From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket




I don't understand WHY IPL franchises are interested in HUNDRED, a
format which no other country plays and cares about.



==================================================================


https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/ipl-franchises-eye-controlling-stakes-in-hundred-teams-1444305

IPL franchises eye controlling stakes in Hundred teams

An integral part of ECB's privatisation of the Hundred involves the
eight teams being run as a joint venture
Nagraj Gollapudi

24-Jul-2024 rCo 7 hrs ago

Is it wise or profitable to buy the minority (49%) stake being offered
by ECB to own one of the eight franchises in the Hundred? That's the
question being asked by owners of almost all of the 10 IPL teams, most
of whom are keen to buy teams in the Hundred but not in favour of being
a "passive" investor.

An integral part of ECB's privatisation of the Hundred, which launched
its fourth season on Tuesday, involves the eight teams being run as a
joint venture. The ECB has finalised a model which will leave 51% stake
with eight Hundred 'hosts' - seven counties and, in the case of London
Spirit, Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC). The remaining 49% will be sold to private investors, which will be finalised by ECB in coordination with
the hosts, who have also been given the choice to divest some or all of
their stakes before the formal bidding process from mid-September.

But several IPL franchise owners have expressed reservations, especially
on the controlling stake which, along with trust, is one of two key
factors that determine the success and longevity of any joint venture.
It is no different for the Hundred.

"This is going to be new for anyone who's coming in, because in all the
other franchise investments, we are 100% owners," said the head of one IPL-winning franchise. "The dynamics of that are very different. Here,
it's going to be a joint venture. There's valuation subject, then
there's ownership subject, then there's operational matters - all these
issues come to the fore immediately."

The official, who declined to be named, said the very fact that there's another partner, whether they have a minority or majority stake, raised
a "stumbling block" and "a huge difference" to how their franchises
operated elsewhere. "If it is 49 %, who's in charge? Would you want to
come in as a pure investor? Probably not. I don't know the answer to
that yet.

"But we have been told that control and all those things could be baked
in for the investor who's coming in. I don't know that there'll be a
great deal of appetite and interest to say, 'OK, here's a cheque. I
would like to be a passive investor. Let it run as it is and we'll
contribute to the extent we can.' No."

"The key question is how much that 49% constitutes of the overall
value. If that number is too huge and I am not sure and I see enough
returns, then I would rather take a small share to begin with"
An IPL CEO said they are open to a smaller stake in the Hundred

Vikram Banerjee, head of business operations at ECB, was made aware of investors' concerns on his trip to India during IPL 2024, where he met
with owners and management at various franchises.

"For a number of them, it's around things like brand," Banerjee said on
the subject of control. "For a lot of them it is cricket, and being in
control of the cricket side of things and others, pure and simple
majority stakes from an equity perspective. So we understand that and we understand where they are at. We have then built that into the process.

"If you look across our eight teams, there will be a variety there that
will be on market, and that clarity will be provided when we go to
market in September. And that clarity will provide a range that I
believe, at this point, will have different offerings that will suit all different kinds. And then as the conversations build, the details will
build through October, November, December. We'll get to a really good
place by the time the process runs its course."

Among the eight franchises, so far, the MCC has declared it will
consider selling part or all of its 51% stake subject to approval from
its membership which will vote on the subject by mid-September. Surrey,
who own the other London-based franchise - Oval Invincibles - have said
they have no plans to divest any of their 51% stake.

Richard Gould, the ECB's chief executive, didn't rule out the
possibility of the investors holding a 100% stake subject to their
fulfilling various criteria. "There's certainly the opportunity for
people to have, potentially, 100% ownership. It depends on the
capabilities that they can bring both in terms of finance and
operational delivery. Those opportunities do exist."

The ECB had been clear at the outset that the highest bid will not
necessarily be the winning one. Banerjee said while there was no denying
money was important, the board also wanted partners who were keen to
support the growth of the game at all levels.

Venky Mysore, CEO at Kolkata Knight Riders, the defending IPL champions,
said the success of a joint venture is determined by the "chemistry"
between the investor and the county in the case of the Hundred. Mysore
has been at the helm of the Knight Riders group since 2011, and has
overseen their buying and establishing teams in the Carribean Premier
League, International League T20 and Major League Cricket.

"Like in any joint venture there are legacy issues which will be there
in the Hundred, too," Mysore told ESPNcricinfo earlier this month. "The existing shareholder group has existed for 100-plus years, and suddenly,
you have a new investor coming in and you are joining hands.

"Ultimately in any joint venture, with my experience, it boils down to
the chemistry recipe. It's not the number: it's not about a closed bid
and 'here's a cheque' and the highest bid wins. From our perspective and
from the partner's perspective who have already spoken with us, it's
about that chemistry. Can you work together? Because this is for the
long run.

