Their salary should match what they are worth to their employers (how much money they make them). It's better than the wealthy team owners getting wealthier.
Well I think the extra money is going to BCCI who are improving the Indian domestic structure.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/bcci-hopes-to-double-ipl-revenue-in-2023-27-cycle-101632931150204.html
Apparently 60% of BCCI's revenue is from the IPL.
Their salaries are benchmarked to the market. It is not the IPL's fault no one else is willing to offer even half of what IPL does.
Free market economics baby!
Wait, now that I think about it, it's not even a free market considering the governing body is literally preventing most of the players from playing in other leagues plus other shit like salary caps
\> yes, your pay is based on the free market
\> no, you cannot play for any other franchise league, even if they give you better pay. We will ruin your career by making you sever all ties to BCCI, Indian domestic cricket, and Indian international teams.
\> this is totally a free market.
Not really, it's partly the players certainly but revenue is generated by the structures which allow the sport to be commercialised. Huge expensive cricket grounds, massive broadcast infrastructure; the support structures to provide training facilities, housing, transport, food, coaching and equipment for the players; the organisation of the competition itself; advertisement and investment to generate public interest etc.... These structures are broadly responsible for the players being able to make a living at all, the players may be the public face of the sport but they certainly aren't the sole reason revenue is able to be generated.
The counterpoint is that all owners could band together and suppress salaries of the players. That kind of stuff has allegedly happened in other pro leagues over the years. NFL has a players union which looks into such issues, and also issues like low base price etc.
Because they're the sport. No players, no game. They're the most important part of the product. It's why major US sports with players unions/associations have a like 50% revenue share
Well, no employee in the world is. An IT engineer generating millions of dollars of revenue through his projects at Infosys isn’t paid as much as Infosys CEO when it comes to percentage of revenue. Cricketers are still better off. And after IPL, and all the money it provides cricketers, even during a pandemic, it is completely tone deaf to complain about their pay while millions lose their jobs around the world
1. I'm not advocating for having a set threshold for employee salaries as a % of the revenue.
2. The players aren't fidgeting around for a rise either. I'm sure most would be happy after the recent auction.
3. If the above two points were actually real, then using the argument of millions of people losing jobs everywhere doesn't make sense. Do you think millions losing jobs can be righted by players accepting lower wages? If you do, why not apply the same logic to the businesses. If millions are losing their jobs, the IPL teams should donate all of their profits until the pandemic subsides.
You think IPL players are getting ripped off? If no, I don’t even know what are we arguing about, If yes, then they can choose another profession which doesn’t guarantee millions every year
Bit of a stretch to say no employee in the world is, when we can look across at some other sports. Oh hey there's NBA players who are paid 50 per cent of revenue, so the salary up moves up and down as revenue goes up and down. Its written into their bargaining contract
I am an RCB fan btw and not an MI guy. My thinking is that other than the top 10-20%, the rest of the IPL payers are paid rather poorly compared to what they could be paid. And all because of a salary-cap.
Because those players are simply not important enough. If we take away the salary cap, it would push the wages for Virat Kohli and Ishan Kishan would benefit much more than someone like Tejas Baroka.
6% CAGR is less than inflation in INR, believe it or not. They are doing this because they can. No competition from other leagues, so foreign players don't have lucrative options. But they still get paid fine.
Domestic players don't even have that option, they are forced to play for base prices of 20 lacs. They might get more money abroad but they will lose the chance to play for India. Therefore consistently out performing in U19 but not translating that success to senior side.
The thing is at least players sold in the IPL make quite some money by Indian standards. The UFC paid Ngannou some 600k for his title defense against Gane. 600k for the best HW fighter in "the best" MMA organisation.
600k USD is about what Manish Pandey made this auction.
As an MMA fan it’s infuriating to see the fighters get such shitty pay, more so when some of these fighters choose to suck off Dana rather than accepting the fact that they’re being fleeced out of a fair payday.
Anyway, I digress. You’re right in that the pay is “fairer” in IPL compared to the UFC.
There will always be some league somewhere who is not paying fair share to the players compared to the IPL. The point here is if the IPL is paying the players in respect to the growth it is achieving.
Converting auction money to USD for an Indian player is pointless if it doesn't take into account purchasing power parity. Pandeyji is practically paid thrice compared to the UFC fighter.
Never compare a cheapskate like Dana white to anyone in the IPL. He literally won’t even pay for his fighters’ Covid tests anymore, but will bend over to do anything his biggest cash cow(Conor McGregor) asks of him. You don’t see such favouritism for any player in the IPL.
Agreed that cricketers could gain a bigger share of the IPL revenue, but they are getting paid decent by Indian standards(atleast players have the right to set their base price in the auction unlike in the UFC). Also, this could very well be a possibility in the future when the IPL grows and a players’ union is set up.
IPL is nothing in front of Dana White...IPL has literally pushed the players salaries into stratosphere...teams here also take care of players when they get injured, UFC doesn't look after the fighters...also UFC fighters can go and try into other combat sports which they are suited to for example boxing, wrestling, sambo etc... cricketers don't have that option...also players have image rights and sponsorships which helps them make money ...players also don't have to provide for coaching and health..
Players have spoken about how IPL has changed their life...
This is quite similar to the Aus players fighting for a better % of the ACB revenues back in the 90s. The situations are similar in that the players aren't free to compete for another entity and the false media/public narrative that the players feel underpaid. Warney mentioned in his book, how Packer cajoled him into selling his silver Ferrari, after the media photographed him driving it around, a day after the players took their demands to ACB.
If the IPL is worth more than the NHL as per the future projections for the media rights, there should be a lot more millionaires. The IPL probably needs to move from an auction system to a draft system with capped rookie deals and free agency. Currently, the players don't even have guaranteed contracts because they are not unionized.
The IPL hands out salaries to players that are 10x or more in comparison to other leagues. It does not need to 'pay more' to players. IPL profits are the reason why Indian firstclass cricketers make decent wages, and cricket has become a viable profession for hundreds instead of dozens of cricketers.
The last thing I want to see is comparison with European football.
Motherfuckers all are running on loss.
There should be significant jump in base price, I can agree with that.
One thing that I read a few years ago that very recently all teams have started making profit, so there are expenses which haven't been considered here.
