30 PM
BengaliPagol's Avatar
BengaliPagol BengaliPagol is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 4, 2012
Location: Meherpur, Kushtia
Favorite Player: Imrul "The Don" Kayes
Posts: 7,206

Quote:
Originally Posted by be_friend_13
Exactly my point, not sure what were you trying to say.
you were talking about teams not accepting the big 3 proposal should rebel against bcci but how is that even possible considering bcci make majority of the revenue. With more money comes more power. Without money u cant do jack.
__________________
Check out our podcast channel and also our episode with Dr Mohamed Ghilan!
facebook.com/boysinthecave
boysinthecave.libsyn.com
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old March 17, 2015, 08:41 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

There were 2 separate arguments on this thread:

A) Ajkar claiming that its BCCI's fault for ruining cricket but agreeing that BCCI contributes the most

B) Tigerblood99 being skeptical about BCCI's contribution altogether


Your point & my article and a short analysis proves B.

As for A, I am pretty sure that BCCI generates a billion dollar but again, cricket wasn't this popular back in the 80s and definitely didn't generate as much revenue but there were countries that were playing the game. If it is all about upholding the spirit of the game and not about money as you and others have been claiming, then I am pretty sure they (other board members- 7!) could have simply walked away and formed their parallel ICC. Not that the other boards aren't generating revenues, they are, just not nearly as much but sufficient to form a cricket council, i'd like to believe, right?

Having said that, when your argument is about making sure that cricket wins, why even think about money? You can play cricket with a billion dollars and hot cheerleaders and you can also play cricket without a billion dollars, no cheerleaders and no fireworks.

Hence, it is not JUST BCCI's fault. Everyone wants money and every board has done their math and weighed pros and cons, every board is after money and everyone wants as much as they can get out of ICC. So lets stop talking about "upholding the spirit of the game" or "ruining cricket" because those are all plain lies.

Hence I feel everyones responsible because everyone has a stake in these decisions that ICC takes. If the other boards feel that they contribute more and are not being given enough as much as they contribute, I have no doubt in my mind that they would have walked away from ICC and formed a parallel governing body.

Questions raised about the spirit of cricket are inversely proportional to the amount of money boards make.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old March 17, 2015, 08:45 PM
BengaliIndia BengaliIndia is offline
Club Cricketer
 
Join Date: June 17, 2014
Posts: 108

Romanticism and Materialism are two divergent aspects... people who tries to promote first while reaping the benefits of second (directly and indirectly) are a confused lot. There is a massive a commercial reason that Bangladesh was the host of ICC WC 2001 and ICC T20 2013----no one can deny that... so you guys had the spot light because ICC (and your evil yindoo BCCI) wanted to mint money out of a new emerging market--- and now you are all going bruhaha over ICC's decision which is driven mostly by commercial reasons?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old March 17, 2015, 08:51 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengaliIndia
Romanticism and Materialism are two divergent aspects... people who tries to promote first while reaping the benefits of second (directly and indirectly) are a confused lot. There is a massive a commercial reason that Bangladesh was the host of ICC WC 2001 and ICC T20 2013----no one can deny that... so you guys had the spot light because ICC (and your evil yindoo BCCI) wanted to mint money out of a new emerging market--- and now you are all going bruhaha over ICC's decision which is driven mostly by commercial reasons?
Exactly, I am pretty sure India alone has enough world class cricket stadiums to host a cricket world cup. Why do you think BCCI partnered with the other boards if they are indeed so cunning and evil?
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old March 18, 2015, 04:55 AM
senman's Avatar
senman senman is offline
ODI Cricketer
 
Join Date: February 6, 2009
Location: Chennai
Favorite Player: MS.Dhoni
Posts: 711

Quote:
Originally Posted by be_friend_13
Exactly, I am pretty sure India alone has enough world class cricket stadiums to host a cricket world cup. Why do you think BCCI partnered with the other boards if they are indeed so cunning and evil?
Valid point. Why does the BCCI want to share revenue with other Asian countries if India alone can have all the money?

BCCI is being villanised most of the time eventhough it had stood with and backed Asian countries many times. SC people (BD, SL and Pak) are falling victim to English reporters, BCCI is providing the much needed balance against Eng and Aus board.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old March 18, 2015, 11:21 AM
horizon horizon is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: January 29, 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 1,797

Those who are so concerned about distribution disparity among full members didn't see it existed for long time between a full member and an associate. The system should have been protested right then and there, instead the "bring more money to get more money" was allowed to go on by all full members who thought they are "elite"s compared to associates. They don't even allow an associate to become a full member.
Now suddenly a few of the group members has become "ultra-elite" and asking other full members to behave as associates. What's wrong in this? The system was anyway unjust from the beginning ...
__________________
The best tennis ball cricketer ever ... is ...
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old March 18, 2015, 01:50 PM
duke's Avatar
duke duke is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: November 5, 2014
Favorite Player: Adam Gilchrist
Posts: 295

This I dont understand. If the amount of money BCCI is going to get is unfair then why didn't other boards protest? Surely they could have just gone along and form another league with CA and ECB. Why did CA and ECB agree to this deal if the amount of money being provided to BCCI is unfair? What were they afraid of ?

To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.

If BCCI is not generating enough revenue they why every board is kowtowing to its demand?
Which board do you think should get the most revenue? Who do you think is generating the most revenue?

PS- Have you seen the sponsors of many ICC events recently?
All are Indian companies. Even this present world cup has Reliance as its sponsor.

The bottom line being if the 9 nations were unhappy , they could have voted against this revenue distribution proposal. They didn't.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old March 18, 2015, 03:49 PM
brockley brockley is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: August 8, 2007
Posts: 2,527

The 6 sides who keep one day status get increased funding,especially afghanistan and ireland who are trying to set up a first class system.But below the the other associate nations take a cut,as do most the test sides outside the big 3.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old March 18, 2015, 04:55 PM
be_friend_13 be_friend_13 is offline
First Class Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: San Diego
Favorite Player: Tendulkar & Jonty Rhodes
Posts: 266

Quote:
Originally Posted by brockley
The 6 sides who keep one day status get increased funding,especially afghanistan and ireland who are trying to set up a first class system.But below the the other associate nations take a cut,as do most the test sides outside the big 3.
Because the old system of equitable distribution was done away with and a much more fair approach brought in for revenue sharing. Other test nations are capable of doing more domestically as they are an established test side and expected to do more in terms of revenues.

Associates (6 nations) require money to set up first class system, as you mentioned and if since they are still fairly new, they are being helped. Why do the test sides need any help?

PS: It is not even Big 3, its just India taking a massive pie as it rightfully deserves owing to its lopsided contribution.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:27 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
BanglaCricket.com
 

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Partner Sites | Useful Links | Banners |

© BanglaCricket