"Speaking for ourselvesrCa we think about it for the long haul. So
something like [the Hundred], again, you think about it for the long
haul and then say, 'OK, it's a joint venture'. If it has to work, then
the people, the chemistry has to be a big determining factor. And those
are the risks of joint ventures in general."

Not everyone is chasing a majority stake, though. A CEO at a third IPL
team told ESPNcricinfo that since they are just dipping their feet in
the Hundred, and doesn't fully understand the business model, they would prefer to buy a smaller stake in a franchise and build on it gradually.

"49% is good enough to begin with," the CEO said. "The key question is
how much that 49% constitutes of the overall value. If that number is
too huge and I am not sure and I see enough returns, then I would rather
take a small share to begin with, with a rider that I would be allowed
to take more of a stake with every passing year, or every five years."


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 24/07/2024 11:33, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

I don't understand WHY IPL franchises are interested in HUNDRED, a
format which no other country plays and cares about.

Probably because they are not irrationally fixated on the format
differences between T20 and the Hundred, which are really pretty minor.
--
David North

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 7/24/2024 9:18 PM, David North wrote:

On 24/07/2024 11:33, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

I don't understand WHY IPL franchises are interested in HUNDRED, a
format which no other country plays and cares about.

Probably because they are not irrationally fixated on the format
differences between T20 and the Hundred, which are really pretty minor.

We already have 3 international formats with some differences in rules.

WHY do we need one more in the form of HUNDREDS IF there are only minor differences between T20s and Hundreds?

Doesn't make any logical sense.

It appears that Hundreds are created just to "SAVE a little bit of TIME"
for the brit cricket fans.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 25/07/2024 07:26, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

We already have 3 international formats with some differences in
rules.
WHY do we need one more in the form of HUNDREDS IF there are only
minor differences between T20s and Hundreds?

We don't "need" it, but it brings in lots of people, lots of
money, and lots of publicity.

FTAOD, I speak as some one who dislikes the format, doesn't
agree with tinkering with rules for the sake of tinkering, and thinks
a serious opportunity was missed [see below].

Doesn't make any logical sense.

Doesn't need to. Money is sense enough.

It appears that Hundreds are created just to "SAVE a little bit of
TIME" for the brit cricket fans.

Whatever time is saved in play is lost in the razzmatazz, and
is negligible compared with the time that fans take to travel to the
ground and travel home again afterwards. A partial excuse is that it's
not for the cricket fans, but for the non-fans. For the non-fan, the
jargon that we all know and love ["He's bowling leg-breaks and googlies
with two short legs, extra cover, three slips and a gully ...."] simply
makes no sense; brilliant fielding and sixes are a different matter.
If the new format attracts a new audience who graduate to T20, etc.,
then a lot can be forgiven.

What is the "missed opportunity"? Well, cricket, like football
but unlike [eg] tennis and golf, is rooted in locality. We support our
local counties. I've found it impossible to support [beyond a vague
interest in the actual result] teams that bear no relation to location. Football is bad enough; but even so Bloggs isn't playing for ManU this
week in the league, for Coventry next week in the cup, for Stoke in the
league cup, and back to ManU the week after. Not normally, anyway. It
comes as somewhat of a shock to go to TB and see Yorkies playing for "us"
while half the Notts team are playing in Wales or London. The teams
should, IMO, be more clearly regional. I could support an East Midlands
side made up from players who normally played for the local counties;
and I would not expect such players who failed to make the EMidlands
team to go off and play for some remote part of the UK.
--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Grieg
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 25/07/2024 07:26, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

On 7/24/2024 9:18 PM, David North wrote:

On 24/07/2024 11:33, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

I don't understand WHY IPL franchises are interested in HUNDRED, a
format which no other country plays and cares about.

Probably because they are not irrationally fixated on the format
differences between T20 and the Hundred, which are really pretty minor.

We already have 3 international formats with some differences in rules.

3? What about the 4-day Tests that have been played recently?

Anyway, the Hundred isn't an international tournament. If we include all
the different formats that first-class (2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 days, and
timeless) and one-day (certainly every multiple of 5 overs from 40 to
65) matches have taken over the years, there must have been umpteen in
all, not just 3.

WHY do we need one more in the form of HUNDREDS IF there are only minor differences between T20s and Hundreds?

Doesn't make any logical sense.

It appears that Hundreds are created just to "SAVE a little bit of TIME"
for the brit cricket fans.

Mainly for the broadcasters rather than the fans, I think.
--
David North

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 25/07/2024 16:57, Andy Walker wrote:

On 25/07/2024 07:26, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

We already have 3 international formats with some differences in
rules.
WHY do we need one more in the form of HUNDREDS IF there are only
minor differences between T20s and Hundreds?