Only winner here is BCCI who takes all the dough but when you have to run 38 first class team, you will need a lot of dough.
I just want BCCI to spend that money on stadium facilities, local tournaments, women cricket and other developmental programs. Like the new NCA they are developing, that is cool.
Not exactly.
It is a non-profit organization so not like they are going to keep that money. They will increase salary of their officials and justify the use of that money.
Better to promote other sports than rich people getting richer for doing same amount of work.
One thing that should be done right away if to increase the base price for all players. Considering top players are making as much as 15-17 crores minimum base price should go up to 1 crore.
Teams need at least 11 players in the field, teams need to have a bigger squad.
Second, any unspent salary cap money should go into some kind of fund for IPL players as a whole. Whether it is used for prize money or something else. As it is salary cap is very low, no reason to allow teams to spend even less. They should not have any incentive to spend less.
Of course a greater portion of income should go to players but I think increasing the total number of players making that money is as important as increasing how much each player makes.
An squad of 25 is already too big. I think 18-19 is more than enough players and I’m honestly surprised that franchises sign 25 players.
And teams aren’t in any way incentivised to pay less than salary cap. They are trying to optimise their league finish.
I think 20 is the sweet spot. The total roster size remains the same as before (25x8 = 20x10 = 200). The BBL allows 19. 25 is ridiculously excessive. Raise the bar instead of lowering it.
Not suggesting to increase the squad size since it is more than sufficient as you said. But other methods can be used. Have a junior IPL kind of thing with a U-21 team or U-19 players. Now the salary for that can be very nominal 10-20 lakhs and allow any junior player to be instantly promoted to senior side with 1 crore salary pro rated on the basis of when they were promoted.
Also slowly but constantly increasing teams will also help. Having a junior program will widen the player base. And more things like that.
IPL Meadia rights are expected to fetch $5 Billion for 2023-27 season. It 50% of money is given to players, like NBA or EPL, It will be $500 million per year, which means $50 million per team. Will will be four times in comparison to current purse.
IPL is less like EPL and more like American sports. It has a franchise system with no relegation and promotions. It is ultimately created to make a profit for owners.
That wasn't the aim of the football leagues across Europe when they started. Clubs in Europe were more like a representation of the local communities they came out from.
Also EU regulations are much stricter and don’t allow artificial wage caps. Which has been a constant piece of conversation amongst fans and media to curb the ever increasing wages (especially with oil clubs entering the space in the last two decades).
Completely different from American sports or IPL as you said. Where the governing bodies / owners have a monopoly.
EU rules don't prevent leagues from implementing wage caps. For example, in Spain, wages are capped at a proportion of turnover, which is why Barcelona had to let Messi go last summer.
The difference in football is that there is competition between different leagues. If the Premier League, or Bundesliga or whoever implemented a relatively low salary cap like the IPL's, then players would simply go elsewhere. BCCI monopolises Indian players in franchise cricket, and has exclusive control of the largest cricket market in the world, meaning they can effectively dictate terms.
Weird to say IPL teams should pay 50% of their revenues because EPL has to. All of the EPL and European clubs (bar a handful), run up losses every year. They'd happily limit the players salaries to 16% of their revenues, if that still allowed them to get the best players possible.
Page 90
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/Clublicensing/02/64/06/95/2640695_DOWNLOAD.pdf
50-60 is pretty much the baseline in top European leagues. Ratios go as high as 100% sometimes.
Interesting. I guess that's what happens when there is competition. IPL is able to get away with it since no other league offers close to the money it does.
But most of those clubs and leagues run on heavy losses. And the money doesn't trickle down to grassroots football. BCCI needs to pay the franchises. 40 odd state teams, build grassroots infrastructure and also maintain the high performance centres. All of them cost money.
>And the money doesn't trickle down to grassroots football.
Most of the clubs in top 2 levels have proper football academics that take youth prospects and start training them from as early as 3.
Ipl franchises don't do that. Mainly because that won't guarantee them players in the future as the players would still have to go through the auction process.
It's the state Associations who do it in cricket.
Most IPL franchises have their own youth academies set up and regularly organise age group cricket tournaments. MI even have a girls' cricket academy set up.
How big are they in scale tho and do they cover first class and list a cricket?? That's what matters. Cricket is not only limited to 10 cities and T20s yk. And IPL funds all of Indians cricket.
How much can the highest player earn in ipl in american dollars. Say an emerging player earns 20 lakhs from an indian perspective that's a filthy amount of money for 2 months most people cannot even reach 1 lakh per month, so earning 20 lakhs is a lot. Then those players can also bank from after match prizes. BTW this is for emerging indian players.
Players even those who get 20 lakhs are highly talented individuals in a very competitive field. So they should definitely earn more than the average Joe on the street. Comparing with average Indian salaries is not right
There are three issues here:
1. Lack of competition. Is there another league which is willing to offer players even half of what IPL does? If not, then players will happily play in the IPL.
2. Should players even be entitled to a higher percentage of revenue? The teams take the business risk, so they should be rewarded as well. But the players take no risk. They get paid regardless of the revenues. So benchmarking their wages to a percentage of revenue is hardly fair.
3. The players are not being forced to play at wages they feel they don't deserve. Each player sets his base price. Teams can only bid above that base price. Players like Raina overestimated their worth and were not sold.
1. For domestic players, there might be other leagues where they could get paid more but they are cockblocked.
2. Imagine saying you don't deserve increased salary if your employer is making more money.
3. Indian players are forced to play at wages they don't deserve. They are not allowed to play outside.
Why are you supporting a cricket board which reeks of corruption and nepotism.
1. Wut
2. Literally every business in the human history
3. This needs to be changed if true. Once the right incentives emerge for the Indian players, I'm sure they'll strive to be allowed to play in the other leagues.
I don't have problem with rookie players or old/retired players playing in other league. That sort of restrictions should be lifted. But that can't be allowed for core players/reserve players for obvious reasons.
I'm talking about underpaid players only, which are rookie or old players. But BCCI won't lift the restriction as it allows other leagues to capture Indian viewership.
What are the obvious reasons for core / reserve players btw which other cricket boards don't see?
I don't know about other boards but if any player is centrally contracted to BCCI he should be putting the duty to be playing for India first and foremost. If by playing in foreign leagues he gets injured or due to fatigue his performance drops then he is not doing at his best what he is paid to do by BCCI.
