When BCCI stole from Zee Entertainment

If recalling the childhood days of playing cricket reminds you of having to dip your hands in drains to get the ball out, Insider’s deepest condolences. However fond (or not) the memory of cricket may be for you, it is undeniably one of the most intriguing products of mankind. After all, be it a train station or any public space, if there is something that can get every Indian’s eye hooked to a tiny audio-less screen, it is cricket.

As if multiple gods and religions weren’t enough already, we Indians have labelled even cricketers as demigods to start feuds in their names. And that’s why another thing that proves the large viewership and prominence of the game is the hotly contested battles in arenas ranging from media boardroom to chai tapris. No wonder sports channels and media companies have been earning gigabucks through broadcasting rights and advertising revenues since cricket began broadcasting. And these broadcasting rights are what determine the advertising revenues!

BCCI Vs Zee —The Clash of the Titan and the Hummingbird

Zee Entertainment Enterprises (formerly known as Zee Telefilms Ltd) is an Indian media conglomerate. With corporate headquarters in Mumbai, it is into television, print, internet, film, mobile content and related businesses. It is also the largest company for Hindi programming. The four verticals of the company include content and broadcasting, access, education, film production and distribution.

BCCI, for even the uninitiated, is the very well-known authoritarian body of Indian cricket. With India’s “Sarkar Raj”, one would expect that the Government would be involved with BCCI being the regulator of India’s most popular sport. So popular that it is often recognised as the national sport of the country (p.s. it’s not hockey either). Contrary to the above statement, though, the government of India is about as involved with BCCI as it is with you and me. BCCI is an autonomous body, and by golly, does the Board practice its autonomy!

More monopolistic than an elder sibling during any time sent playing with them, without any of friendliness at other moments, Zee met fierce competition in cricket through BCCI, although neither of these giants’ corporate representatives seem to have shared any competitive moment on the turf. Maybe that’s how they should have settled their differences, it would have been an interesting match.

Well, let’s keep the matches with make-believe team members limited to EA Sports (strike a chord, did I?) and read about what really happened between the media giant and the cricket overlord.

Cricket- The Game of India

Now the monopoly BCCI exercised on cricket broadcast rights was a whole cake, and it must have been delicious because not just private broadcasters but even the Government of India wanted a piece of it. Which is why it went about getting a piece by implementing a whole damn law!

The law we are talking about is the Broadcast Bill of 2006 brought by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry. The bill stipulated that BCCI equally distributed broadcast rights to not only private broadcasters but Doordarshan as well. I&B Ministry reasoned that Doordarshan had a greater reach, especially in rural and backward regions of the country. So, the bill demanded Doordarshan’s viewership be extended to remote villages in India. #HarGharBijli, #HarGharJal, #HarGharShaulaya and now, #HarGharCricket. “After all, the country’s citizens should participate in viewing sporting events like cricket.” thought the Government.

The introduction of the bill made it so that BCCI would not be in the profitable situation that it initially was. Doordarshan mandatorily getting the broadcast rights meant a loss of revenue for BCCI. This loss would come as a two-pronged attack.

Firstly, Doordarshan would not generate any revenue for the cricket giant as the national broadcaster would be given away the right to telecast the matches. This meant that the broadcast rights that private providers had to bid for, Doordarshan would acquire for free.

Next, with Doordarshan being the “people’s channel”, it was much easier to access, whether through a cable operator or just an antenna that was connected to your TV. Yes, DTH was a thing, but not everyone had access to it (no, I'm not old, I'm antique)! So, the masses naturally thronged Doordarshan. This meant that private telecasters would experience a drop in viewership, which meant advertisers would not want to pay them to appear on their channels. Therefore, the channels would lose their revenue too. This also meant that bidding to acquire the telecast rights would not even break even, let alone generate any income.

So you can see why the private players would not be too excited about the bill. As a result, they appealed against the bill and moved to the Supreme Court, like the jealous older siblings when the younger one does something weirdly sensible.

2006 was also the year when Zee Telefilms signed a ₹90,62,000 deal with BCCI to broadcast 25 overseas games played by the Indian cricket team. Owing to its newly acquired loss-making position, BCCI thought it could screw Zee around a little. So, BCCI decided to change the terms of the deal.

The No-ball Delivery

As part of the new deal, BCCI made the following demands as a part of the new deal:

1. BCCI would not distribute the broadcast rights for matches held in neutral locations. This meant that matches played in locations that neither of the competing teams was from, Zee would have to stick to telecasting good old “saas-bahu ki kahani”, as BCCI would cover these matches.
Now, while I enjoy cricket, I am not one of those fanatics that remembers every detail of every match, so I don’t quite remember how many matches in the 2006-07 world cup fell in the neutral category. Even with my limited knowledge and interest, it’s pretty deducible that BCCI was not being very “neutral” towards Zee.

2. Zee was only given rights to telecast one-day matches, while rights to matches in the test format were not given to the media company.
As our cricket-loving CTO would tell me, and I’d take his word for it (that man knows the game well and plays it even better), ODI matches are more exciting for the audiences due to the high-performance action in the matches. Test matches, owing to their defensive playstyle and multi-day durations, are not so thrilling to watch. From a telecasters perspective, however, test matches were where the money would be, as more days of cricket, meant more days of ensured audience, meaning more revenue from better ads.

3. Zee wanted discounts on the broadcast rights, as the bids it had to place to acquire these rights did not justify the revenue these matches generated. This lacklustre revenue was a side-effect of non-encrypted telecast frequencies.
Non-encrypted frequency= Cricket turns into Tata Salt. Desh ka Namak Game. Also, let’s be honest, if shopkippa bhaeya does not give discounts, there’s bound to be some obvious friction!

