Why pay the same for IND vs AFG and IND vs AUS? Bilateral cricket gets a reality-check
JioStar's Uday Shankar issued a blunt reality check to cricket administrators, warning that bilateral cricket faces a pricing crisis due to audience burnout and a lack of market competition.
If you did not think franchise cricket was taking over, there might be all the more reason to believe it might be the case. The vice-chairperson of JioStar, the leading broadcaster for cricket in India, has now questioned cricket's decision-makers on why they should be investing in bilateral cricket, especially ones that do not involve high-profile teams.
In an interview with Variety, Uday Shankar gave cricket administrators a blunt reality check about how they price their media packages, arguing that sports bodies are on the verge of pricing themselves out of their most profitable market.
"Why should you really expect JioStar to pay the same value for a match between India and Afghanistan, India and Bangladesh, or India and Sri Lanka that I pay for a match between India and England or India and Australia?" Shankar asked, signalling a massive shift in how media companies calculate their investments.
The warning comes as the aggressive bidding wars that historically bloated the value of cricket broadcasting rights finally begin to cool down. Broadcasters are no longer willing to absorb flat-rate premium fees for lesser-watched bilateral tours, choosing instead to focus on long-term profitability and viewer data. Historically, media giants engaged in fierce, multi-way tug-of-wars, overpaying for content simply to block rivals from gaining a foothold in the market. Today, that defensive corporate spending is being replaced by strict fiscal discipline.
Furthermore, the industry dynamics that drove the historic 2022 price surge are highly unlikely to repeat. The mega-merger of Viacom18 and Disney’s Indian operations into JioStar has effectively removed the primary source of competitive tension from the market. With the biggest bidding rivals now operating under the same umbrella, the aggressive auction wars that previously bloated cricket rights are officially a thing of the past.
The Dilution of Per-Match Value
Adding to the friction is an impending stagnation in future media rights. Projections reportedly indicate that the next broadcast cycle post-2027 will hold flat at around 5.4 billion US Dollars. While this technically matches the current deal's headline value at current exchange rates, it actually represents a 13 percent decline on a per-match basis.
Cricket boards have attempted to generate higher total revenues by bloating the calendar, but an expanded match schedule only dilutes individual game value. Broadcasters are realising that running more inventory does not nearly translate into more advertisement dollars, especially when the quality of that inventory is compromised by low-profile fixtures.
The Viewer's Perspective
Compounding the crisis for cricket administrators is growing viewer saturation. The cricket calendar is relentlessly packed; a home men's T20 World Cup is a massive event on its own, but it must now compete for mental bandwidth with a sprawling IPL season. Immediately following that, the Women's T20 World Cup in England creates an overlapping broadcast schedule alongside global spectacles like the FIFA World Cup.
This non-stop barrage of premium tournaments leaves fans with no room to breathe, completely eroding the novelty of the sport. When high-stakes World Cups and marquee franchise leagues run concurrently, low-profile bilateral series simply become background noise. Viewers are burnt out, and broadcasters are realising they cannot monetise an audience that is actively tuning out.
Ultimately, Shankar made it clear that unless international cricket bodies adapt to these changing financial dynamics, kerb calendar inflation, and restructure their valuation expectations, the traditional bilateral game faces an imminent pricing crisis.
If you did not think franchise cricket was taking over, there might be all the more reason to believe it might be the case. The vice-chairperson of JioStar, the leading broadcaster for cricket in India, has now questioned cricket's decision-makers on why they should be investing in bilateral cricket, especially ones that do not involve high-profile teams.
In an interview with Variety, Uday Shankar gave cricket administrators a blunt reality check about how they price their media packages, arguing that sports bodies are on the verge of pricing themselves out of their most profitable market.
"Why should you really expect JioStar to pay the same value for a match between India and Afghanistan, India and Bangladesh, or India and Sri Lanka that I pay for a match between India and England or India and Australia?" Shankar asked, signalling a massive shift in how media companies calculate their investments.
The warning comes as the aggressive bidding wars that historically bloated the value of cricket broadcasting rights finally begin to cool down. Broadcasters are no longer willing to absorb flat-rate premium fees for lesser-watched bilateral tours, choosing instead to focus on long-term profitability and viewer data. Historically, media giants engaged in fierce, multi-way tug-of-wars, overpaying for content simply to block rivals from gaining a foothold in the market. Today, that defensive corporate spending is being replaced by strict fiscal discipline.
Furthermore, the industry dynamics that drove the historic 2022 price surge are highly unlikely to repeat. The mega-merger of Viacom18 and Disney’s Indian operations into JioStar has effectively removed the primary source of competitive tension from the market. With the biggest bidding rivals now operating under the same umbrella, the aggressive auction wars that previously bloated cricket rights are officially a thing of the past.
The Dilution of Per-Match Value
Adding to the friction is an impending stagnation in future media rights. Projections reportedly indicate that the next broadcast cycle post-2027 will hold flat at around 5.4 billion US Dollars. While this technically matches the current deal's headline value at current exchange rates, it actually represents a 13 percent decline on a per-match basis.
Cricket boards have attempted to generate higher total revenues by bloating the calendar, but an expanded match schedule only dilutes individual game value. Broadcasters are realising that running more inventory does not nearly translate into more advertisement dollars, especially when the quality of that inventory is compromised by low-profile fixtures.
The Viewer's Perspective
Compounding the crisis for cricket administrators is growing viewer saturation. The cricket calendar is relentlessly packed; a home men's T20 World Cup is a massive event on its own, but it must now compete for mental bandwidth with a sprawling IPL season. Immediately following that, the Women's T20 World Cup in England creates an overlapping broadcast schedule alongside global spectacles like the FIFA World Cup.
This non-stop barrage of premium tournaments leaves fans with no room to breathe, completely eroding the novelty of the sport. When high-stakes World Cups and marquee franchise leagues run concurrently, low-profile bilateral series simply become background noise. Viewers are burnt out, and broadcasters are realising they cannot monetise an audience that is actively tuning out.
Ultimately, Shankar made it clear that unless international cricket bodies adapt to these changing financial dynamics, kerb calendar inflation, and restructure their valuation expectations, the traditional bilateral game faces an imminent pricing crisis.