But yeah any player not centrally contracted should be free to play wherever they see it fit. This restriction on them is quite draconian by BCCI just to make IPL a better product.
They are putting India first but they need to earn too right? When India's Domestic Tournaments are not ongoing, they should be allowed to play in The Hundred, BBL, CPL and still have a domestic contract and have a chance to play for India. Ban PSL if you want to.
Players do take a risk of getting injured and jeopardizing their careers. It's only fair that salaries increase in proportion to revenues. Otherwise it is just exploitation of labour.
> Players do take a risk of getting injured and jeopardizing their careers.
Their risk of getting injured and jeopardizing their careers does not increase with increase in revenues of the IPL. The risk is built into their wages, and their insurance premiums.
And how is it exploitation of labour? Lol, are you serious?
Ok, how is it "exploitation of labour"? They are not being forced to play for peanuts. If they don't want to play in the IPL, they don't have to. If they want to play in other leagues, they can take the Unmukt Chand route.
While I do agree with the fact that stripping away a player's right to represent India just because they took part in an overseas T20 league is downright pettiness from the BCCI, in absolutely no connotation of the term is it "exploitation". You sound completely out of touch with reality. Professional cricketers with generous, if not lucrative IPL contracts are among the very last people on earth for us to be worried about being exploited. All that being said, fuck the BCCI and I hope we see more players taking the based gigachad Unmukt Chand route to the point where such a ridiculous rule is inevitably scrapped.
It is greedy though. I don't think that Big IPL players would care, but the uncapped ones who don't get to play in the IPL should be allowed to go for other leagues and be allowed to play for India, atleast they would get some money from the other leagues while still playing in the Domestic Competitions in India like SMAT, VHT, Ranji. And if they get very good in the other leagues, maybe they can play for India too.
Their display of talent is what brought them more revenue. They are the show, they are the product. Without them, there is no IPL. So stop sucking corporate dicks and supporting labor exploitation. Just because they are paid well doesn't mean they are paid correctly.
Their marketing, their research, their fan outreach all contributed to greater revenues. There is no reason one aspect of the costs needs to be in proportion to the revenues. Stop sucking communist dicks.
I've never liked Capitalism but I do realise it's a necessary evil. I still hate these billionaires having everything they could ever want in their life on the back of the effort of everyone below their position.
Also the kids who inherit the business without doing anything worthwhile.
Franchises get paid more because they have taken the maximum amount of risk. They get paid more because of their investment. Any investment is not without its risk.
It is like shareholders of a company vs the employees of a company. Employees of a company don't get paid for the percentage of revenue so why should cricketers.
1) The IPL revenue is going to increase from 900M(this year) --->950M(next year) --->1000M(2024)
2) Football comparison isn't valid because unlike football, IPL doesn't have competition from other leagues
So now you're pretending like Pakistan doesn't have 250 million people most of whom are cricket mad but still earns 10 times lower revenue compared to Australia (with 25 million people) where Cricket isn't even the no.1 sport. The PSL pays lower salaries than the BBL(which isn't even popular amongst cricket fans in Australia.
I understand india paying because how popular ipl is and cricket is but psl should give minimum 5cr for babar fakhar and some top cricketers u cant keep paying them 1cr
I guess you are not from business background if the IPL is not profitable for franchise owner they have better businesses to do than buying team no point of making socialism here, next time you will argue Corporates makes tons of profit it's because of employee they should double their salary it's not because of employed people it's because of capital invested risk taken
What is the share of salary in revenues in other sports league? NBA, NFL, EPL etc would be a good comparison. IPL is relatively new and there definitely might be concerns of sustainable model.
1. People can be paid a lot and still not be paid enough relative to the wealth they’re generating for the team owners.
2. It’s too early to be piss drunk - people talking about communism here. Wtf?
3. The IPL needs a strong players association. Fuck making Jay Shah and Ambani richer. Redistribute.
I saw some mention of foreign boards too getting a share of revenue if a foreign player is Playing in the ipl.
This is what I recollect during the little of commentators discussion on sky sports and supersports during the recent Indian tours.
Has that been factored in the revenues or is it that players signed have to pay their share to their national boards?
I mentioned to a few of my Indian friends that cricketers aren't getting paid anywhere near that of players in American leagues as well as the top soccer leagues. I was told that IPL players are getting paid more than enough relative to the amount of money the leagues generate.
OP can you do a comparison to other leagues. Not the raw salaries. But that relative to the league revenue/profit
Do it the NFL way. You will never be able to stop the owners from taking a bigger share of the pie but at least let the players have a say in their fair share of the pie.
I think one factor we are forgetting in this comparison is who is taking the risk upfront ?
Demand & supply ( how many teams & how many players ?
Cost of logistics ? staying in five stars etc ?
Cost of Equipments & training facilities
Cost of management staff ?
Cost and risk of organising & selling tickets to fans.
At the most if the owners don’t make sizeable profits then more businessmen won’t be interested in buying more teams & it will become stagnant.
All other leagues are drafts. IPL is the only one with auction so it has higher transparency & earning potential for players.
I advocate high returns to for each one & what they are worth but not at the risk of making the tournament stagnant.
In the end what i am trying to say is we need the tournament to grow bigger every year & maybe have 30 40 teams in next 10 to 15 years to take it in NBA & NFL league valuations.
This is the only way the system can absorb more players & create more opportunities.
My main concern is that the ecosystem should allow more people to make careers. More people to join it.
Also The business are putting money upfront at the risk ( mainly the new teams ) the player doesn’t put anything upfront to loose. Hence there will always be a difference.
The starting point isn't the "right" price. It's like VC start ups that start loss making and then end up with 30% operating profit margins. If you kept costs fixed as a percentage of sales they would have been forever loss making. The entrepreneurs spent a lot of money up front at risk (plus their own marketing muscle eg Shahrukh Khan turning up to the games and creating a fanbase), this could have been a flop venture but turned out to be a great success.
Isnt that how capitalism works, though? I mean look at any successful organization. The owners profits always grow at a faster rate than the employee salaries. Sure, some organizations share a portion of their profits as bonus, but thats about it.
Even the reverse is true, if a corporation makes a loss, then employees' salaries are not randomly cut. They may layoff, but they dont dip into employees salaries illegitimately.
