NEWS
MATCH REPORTS
DIARY
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
PEOPLE
ARCHIVES

Is it all done with mirrors, Mr Lele?

Yours truly was in the company of a veteran correspondent-editor-columnist when news came in last Friday that Doordarshan (as in Prasar Bharati) had bagged the terrestrial 'and' satellite television rights to Indian cricket for the next five years.

Before the shock that DD had beaten ESPN-Star Sports, Sony and Zee could register -- and before the scary prospect of getting up at five to watch hazy four-ball overs from Down Under this December could disappear -- came an interesting comment from the other end.

"If for nothing else, at least for purely patriotic reasons, Doordarshan deserved to get the rights," said the venerable scribe.

Yes, for purely patriotic reasons.

Not for the great pictures it produces, not for the great pictures it transmits, not for the great pictures we receive, not for its great commentators, not for its great respect for the game, but simply because it's an Indian channel run on the Indian tax-payer's money, DD deserved the chance to show Indian cricket, was the implied logic.

Is it so?

Quite in keeping with the governing body of an amateur sport which does not float global tenders calling for bids for television rights, and quite in keeping with its general secrecy over most matters, especially those financial, BCCI refused to divulge the amount DD offered which helped it clinch the deal ahead of the global television majors.

"The offer from Prasar Bharati was substantial," was all that honorary secretary J Y Lele would say of yet another "unanimous" BCCI decision.

Which leads us to wonder: since it was money, money, money -- ten million dollars of it -- which prompted BCCI's bossmen to award the same television rights for the same five-year period to the London-based Trans World International and the US-based ESPN five years ago, what really provoked this sudden upsurge in patriotism in the BCCI?

Since the model code of conduct is in force, we cannot, of course, say that somebody in the BJP, somebody of the likes of, say, Information and Broadcasting Minister Pramod Mahajan, had anything to do with BCCI's decision, in the name of the amar jawans of Kargil. No sir, we can't say that; so we won't.

So, what happened?

"There were peripheral reasons like viewership," Little Lele is further quoted as saying by The Hindu (August 21).

Yes, you heard right. Viewership of a channel, admits the BCCI finally, is a "peripheral" reason for it to hand over television rights.

My Reader's Digest dictionary says "peripheral" means "not of central importance; minor or incidental". What Lele is saying is this: you and I, and the hapless millions who love this game and who watch this game at the risk of limb and wife, are just an aside in the all-important matter of deciding who shall show it to us!

But then, the viewer and the spectator has always been a "peripheral" factor for the BCCI for some while now, if you haven't noticed.

For five years now, they have showed us this, the most wonderful game on the Third Rock from the Sun, on a pay-channel which was a. mostly off than on during match-time, thanks to the BCCI's blood-brothers, Mammon-worshipping cable operators, and b. inaccessible to 99.3 per cent of India's wonderful population.

(This is no rhetoric. Remember, Pepsi got to sponsor the Test and one-day series on BCCI's guarantee that ESPN's telecast would reach 7 million households. Seven million out of 980 million = 0.7 per cent!)

Furthermore, at most major cricket grounds, the BCCI and its hapless minions have removed large sections of "Gandhi Class" seats to accommodate those atrocious giant television screens for the benefit of the pavilion seats who can't follow the game live, and to make space for luxury tents for sponsors.

So, you and I were always "peripheral" in the BCCI's scheme of things. And it's no surprise to find Mr Lele admitting as much. Thank you.

But if it wasn't the money, and if it wasn't the "peripheral" issue of viewership, what really prompted BCCI to deliver this fait accompli?

"It was the correct decision taken finally," said former BCCI president Inder Singh Bindra, the friend-turned-foe of ICC chief Jagmohan Dalmiya, on the television rights decision. Trust a serving Indian Administrative Service officer to applaud BCCI's good deed for that behemoth of sloth and scandal, Doordarshan.

What gives?