-a-a-a-aWe don't "need" it, but it brings in lots of people, lots of
money, and lots of publicity.

-a-a-a-aFTAOD, I speak as some one who dislikes the format, doesn't
agree with tinkering with rules for the sake of tinkering, and thinks
a serious opportunity was missed [see below].

Doesn't make any logical sense.

-a-a-a-aDoesn't need to.-a Money is sense enough.

It appears that Hundreds are created just to "SAVE a little bit of
TIME" for the brit cricket fans.

-a-a-a-aWhatever time is saved in play is lost in the razzmatazz,

Is there much more of that than in T20?

and
is negligible compared with the time that fans take to travel to the
ground and travel home again afterwards.-a A partial excuse is that it's
not for the cricket fans, but for the non-fans.-a For the non-fan, the
jargon that we all know and love ["He's bowling leg-breaks and googlies
with two short legs, extra cover, three slips and a gully ...."] simply
makes no sense;-a brilliant fielding and sixes are a different matter.
If the new format attracts a new audience who graduate to T20, etc.,
then a lot can be forgiven.

-a-a-a-aWhat is the "missed opportunity"?-a Well, cricket, like football
but unlike [eg] tennis and golf, is rooted in locality.-a We support our local counties.-a I've found it impossible to support [beyond a vague interest in the actual result] teams that bear no relation to location. Football is bad enough;-a but even so Bloggs isn't playing for ManU this
week in the league, for Coventry next week in the cup, for Stoke in the league cup, and back to ManU the week after.-a Not normally, anyway.-a It comes as somewhat of a shock to go to TB and see Yorkies playing for "us" while half the Notts team are playing in Wales or London.-a The teams
should, IMO, be more clearly regional.-a I could support an East Midlands side made up from players who normally played for the local counties;
and I would not expect such players who failed to make the EMidlands
team to go off and play for some remote part of the UK.

At least the East Midlands has a team of some description, unlike the
South West (or the North East for that matter).
--
David North

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 26/07/2024 07:59, David North wrote:

On 25/07/2024 16:57, Andy Walker wrote:

On 25/07/2024 07:26, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

[...]

It appears that Hundreds are created just to "SAVE a little bit of
TIME" for the brit cricket fans.

-a-a-a-a-aWhatever time is saved in play is lost in the razzmatazz,

Is there much more of that than in T20?

Dunno. It seems that way on TV. I doubt whether I shall ever
attend a live "The Hundred" match to find out.

[...] I could support an East Midlands
side made up from players who normally played for the local counties;
and I would not expect such players who failed to make the EMidlands
team to go off and play for some remote part of the UK.

At least the East Midlands has a team of some description, unlike
the South West (or the North East for that matter).

Yebbut! It's not an "East Midlands" team, it's a scratch side,
with a modest preponderance of local players [while other local players
are off playing for Wales, etc] that happens to be based at TB. It's
not interestingly different from the "All-England XI" of the 19thC in
that respect. If the SW [or NE for that matter] could raise some money,
they too could run scratch sides with a few locals tossed in and based
at [wherever] and could either join "The Hundred" or set up a rival competition. It might attract a decent crowd, but no loyalty. In the
absence of a team local to you, you might as well support Trent Rockets
and watch them on TV; and perhaps switch to a different side next year.
[It was always one of RH's failings that he never understood the concept
of loyalty to a local side, except in terms of nationality. I suspect
that much the same applies to a fair number of cricket's administrators,
esp those who set up things like "The Hundred".]
--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Hause
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.sport.cricket

On 26/07/2024 17:32, I wrote:

On 26/07/2024 07:59, David North wrote:

At least the East Midlands has a team of some description, unlike
the South West (or the North East for that matter).

-a-a-a-aYebbut!-a It's not an "East Midlands" team, it's a scratch side, with a modest preponderance of local players [while other local players
are off playing for Wales, etc] that happens to be based at TB.[...]

As if to prove the point, the side that played yesterday was
Tom Banton [Som], Adam Lyth [Yorks], Alex Hales [Notts], Sam Hain [Warks], Rovman Powell [Jamaica], Imad Wasim [sort-of Notts], Lewis Gregory [Som].
Chris Green [Lancs], Luke Wood [Lancs, formerly Notts], Ollie Robinson
[Sussex] and Sam Cook [Essex]. None of them born in the EMidlands, only
three with any arguable case for being EMidlands players [unless I've
missed someone who played a couple of matches for Derbys 2nd XI or some
such]. That's no more an EMidlands team than it is a SWest team.

IOW, there you are, David. You can follow Trent Rockets from afar
with a clear conscience, as I do [except that I'm not quite so far].

[I haven't checked TR Women; it wouldn't surprise me if they were somewhat more local.]
--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Chalon
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2