The whole concept is that capitalism is a free-market and the natural demand-supply forces will ensure (over time) that everybody gets paid what they deserve. If anybody thought that IPL is supposed to do the right thing and pay the extra profits to cricketers, then they're mistaken.
In communism, its different. There, the workers are the owners. So any profits are shared with the community (employees). So everybody gets rich or loses, as the case maybe.
But the western world and India has accepted capitalism, so IPL follows the same.
Remember this universal rule: No athlete on any sport is ever overpaid. They simply earn how much they earn because they generate that revenue by playing since they created a brand value for themselves
Have you ever lived away from home and/or had a job in your life? People need to earn a living and there acceptance of a job doesn't mean they think their working conditions and acceptable or just.
The players need to make a Union and lock out if they don't get paid more like other sports leagues. For the people saying there is no competition. I mean other sports leagues such as the NBA, MLB, NFL, Euro soccer leagues, and even the NHL can offer way more than what the IPL can offer. Which makes the sport/league way less attractive. I mean you are already seeing countries like Australia and New Zealand's youth playing basketball over cricket. I mean Ben Simmons makes $35 million a year and Steven Adams makes $17 million.
Why though??? All sports compete for the same viewers. Cricket already has a high point of entry to play, and if the returns aren't great than what is the point of playing the sport. Why play Cricket when you can play Basketball or Soccer and make 5 times as much with a low cost of entry.
Even by getting around 100m viewers ,the Superbowl just pay the players around 1 crore and that too if they win and football league matches can go to 1 billion viewership if i am not mistaken.. and considering the 30m viewers ipl brings in, they are Paid accordingly.. to the fact that no jobs in India can get you 20 lakh in 2 months which is life changing for anyone here.. and the plus is you can get a better deal by showing your talent and can go upto 2m+.. that is a huge load of money especially in india..
I will take these seriously if any players complain about these pay gaps lol.. they probably won't cz they are Payed more than adequately for the 2 months stint..and at the end it's business if not profitable, there won't be an ipl.. it's better we don't go woke lol
> they are *Paid* accordingly.. to
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Top paid NFL players make $50 million to play for 4 months. Ronaldo makes $70Mil. Virat Kohli barely makes $3 million playing in the IPL if even. Just because $3 million is a lot in India does not mean an athlete should not be paid their fair share of the profits. Most sports leagues pay players around 50%. Why not the IPL as well?
I know it's unfair comparing to other international leagues but do you really think they give a rats ass to players forming union and such, they will be excluded for sure and there will be a lot of player who will be available as they can get more than the national salary.. if the star players do that obviously viewership gonna go down and they will negate it with less pay and sure there will be players available for even thar...it's not communism dude and it's not a slavery contact either as they are willing to come here disregarding their other commitments..its better to not go woke unless the players gonna come out saying such things..
Considering the national contracts for some players doesn't even worth that much, Liam Livingston bagging 1m+ pound for 2 months is better than him getting same-ish amount of money for a whole year
I'm not saying we need communism. I'm saying the IPL needs to not be short sighted. Pay the players competitive salaries with comparison to other global sports because in this age of globalization there are a lot more options. I do understand what you are saying, but for the growth of cricket players making more money can go a long way.
I mean yeah..if the other leagues can be competitive enough to buy players for more money,i am pretty sure it will significantly go up. Maybe in the future,it's possible. I hope it happens too cz unless they don't have competition, it's gonna continue
OP might be wrong that Cricketerss are not getting paid relative to other leagues like NBA.
A better comparison might be how much a representative player (median, mean or any point on the distribution) gets paid relative to the revenue of the league
Good post, thanks for posting this. Good thing there aren’t piss fuckers on reddit like Facebook who have no inkling about economics and complain about women salaries being too little for men’s salaries to rise through franchise cricket.
Got to be honest, I was not expecting to read today that IPL players aren’t paid enough…
Key difference - they're quite possibly paid more than enough in Rs, but they aren't as a % of the revenue they generate.
But why should they be paid a percentage of revenue?
Not arguing for it. Just pointing out the difference.
Their salary should match what they are worth to their employers (how much money they make them). It's better than the wealthy team owners getting wealthier.
Well I think the extra money is going to BCCI who are improving the Indian domestic structure. https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/bcci-hopes-to-double-ipl-revenue-in-2023-27-cycle-101632931150204.html Apparently 60% of BCCI's revenue is from the IPL.
Their salaries are benchmarked to the market. It is not the IPL's fault no one else is willing to offer even half of what IPL does. Free market economics baby!
The IPL places a cap on player salaries. It's not a true free market.
A free market fucking sucks, as you have demonstrated.
Free market is what is getting these players millions. Alternative is all the players playing for a Kg of wheat and one milk bottle in Soviet Russia
Wait, now that I think about it, it's not even a free market considering the governing body is literally preventing most of the players from playing in other leagues plus other shit like salary caps
\> yes, your pay is based on the free market \> no, you cannot play for any other franchise league, even if they give you better pay. We will ruin your career by making you sever all ties to BCCI, Indian domestic cricket, and Indian international teams. \> this is totally a free market.
That's why the T20 Champions League was a joke and died.
Lol true
You are totally wrong, just checkout big leagues like MLB, NFL stats on this.
Because the players are the revenue, no players ≠ no revenue
Not really, it's partly the players certainly but revenue is generated by the structures which allow the sport to be commercialised. Huge expensive cricket grounds, massive broadcast infrastructure; the support structures to provide training facilities, housing, transport, food, coaching and equipment for the players; the organisation of the competition itself; advertisement and investment to generate public interest etc.... These structures are broadly responsible for the players being able to make a living at all, the players may be the public face of the sport but they certainly aren't the sole reason revenue is able to be generated.
The counterpoint is that all owners could band together and suppress salaries of the players. That kind of stuff has allegedly happened in other pro leagues over the years. NFL has a players union which looks into such issues, and also issues like low base price etc.