The Hindu reports that DD (whose revenue slumped from Rs 4.9 billion last year to Rs 3.99 billion this year) had agreed to pay the BCCI Rs 454 million every year for the next five years for the television rights. This works out to a cumulative amount of Rs 2.27 billion (approximately $53 million). In contast, Sony Entertainment Television offered Rs 380 million per year, Zee bid Rs 280 million and ESPN-Star offered Rs 270 million. Loss-making DD, by inference, outbid the competition.

Is that a good deal for the BCCI?

On the face of it, yes. Deep down, no.

For starters, DD has promised to pay BCCI Rs 454 million per year every year for both terrestrial 'and' satellite rights for the next five years. On the other hand, since the other three channels are satellite channels with no intention of going terrestrial, they were presumably making bids for 'only' the satellite rights? In other words, Sony bid Rs 380 million for the satellite rights, Zee bid Rs 280 million for the satellite rights.

DD, however, has got both the satellite 'and' terrestrial rights for Rs 450 million. Simple subtraction (450 million minus 380 million) tells me that DD is paying a piddling Rs 70 million for the terrestrial rights vis-a-vis Sony. Anybody who can convince anybody that Rs 70 million is a good price for "54 million homes" (which is DD's claimed terrestrial reach) can go and sell refrigerators to eskimos!

It is possible that the BCCI will claim that Sony/Zee/ESPN offered their lower bids for both satellite 'and' terrestrial rights, and that they opted for the higher DD bid to prevent rights from being sub-sold. But would the satellite broadcasters have sold the terrestrial rights to DD when it would have jeopardised the very objective behind their bid? Which is why the BCCI-DD deal smells fishy.

Consider:

# The Sri Lankan cricket board chief executive, Dammika Ranatunga, is quoted by The Hindu as saying that Sony had agreed to pay $7.75 million (roughly Rs 350 million) for an 18-month period for television rights to games in the Emerald Island.

Ram knows Lanka is an infinitely smaller country, with limited cricket and a very small audience. By the same yardstick, DD would have had to pay Rs 1.16 billion for a five-year period for the Lanka rights. And yet, what does it pay here? Rs 70 million per year for 54 million homes!

Consider again:

# An unnamed member of the Pakistan Cricket Board's ad hoc committee is quoted by The Dawn as saying that TWI had signed a $ 25 million (Rs 1.02 billion) agreement with the Cricketers Benefit Fund Series in Sharjah for telecast rights.

Again, Sharjah is a small country with dubious one-day cricket and no Test cricket. Assuming TWI paid Rs 1.02 billion for a four-year period, DD would have had to pay Rs 1.27 billion for five years for rights. And yet, what do we have here? Rs 70 million per year for 54 million homes!

I mean, terrestrial transmission is DD's core-strength. Opening a low power transmitter a day was how it has acquired such penetration in the mid-80s. Its satellite plans of its sports and news channels, are still to take off. And yet, it pays Rs 70 million for the terrestrial rights vis-a-vis Sony's Rs 380 million bid for satellite rights, and BCCI accepts it!!

"As per the indications, DD will show the matches on the main channels as they had said the viewership was 54 million homes," hon. secy. Lele is quoted by news agencies as saying.

Since its 24-hour sports channel floated with much fanfare earlier this year is received only in Mr Pramod Mahajan's home, and since "main channels" can only mean channels everybody watches which is DD1 and DD2, one can safely infer that DD's claim to reach 54 million homes is not based on its satellite transmission reach. Clearly, DD is talking terrestrial here.

So what is behind this wonderful act of magnanimity by an extraordinarily stingy organisation? (Again, this is no empty rhetoric: Remember, BCCI handed out Rs 25,000 to M L Jaisimha three days before his funeral. And Rs 50,000 to B S Chandrashekar when he needed Rs 1.1 million for treating his leg injury.)

What, indeed?

Initially, handing over the rights simultaneously to a terrestrial broadcaster with vast reach (DD) and a satellite broadcaster with the technical and financial wherewithal (Sony) seemed like the politically right thing to do for the BCCI. And pretty straightforward, too.

Regardless of what the paid pipers of satellite television (the media critics, dummy) say, there's little doubt that DD -- in spite of all its technical and financial deficiencies -- still boasts numbers that leave Rupertji Murdoch and Subhashji Chandra panting.