BCCI could play fast and loose with private broadcasters’ rights owing to its monopoly as the all-powerful body regulating cricket in India. So Zee decided to take matters into its own hands. (Petition to broadcast this Mahabharatha on Doordarshan, please!)

BCCI versus Zee 

Before the 2006 Broadcast bill struggle, BCCI had sent a letter of intent demanding fresh bids from Zee and ESPN to telecast matches played in Australia, Pakistan and South Africa until April 2005. With the change in dynamics, thanks to the introduction of the Broadcast bill, Zee wanted a better position as the broadcaster of the nation’s favourite sport.

Zee’s demands for better prices and exclusivity were on the table as Zee made it clear that it would not act as a broadcaster for India’s games against South Africa unless BCCI renounced its double standards and gave Zee a hefty rebate in the payments for the rights to broadcast. Most sports channels wanted encryption rights as unencrypted transmissions from Doordarshan benefited viewers in Bangladesh, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Nepal who didn’t pay for the services. Thus, BCCI was left high and dry without a broadcaster for its South Africa series. 

BCCI’s “My Bat and Ball, My Rules”

At this time, Zee Sports also contemplated starting the Indian Cricket League. BCCI didn’t want another cricket league to flourish in India as it felt its revenue streams would dilute. Duh! Zee’s proposed league was to act independently of the BCCI in conducting its matches and tournaments.

So how did BCCI react? With the power that it had, thanks to its monopoly, it decided to put Zee in a pinch, like the spoilt brat that owns the cricket set during gully games and starts throwing a tantrum whenever they start to lose.

When Kapil Dev, India’s world cup hero, participated in the ICL, BCCI criticized his association with the private games. Dev was also removed from his position as the chairman of the National Cricket Academy on the grounds of a “conflict of interest”. BCCI was well aware of its powers and was brazenly misusing them. The Board also banned other Indian players that participated in the ICL;  Ambati Rayudu, Rohan Gavaskar, Dinesh Mongia, and Hemang Badani were some of the players that had to face the wrath of BCCI.

Never one to give up, however, Zee’s ICL decided to take BCCI to court in an attempt to make BCCI stop its cartel-like practices like out-bidding stadiums and sweetening the prize pot for matches held by the Board. Delhi High Court ruled in favour of ICL, asking the Board to stop trying to threaten or coerce the players by misuse of its powers. After all, the players of India’s favourite game (besides criticising marriages) should not have to suffer due to tangles of corporate moguls.

So, did BCCI stop its interference? We’ll let you figure that out with a few hints on how things turned out…

Today, ICL is but a memory lost between murmurs in pavilions as “Cricket” turned into “Premier”. The famous trumpet tune is all that is heard whenever international cricketers playing for teams other than their country's are mentioned. BCCI kept misusing its influence, both inter and intra nationally, to strong-arm players into staying with their original masters.

The court ruling in favour of ICL prevented the Board from approaching the players; nothing was mentioned of the state associations still under BCCI’s wings not squeezing these players. The cricketers, strapped for money and publicity in the early days, had to switch back to BCCI and ICL slowly fizzled out, like my excitement for cricket matches whenever India starts to lose.

The BCCI-Zee rivalry was legendary, even causing the Competition Commission of India to intervene. As a result of this feud, BCCI and Zee parted ways for 17 years. BCCI, the sole controlling authority for Indian cricket, could virtually dictate terms to private broadcasters. It had everyone dancing to its tunes. No wonder it is the richest and most powerful cricket association in the world. As the national governing body for Indian cricket, it also controls the Indian Premier League. BCCI is like Tom, who successfully beat Jerry (Zee) and ate him too. *Louis Armstrong’s What a Wonderful World plays in the backdrop*

BCCI turned out to be an equivalent of Amber Heard in the Johnny Depp saga. Except BCCI, even with its overpowered guile, managed to win.

The Situation Today—Foes Turn Into Friends? 

Today, the situation is different. Zee Entertainment has been mired in corporate controversy due to a botched takeover attempt from its anchor investors, Invesco and others. Zee entered into a merger and amalgamation scheme with Sony Pictures Network. The point of this deal was to ward off the takeover attempt and force out Punit Goenka, the son of Subash Chandra, the founder of Zee. Sony will be the majority stakeholder in the merged entity, with Punit Goenka continuing as Chairman and CEO. Sony will hold a 50.86% stake, and the founder, Subash Chandra’s stake will be reduced to 3.99%. Zee is also making a fresh beginning by pulling all fresh and dormant cases against the BCCI. Jagmohan Dalmiya, BCCI Chairman, during the epic battle between BCCI and Zee Entertainment, is now deceased, and the old guard at Zee has moved on.

BCCI is coming up with the invitation to tender for IPL broadcasting rights for the next five years and also bringing out a tender for Indian cricket’s bilateral rights. Zee has taken a fresh initiative with its old combatant instead of dwelling on past wrongs. With BCCI’s financial muscle, Zee Entertainment is cautiously proceeding with the auction. Zee is now operating under the umbrella of a merged entity, and the opportunity for huge financial gains from securing broadcasting rights is not lost on Zee.

Post Game Highlights

BCCI, with its financial muscle and autonomy, has complete sway over the world of cricket. In any battle to secure broadcasting rights for cricket matches, fighting against the BCCI proves to be a loser’s game. Many private broadcasting companies are vying for broadcasting rights. The lesson from the BCCI-Zee saga is that; to garner potential advertising revenues, private broadcasters must not just bend over backwards and let a tyrant rule a game that is of the people, by the people, for the people.