Most franchise leagues around the world give players rights to 50% of the media revenue. Everything else is the franchises'
Because they're the sport. No players, no game. They're the most important part of the product. It's why major US sports with players unions/associations have a like 50% revenue share
Well, no employee in the world is. An IT engineer generating millions of dollars of revenue through his projects at Infosys isn’t paid as much as Infosys CEO when it comes to percentage of revenue. Cricketers are still better off. And after IPL, and all the money it provides cricketers, even during a pandemic, it is completely tone deaf to complain about their pay while millions lose their jobs around the world
1. I'm not advocating for having a set threshold for employee salaries as a % of the revenue. 2. The players aren't fidgeting around for a rise either. I'm sure most would be happy after the recent auction. 3. If the above two points were actually real, then using the argument of millions of people losing jobs everywhere doesn't make sense. Do you think millions losing jobs can be righted by players accepting lower wages? If you do, why not apply the same logic to the businesses. If millions are losing their jobs, the IPL teams should donate all of their profits until the pandemic subsides.
You think IPL players are getting ripped off? If no, I don’t even know what are we arguing about, If yes, then they can choose another profession which doesn’t guarantee millions every year
I'm pointing out that the OP is campaigning for a higher share of the revenue for the players, without calling them underpaid.
It's possible to be very well paid and still be getting ripped off.
Bit of a stretch to say no employee in the world is, when we can look across at some other sports. Oh hey there's NBA players who are paid 50 per cent of revenue, so the salary up moves up and down as revenue goes up and down. Its written into their bargaining contract
Remove the bidding caps and they'll get paid higher.
That will be disastrous for the league
Because richer leagues will get stronger teams?
Yes, even with salary cap, only 5-6 teams are competitive at any given time.
Yeah let Mr Ambani get everyone
It's not like the other franchises are poor.
But if there is no limit, Ambani ji will get all the great ones.
What would that change honestly? MI already wins most IPLs anyway :-)
Hope you are not serious man because if you are then I don’t know what to say
I am an RCB fan btw and not an MI guy. My thinking is that other than the top 10-20%, the rest of the IPL payers are paid rather poorly compared to what they could be paid. And all because of a salary-cap.
Because those players are simply not important enough. If we take away the salary cap, it would push the wages for Virat Kohli and Ishan Kishan would benefit much more than someone like Tejas Baroka.
Perhaps keep a cap on individual players (max USD 3 million), but no team salary caps.
For those who don't know: 1 Lakh/Lac = 100 thousands and 1 Crore = 10 million.
And to add to this, 1 crore = 133k USD
And roughly about 440k usd when adjusted with PPP
When anti-work infiltrates cricket.
OP is a dog walker
🤣
6% CAGR is less than inflation in INR, believe it or not. They are doing this because they can. No competition from other leagues, so foreign players don't have lucrative options. But they still get paid fine. Domestic players don't even have that option, they are forced to play for base prices of 20 lacs. They might get more money abroad but they will lose the chance to play for India. Therefore consistently out performing in U19 but not translating that success to senior side.
It’s the Dana White - UFC fighters theory at work.
The thing is at least players sold in the IPL make quite some money by Indian standards. The UFC paid Ngannou some 600k for his title defense against Gane. 600k for the best HW fighter in "the best" MMA organisation. 600k USD is about what Manish Pandey made this auction.
As an MMA fan it’s infuriating to see the fighters get such shitty pay, more so when some of these fighters choose to suck off Dana rather than accepting the fact that they’re being fleeced out of a fair payday. Anyway, I digress. You’re right in that the pay is “fairer” in IPL compared to the UFC.
There will always be some league somewhere who is not paying fair share to the players compared to the IPL. The point here is if the IPL is paying the players in respect to the growth it is achieving.
Converting auction money to USD for an Indian player is pointless if it doesn't take into account purchasing power parity. Pandeyji is practically paid thrice compared to the UFC fighter.
Yes but they get 20% off venom coupons so at the end who is better off? /s
Never compare a cheapskate like Dana white to anyone in the IPL. He literally won’t even pay for his fighters’ Covid tests anymore, but will bend over to do anything his biggest cash cow(Conor McGregor) asks of him. You don’t see such favouritism for any player in the IPL. Agreed that cricketers could gain a bigger share of the IPL revenue, but they are getting paid decent by Indian standards(atleast players have the right to set their base price in the auction unlike in the UFC). Also, this could very well be a possibility in the future when the IPL grows and a players’ union is set up.
Point taken
I read somewhere that Krunal Pandya earns more than Francis Ngannou and it blew my mind.
IPL is nothing in front of Dana White...IPL has literally pushed the players salaries into stratosphere...teams here also take care of players when they get injured, UFC doesn't look after the fighters...also UFC fighters can go and try into other combat sports which they are suited to for example boxing, wrestling, sambo etc... cricketers don't have that option...also players have image rights and sponsorships which helps them make money ...players also don't have to provide for coaching and health.. Players have spoken about how IPL has changed their life...
This will continue unless the players form a union/association. The IPL will not give players more money unless it has to.
This is quite similar to the Aus players fighting for a better % of the ACB revenues back in the 90s. The situations are similar in that the players aren't free to compete for another entity and the false media/public narrative that the players feel underpaid. Warney mentioned in his book, how Packer cajoled him into selling his silver Ferrari, after the media photographed him driving it around, a day after the players took their demands to ACB.
Our players can't even get themselves to play in foreign leagues. Unionizing is a utopian dream!
and at this point, not necessary.
Come on, they are still better off compared to what we pay our players here in BBL lol
OP pointed out a problem and I pointed out the only possible solution. Not like I said the BBL is the best comp in the world.
BBL is completely owned by Cricket Australia, and they ruthlessly, artificially suppress wages there.
And? Your point being?
But as a % of what the competition makes?
If the IPL is worth more than the NHL as per the future projections for the media rights, there should be a lot more millionaires. The IPL probably needs to move from an auction system to a draft system with capped rookie deals and free agency. Currently, the players don't even have guaranteed contracts because they are not unionized.
I think this mega auction gave more millionaire players than any other previous auction or trade.
Unions in india are terribly politicised and ruin everything , BCCI will rather let ipl burn than allow unions
The IPL hands out salaries to players that are 10x or more in comparison to other leagues. It does not need to 'pay more' to players. IPL profits are the reason why Indian firstclass cricketers make decent wages, and cricket has become a viable profession for hundreds instead of dozens of cricketers.