Also, having a "government-owned" channel on its side was the smart thing to do for the Laxmi Puja-types within the Board, because it acts as a buffer from judicial criticism that they sold away the rights for a few dollars more, thus depriving large sections of the population of their only source of entertainment in these dark times.

DD -- much like the BBC in Britain smarting under Murdoch's Sky assault -- needed cricket to reassure itself that it can survive as a market-entity. And that, as a national broadcaster running on the tax-payer's money, it was doing something to bring viewers something they all loved to see on television: cricket. Lowest common denominator and all that.

Equally importantly, it was imperative for the BCCI to simultaneously sell the rights to a good satellite broadcaster. Generating good pictures and ensuring good transmission and reception is essential for cricket's sponsors and advertisers to sneak into a few hundred thousand urban homes which is all that counts against the millions forced to watch DD.

("In television's global market-place, these few count for more than DD's hundreds of millions," as Mike Marqusee writes in War Minus The Shooting on the wrangling over television rights for the 1996 World Cup between DD and Star Sports worth $5 million (Rs 230 million), after WorldTel pulled off a smart one. Verily.)

To that extent, Sony, with its stunning public offer of Rs 1 billion to Rs 2 billion, with the record of having telecast the Princess Diana Memorial match, a couple of benefit games, and the ongoing India-Sri-Lanka-Australia triangular, may not have the "adequate experience" which Lele insisted before the decision was made. But it seemed to be on its way after tying up deals in Sri Lanka and Singapore.

So, what happened? Who stabbed Sony Entertainment Television's ambitious bid to steal a march over its arch-rival Zee, a channel with many, many friends in the BJP with many, many friends in the BCCI?

Till as late as August 11, it seemed that at least the satellite rights was reasonably within Sony's reach a. when The Hindu reported that it had made a Rs 1 billion bid and was willing to go all the way up to Rs 200 crore for the satellite rights, and b. when the honorary secretary of the Singapore Cricket Association, Anil Kalavar, began gloating on the five-year deal that Sony had struck in the city-state.

Kalavar told The Hindu (which has covered the rights' issue with some consistency): "India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are the big brothers who helped us develop cricket in Singapore. We have got another big brother in Sony now. The Indian cricket board and Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya have encouraged us and we acknowledge and appreciate it."

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. So it seemed.

But the business of television rights and picture production is a veritable minefield -- real cloak and dagger stuff with an astonishing collision of interests, especially in the case of India -- and DD's rivals appear to have paid the price for it.

For instance, as many as two years ago, TWI-ESPN sources were privately convinced that they didn't have a hope in hell of bagging the television rights once again, and were more or less sure whose turn it would be when the time was ripe, given the proximity of a television software mogul and his cricketer-partner with the BCCI's presiding diety.

Those fears were confirmed when the ESPN topbrass were reportedly told last week not to waste their time coming to Bombay for the working committee ratification. It, of course, did not help that ESPN-StarSports bid of Rs 270 million was also the lowest among the four competing channels.

At another level, Sony probably shot itself in the foot by going public not just with scale of its bid, but also by revealing who might produce the pictures for it if it won the race: AirTime, the South African company which pioneered the use of StumpVision and the earpiece radio link between Hansie Cronje and Bob Woolmer in the World Cup.

Such a move by Sony would have effectively shut out BCCI's chosen one, a real soldier of fortune if there were one in the television software industry, already smarting under a World Cup setback. But by handing over the rights to DD, which doesn't have the expertise or the wherewithal, BCCI's chosen one has a chance to put his foot in the backdoor ajar.

Admittedly, all of this is in the realm of speculation. But in the absence of any logic in BCCI underselling its cashcow to a less-sexy buyer, in its decision NOT to sell the terrestrial rights to one channel and the satellite rights to another, informed guesswork is the last refuge of cricket fans and fanatics who will be deprived of top-quality pictures.

And then again, how does that lovely line end? "Patriotism is the last refuge of ..."

Krishna Prasad