Money for nothing and checks for free!

"Money for nothing and chicks for free" - crooned Mark Knopfler in 1985, to express his views on the music industry. With a single syllable change, it applies to the Indian Premier League (IPL), the newly conceived 20/20 cricket league set up in a franchise structure like the soccer leagues in Europe or the sports leagues in the US.

While the IPL might turn out to be the most defining development to happen to cricket since the Packer saga in 1978, and might take the salaries of players to be on par with those of soccer stars and NFL superstars, yet, when players like Manoj Tiwary, whom I saw in a recent game in Australia and wondered how he even got selected, and Ishant sharma, who despite being the star of the Australian tour was a virtual unknown a couple of months ago, fetched $675,000 and almost $1 MM respectively, the deal seems to have more holes than a sieve.

True that when business tycoons like Vijay Mallya, Ness Wadia, and Mukesh Ambani are rubbing wallets with Bollywoood stars like Preity Zinta and Shah Rukh Khan, there are bound to be excesses. After all, isn't this the marriage between the two biggest passions of a billion Indians - Cricket and Bollywood?.

Let's take a look behind all the glitter and analyze if there is gold.

First and foremost factor in the success of a venture is the product, in this case 20/20 cricket. There is no doubt that it is exciting and probably the best suited version to really bring people to the stadiums and have fun after a hard day's work. But beyond an exciting and serendipitously successful World Cup, there isn't a proof that the version is worth the millions of $$ in bets that are being placed - huge risk with uncertain return - an investment that would make me look like Ford betting on the Edsel.

Secondly, the HR, in this case cricketers, are an impressive lot - established players and upcoming ones with its share of have-beens; overall some of the best players in the World are on display.

Thirdly, the cost of hiring these cricketers - a mind boggling $633 MM - is where the logic behind all this looks as thin as soup in a college mess. Given that the people and the companies involved in the league are some of the biggest in the country and are proven winners this is definitely not a joke. One look at the salaries and more importantly the $$/hour, which is astronomical, it reveals the lack of common sense. E.g., M.S. Dhoni is expected to earn $1500/hour, which according to The Economic Times was higher than what Mukesh Ambani, ironically one of the team owners, earns. Then there are other operating costs that need to be taken into account like those of marketing, support staff, travel etc., that will ultimately make the figure fatter than the priest at my wedding.

I am a great believer in creating a market before creating a product and more importantly earning a few cents before betting millions. The IPL fails on both counts.

Hopefully the IPL will not suffer the same fate as that of the Indian stock market in April 1992, when blinded bullishness brought about the fall of many a millionaire, and Lalit Modi, the brain behind the IPL, will do better than Harshad Mehta.

Fast and Furious...

...two adjectives that would aptly describe the recently concluded 20/20 Cricket World Cup. Some might say "too fast, too furious", but I think the speed was just about right. This was the best cricket tournament since '99 World Cup - the last such one where at least 2 other teams (SA & Pak) were as good as the Aussies before the men in gold and green surged ahead to leave the rest of the world languishing in doldrums.

It is a common business transformation strategy to change a company's focus from its products and revenue to its consumers and many leading companies have turned around losing businesses by successfully implementing it. Cricket over the last 10 years had become a game run by lawyers/politicians for lawyers/politicians with focus on its product (ODIs) and revenue (broadcasting revenue). Along the way the needs and pulse of the consumer was forgotten. While on the verge of alienating the fans from the game, serendipitously or not, the ICC has just implemented one such successful transformation.

Despite numerous experts questioning the purity of the concept (Articles 1, 2 & 3), I am convinced that the game has received the perfect dose of caffeine to keep it going. While it definitely doesn't tamper with the purity and position of the more pristine form of the game that is test cricket, it certainly marks the beginning of the end of the 50 over game and nothing highlighted that more than the contrasting nature of the two world cups staged over the last 6 months - one whose winner was obvious 4 years before it started and the other whose winner was unknown until the last 4 balls were bowled!

While the purists correctly argue that test cricket is the true test of skills, truly close contests of the highest quality are too far and few in between to attract anyone but purists to the game. Over the last 10 years there have been only 2 mindblowing test series (Aus vs. India 2001 & Aus vs. Eng 2005) to satisfy the non-purist. Steve Waugh and his fearless Aussies revolutionized the game by scoring at an unheard of rate of 4 an over in tests, but few other teams could consistently match them to make things interesting. Arguably, the shorter version levels the field for a more even contest where ephemeral brilliance rather than sustained genius is sufficient to win games. But in doing so, it has unearthed the the key to closer contests and tighter finishes that has become a rarity in the game. Also, the average cricket fan does not have 5 days to watch the game in stadiums and appreciate the purity of the game. He prefers the luxury of Cricinfo to give him the executive summary. 20/20 has truly brought the fan back to the grounds.

And finally, to critics who site that the version may not produce a Sachin or a Lara, the counter argument is that Sachins and Laras are supreme talents that will show up and shine irrespective of the format of the game. It might be worthwhile to remember that SRT first announced his talent to the cricket world by taking the life out of Abdul Qadir (described by none other than Viv Richards as the toughest bowler he had faced) in an exhibition match in Pakistan before he went on to greater deeds and bigger stages. Hence the argument is moot.

Twenty Twenty is victory for the cricket consumer and hence I rest my case!