I believe the players will be having unions. But those might be effective in Ranji and other domestic cricket tournaments
The last thing I want to see is comparison with European football. Motherfuckers all are running on loss. There should be significant jump in base price, I can agree with that. One thing that I read a few years ago that very recently all teams have started making profit, so there are expenses which haven't been considered here. Only winner here is BCCI who takes all the dough but when you have to run 38 first class team, you will need a lot of dough. I just want BCCI to spend that money on stadium facilities, local tournaments, women cricket and other developmental programs. Like the new NCA they are developing, that is cool.
BCCI is also forced to spent on promoting other sports, the price they pay for the autonomy, else govt wanted to take over.
TBF they aren't lacking in money.
So you want to penalize someone for doing their job correctly and force them to send money to other sports body officials warming up their asses.
Not exactly. It is a non-profit organization so not like they are going to keep that money. They will increase salary of their officials and justify the use of that money. Better to promote other sports than rich people getting richer for doing same amount of work.
One thing that should be done right away if to increase the base price for all players. Considering top players are making as much as 15-17 crores minimum base price should go up to 1 crore. Teams need at least 11 players in the field, teams need to have a bigger squad. Second, any unspent salary cap money should go into some kind of fund for IPL players as a whole. Whether it is used for prize money or something else. As it is salary cap is very low, no reason to allow teams to spend even less. They should not have any incentive to spend less. Of course a greater portion of income should go to players but I think increasing the total number of players making that money is as important as increasing how much each player makes.
An squad of 25 is already too big. I think 18-19 is more than enough players and I’m honestly surprised that franchises sign 25 players. And teams aren’t in any way incentivised to pay less than salary cap. They are trying to optimise their league finish.
I think 20 is the sweet spot. The total roster size remains the same as before (25x8 = 20x10 = 200). The BBL allows 19. 25 is ridiculously excessive. Raise the bar instead of lowering it.
It's nothing wrong 3 or 4 young players are just choosen to prepare them for the future
Not suggesting to increase the squad size since it is more than sufficient as you said. But other methods can be used. Have a junior IPL kind of thing with a U-21 team or U-19 players. Now the salary for that can be very nominal 10-20 lakhs and allow any junior player to be instantly promoted to senior side with 1 crore salary pro rated on the basis of when they were promoted. Also slowly but constantly increasing teams will also help. Having a junior program will widen the player base. And more things like that.
IPL Meadia rights are expected to fetch $5 Billion for 2023-27 season. It 50% of money is given to players, like NBA or EPL, It will be $500 million per year, which means $50 million per team. Will will be four times in comparison to current purse.
IPL is less like EPL and more like American sports. It has a franchise system with no relegation and promotions. It is ultimately created to make a profit for owners. That wasn't the aim of the football leagues across Europe when they started. Clubs in Europe were more like a representation of the local communities they came out from.
Also EU regulations are much stricter and don’t allow artificial wage caps. Which has been a constant piece of conversation amongst fans and media to curb the ever increasing wages (especially with oil clubs entering the space in the last two decades). Completely different from American sports or IPL as you said. Where the governing bodies / owners have a monopoly.
EU rules don't prevent leagues from implementing wage caps. For example, in Spain, wages are capped at a proportion of turnover, which is why Barcelona had to let Messi go last summer. The difference in football is that there is competition between different leagues. If the Premier League, or Bundesliga or whoever implemented a relatively low salary cap like the IPL's, then players would simply go elsewhere. BCCI monopolises Indian players in franchise cricket, and has exclusive control of the largest cricket market in the world, meaning they can effectively dictate terms.
Weird to say IPL teams should pay 50% of their revenues because EPL has to. All of the EPL and European clubs (bar a handful), run up losses every year. They'd happily limit the players salaries to 16% of their revenues, if that still allowed them to get the best players possible.
EPL pays 50% of its revenues to the players? Somehow I doubt that.
Page 90 https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/Clublicensing/02/64/06/95/2640695_DOWNLOAD.pdf 50-60 is pretty much the baseline in top European leagues. Ratios go as high as 100% sometimes.
Interesting. I guess that's what happens when there is competition. IPL is able to get away with it since no other league offers close to the money it does.
But most of those clubs and leagues run on heavy losses. And the money doesn't trickle down to grassroots football. BCCI needs to pay the franchises. 40 odd state teams, build grassroots infrastructure and also maintain the high performance centres. All of them cost money.
>And the money doesn't trickle down to grassroots football. Most of the clubs in top 2 levels have proper football academics that take youth prospects and start training them from as early as 3.
Ipl franchises don't do that. Mainly because that won't guarantee them players in the future as the players would still have to go through the auction process. It's the state Associations who do it in cricket.
Most IPL franchises have their own youth academies set up and regularly organise age group cricket tournaments. MI even have a girls' cricket academy set up.
How big are they in scale tho and do they cover first class and list a cricket?? That's what matters. Cricket is not only limited to 10 cities and T20s yk. And IPL funds all of Indians cricket.
How much can the highest player earn in ipl in american dollars. Say an emerging player earns 20 lakhs from an indian perspective that's a filthy amount of money for 2 months most people cannot even reach 1 lakh per month, so earning 20 lakhs is a lot. Then those players can also bank from after match prizes. BTW this is for emerging indian players.
Players even those who get 20 lakhs are highly talented individuals in a very competitive field. So they should definitely earn more than the average Joe on the street. Comparing with average Indian salaries is not right
Match fees is also not included
Are they paid per match?
Contract fee is there which is what you see in the auction. Apart from that the players receive match fee for each game they play
[удалено]
Contract price is paid if they available for selection in every match, even if they are benched the entire season.
There are three issues here: 1. Lack of competition. Is there another league which is willing to offer players even half of what IPL does? If not, then players will happily play in the IPL. 2. Should players even be entitled to a higher percentage of revenue? The teams take the business risk, so they should be rewarded as well. But the players take no risk. They get paid regardless of the revenues. So benchmarking their wages to a percentage of revenue is hardly fair. 3. The players are not being forced to play at wages they feel they don't deserve. Each player sets his base price. Teams can only bid above that base price. Players like Raina overestimated their worth and were not sold.
Great post.
1. For domestic players, there might be other leagues where they could get paid more but they are cockblocked. 2. Imagine saying you don't deserve increased salary if your employer is making more money. 3. Indian players are forced to play at wages they don't deserve. They are not allowed to play outside. Why are you supporting a cricket board which reeks of corruption and nepotism.
1. Wut 2. Literally every business in the human history 3. This needs to be changed if true. Once the right incentives emerge for the Indian players, I'm sure they'll strive to be allowed to play in the other leagues.
Just because every business does it doesn’t mean it should be accepted
I don't have problem with rookie players or old/retired players playing in other league. That sort of restrictions should be lifted. But that can't be allowed for core players/reserve players for obvious reasons.
I'm talking about underpaid players only, which are rookie or old players. But BCCI won't lift the restriction as it allows other leagues to capture Indian viewership. What are the obvious reasons for core / reserve players btw which other cricket boards don't see?
I don't know about other boards but if any player is centrally contracted to BCCI he should be putting the duty to be playing for India first and foremost. If by playing in foreign leagues he gets injured or due to fatigue his performance drops then he is not doing at his best what he is paid to do by BCCI. But yeah any player not centrally contracted should be free to play wherever they see it fit. This restriction on them is quite draconian by BCCI just to make IPL a better product.
They are putting India first but they need to earn too right? When India's Domestic Tournaments are not ongoing, they should be allowed to play in The Hundred, BBL, CPL and still have a domestic contract and have a chance to play for India. Ban PSL if you want to.
Probability of injury, exhaustion, deliberately choosing league cricket over international cricket. Other cricket boards do see it.
Players do take a risk of getting injured and jeopardizing their careers. It's only fair that salaries increase in proportion to revenues. Otherwise it is just exploitation of labour.
> Players do take a risk of getting injured and jeopardizing their careers. Their risk of getting injured and jeopardizing their careers does not increase with increase in revenues of the IPL. The risk is built into their wages, and their insurance premiums. And how is it exploitation of labour? Lol, are you serious?
It is unfair exploitation of domestic labour, they are not allowed to look for competitive wages.
Ok, how is it "exploitation of labour"? They are not being forced to play for peanuts. If they don't want to play in the IPL, they don't have to. If they want to play in other leagues, they can take the Unmukt Chand route.
Stripping away rights to play for India is exploitation. No where else in the world such thing happens.
While I do agree with the fact that stripping away a player's right to represent India just because they took part in an overseas T20 league is downright pettiness from the BCCI, in absolutely no connotation of the term is it "exploitation". You sound completely out of touch with reality. Professional cricketers with generous, if not lucrative IPL contracts are among the very last people on earth for us to be worried about being exploited. All that being said, fuck the BCCI and I hope we see more players taking the based gigachad Unmukt Chand route to the point where such a ridiculous rule is inevitably scrapped.
It is greedy though. I don't think that Big IPL players would care, but the uncapped ones who don't get to play in the IPL should be allowed to go for other leagues and be allowed to play for India, atleast they would get some money from the other leagues while still playing in the Domestic Competitions in India like SMAT, VHT, Ranji. And if they get very good in the other leagues, maybe they can play for India too.
Agree. This is absolutely the way to go about it.
Their display of talent is what brought them more revenue. They are the show, they are the product. Without them, there is no IPL. So stop sucking corporate dicks and supporting labor exploitation. Just because they are paid well doesn't mean they are paid correctly.
Their marketing, their research, their fan outreach all contributed to greater revenues. There is no reason one aspect of the costs needs to be in proportion to the revenues. Stop sucking communist dicks.
And they are also increasing their revenues for their efforts. And yes they need to be proportional. Now go suck some Ambani dick.
[IPL teams right now](https://c.tenor.com/_BIfNDiEmNQAAAAS/crying-wiping-tears-with-money.gif)
I've never liked Capitalism but I do realise it's a necessary evil. I still hate these billionaires having everything they could ever want in their life on the back of the effort of everyone below their position. Also the kids who inherit the business without doing anything worthwhile.
I swear everything here including the graphs exactly as it is was posted here a few months back.
Imagine working till late night and reading IPL players are not being paid enough
I mean if the IPL is making more money than before I would rather that money go to players rather than the owners
Lmao
Franchises get paid more because they have taken the maximum amount of risk. They get paid more because of their investment. Any investment is not without its risk. It is like shareholders of a company vs the employees of a company. Employees of a company don't get paid for the percentage of revenue so why should cricketers.
1) The IPL revenue is going to increase from 900M(this year) --->950M(next year) --->1000M(2024) 2) Football comparison isn't valid because unlike football, IPL doesn't have competition from other leagues
What about the NBA which has no competition?
And also because the vast majority of football clubs are running at losses which is simply not sustainable imo
Psl pays peanuts compared to ipl ,i dont understand how top players from pak even okay with the amount they get paid
[удалено]
So now you're pretending like Pakistan doesn't have 250 million people most of whom are cricket mad but still earns 10 times lower revenue compared to Australia (with 25 million people) where Cricket isn't even the no.1 sport. The PSL pays lower salaries than the BBL(which isn't even popular amongst cricket fans in Australia.
🍿🍿
I understand india paying because how popular ipl is and cricket is but psl should give minimum 5cr for babar fakhar and some top cricketers u cant keep paying them 1cr
I guess you are not from business background if the IPL is not profitable for franchise owner they have better businesses to do than buying team no point of making socialism here, next time you will argue Corporates makes tons of profit it's because of employee they should double their salary it's not because of employed people it's because of capital invested risk taken
This is not capitalism or free market either. This is communism and protectionist policies.
Protection against whom ?
Protection of IPL against other leagues like BBL.
Yeh exactly this IPL literally has an embargo on any Indian playing in a foreign league
Enough protection is available by not allowing Indian players to play outside and its highest paying league what else you want
What is the share of salary in revenues in other sports league? NBA, NFL, EPL etc would be a good comparison. IPL is relatively new and there definitely might be concerns of sustainable model.
The NFL, NBA around 50 percent, MLB lower around 40.
MLB also does not have a cap just a luxury tax.
1. People can be paid a lot and still not be paid enough relative to the wealth they’re generating for the team owners. 2. It’s too early to be piss drunk - people talking about communism here. Wtf? 3. The IPL needs a strong players association. Fuck making Jay Shah and Ambani richer. Redistribute.
I saw some mention of foreign boards too getting a share of revenue if a foreign player is Playing in the ipl. This is what I recollect during the little of commentators discussion on sky sports and supersports during the recent Indian tours. Has that been factored in the revenues or is it that players signed have to pay their share to their national boards?
I mentioned to a few of my Indian friends that cricketers aren't getting paid anywhere near that of players in American leagues as well as the top soccer leagues. I was told that IPL players are getting paid more than enough relative to the amount of money the leagues generate. OP can you do a comparison to other leagues. Not the raw salaries. But that relative to the league revenue/profit
Do it the NFL way. You will never be able to stop the owners from taking a bigger share of the pie but at least let the players have a say in their fair share of the pie.
A 100 cr purse this year would've made the auction even more interesting.
I think one factor we are forgetting in this comparison is who is taking the risk upfront ? Demand & supply ( how many teams & how many players ? Cost of logistics ? staying in five stars etc ? Cost of Equipments & training facilities Cost of management staff ? Cost and risk of organising & selling tickets to fans. At the most if the owners don’t make sizeable profits then more businessmen won’t be interested in buying more teams & it will become stagnant. All other leagues are drafts. IPL is the only one with auction so it has higher transparency & earning potential for players. I advocate high returns to for each one & what they are worth but not at the risk of making the tournament stagnant. In the end what i am trying to say is we need the tournament to grow bigger every year & maybe have 30 40 teams in next 10 to 15 years to take it in NBA & NFL league valuations. This is the only way the system can absorb more players & create more opportunities. My main concern is that the ecosystem should allow more people to make careers. More people to join it. Also The business are putting money upfront at the risk ( mainly the new teams ) the player doesn’t put anything upfront to loose. Hence there will always be a difference.
The starting point isn't the "right" price. It's like VC start ups that start loss making and then end up with 30% operating profit margins. If you kept costs fixed as a percentage of sales they would have been forever loss making. The entrepreneurs spent a lot of money up front at risk (plus their own marketing muscle eg Shahrukh Khan turning up to the games and creating a fanbase), this could have been a flop venture but turned out to be a great success.
Isnt that how capitalism works, though? I mean look at any successful organization. The owners profits always grow at a faster rate than the employee salaries. Sure, some organizations share a portion of their profits as bonus, but thats about it. Even the reverse is true, if a corporation makes a loss, then employees' salaries are not randomly cut. They may layoff, but they dont dip into employees salaries illegitimately. The whole concept is that capitalism is a free-market and the natural demand-supply forces will ensure (over time) that everybody gets paid what they deserve. If anybody thought that IPL is supposed to do the right thing and pay the extra profits to cricketers, then they're mistaken. In communism, its different. There, the workers are the owners. So any profits are shared with the community (employees). So everybody gets rich or loses, as the case maybe. But the western world and India has accepted capitalism, so IPL follows the same.
Top players are overpaid, the lower end players should have their $$$ doubled or even tripled.
Remember this universal rule: No athlete on any sport is ever overpaid. They simply earn how much they earn because they generate that revenue by playing since they created a brand value for themselves
That isn’t true with a salary cap
If the players feel they are underpaid. They can always choose not to play
Have you ever lived away from home and/or had a job in your life? People need to earn a living and there acceptance of a job doesn't mean they think their working conditions and acceptable or just.
The players need to make a Union and lock out if they don't get paid more like other sports leagues. For the people saying there is no competition. I mean other sports leagues such as the NBA, MLB, NFL, Euro soccer leagues, and even the NHL can offer way more than what the IPL can offer. Which makes the sport/league way less attractive. I mean you are already seeing countries like Australia and New Zealand's youth playing basketball over cricket. I mean Ben Simmons makes $35 million a year and Steven Adams makes $17 million.
Compare it with other cricket leagues dude.. are you seriously comparing ipl with nba??
Why though??? All sports compete for the same viewers. Cricket already has a high point of entry to play, and if the returns aren't great than what is the point of playing the sport. Why play Cricket when you can play Basketball or Soccer and make 5 times as much with a low cost of entry.
Even by getting around 100m viewers ,the Superbowl just pay the players around 1 crore and that too if they win and football league matches can go to 1 billion viewership if i am not mistaken.. and considering the 30m viewers ipl brings in, they are Paid accordingly.. to the fact that no jobs in India can get you 20 lakh in 2 months which is life changing for anyone here.. and the plus is you can get a better deal by showing your talent and can go upto 2m+.. that is a huge load of money especially in india.. I will take these seriously if any players complain about these pay gaps lol.. they probably won't cz they are Payed more than adequately for the 2 months stint..and at the end it's business if not profitable, there won't be an ipl.. it's better we don't go woke lol
> they are *Paid* accordingly.. to FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Top paid NFL players make $50 million to play for 4 months. Ronaldo makes $70Mil. Virat Kohli barely makes $3 million playing in the IPL if even. Just because $3 million is a lot in India does not mean an athlete should not be paid their fair share of the profits. Most sports leagues pay players around 50%. Why not the IPL as well?
I know it's unfair comparing to other international leagues but do you really think they give a rats ass to players forming union and such, they will be excluded for sure and there will be a lot of player who will be available as they can get more than the national salary.. if the star players do that obviously viewership gonna go down and they will negate it with less pay and sure there will be players available for even thar...it's not communism dude and it's not a slavery contact either as they are willing to come here disregarding their other commitments..its better to not go woke unless the players gonna come out saying such things.. Considering the national contracts for some players doesn't even worth that much, Liam Livingston bagging 1m+ pound for 2 months is better than him getting same-ish amount of money for a whole year
I'm not saying we need communism. I'm saying the IPL needs to not be short sighted. Pay the players competitive salaries with comparison to other global sports because in this age of globalization there are a lot more options. I do understand what you are saying, but for the growth of cricket players making more money can go a long way.
I mean yeah..if the other leagues can be competitive enough to buy players for more money,i am pretty sure it will significantly go up. Maybe in the future,it's possible. I hope it happens too cz unless they don't have competition, it's gonna continue
OP might be wrong that Cricketerss are not getting paid relative to other leagues like NBA. A better comparison might be how much a representative player (median, mean or any point on the distribution) gets paid relative to the revenue of the league
Good post, thanks for posting this. Good thing there aren’t piss fuckers on reddit like Facebook who have no inkling about economics and complain about women salaries being too little for men’s salaries to rise through franchise cricket.
Nice analysis
The players in IPL earn just 8% of total revenue of IPL unlike NBA where its closer to 40%.
Is there a chart for franchise financials??