BBL privatisation is happening, right?
According to Cricket Australia (CA), yes, but more on that shortly. On Monday in Sydney, the CA board agreed to allow clubs who want to sell some or all of their BBL sides to take the major step of going into the market for a valuation, a process that will be led by the merchant bank Raine Group. Melbourne Renegades, who have already been separated out from Cricket Victoria (CV), will lead the way with suggestions that they could be sold by the end of the year.
Remind us what happened with Renegades
Back in June, CV made the shock announcement that they were merging their BBL operations into a single franchise - the (not so) soon-to-be-renamed Melbourne Stars - and handing back their second license which was Renegades. As you can see by this season's fixture lists, both teams still remain after some hasty stepping back from the initial plans although Renegades are under the watch of CA in a temporary management structure.
What about this upcoming season?
It's as you were. Stars and Renegades will play across WBBL and BBL, and even if the latter are sold quickly that will remain the case. The earliest for any major changes is now the 2027-28 season.
So everyone is now on the same page?
Hardly. CA and the states have come up with what has been termed the "self-determination" model which basically means each state can decide what they want to do. The federated model of Australian cricket gives the individual states significant power.
Throughout much of this process there have been three states - Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia - who have been in favour of selling stakes and one, New South Wales, strongly against it, at least under CA's proposed financial modeling. Queensland also have reservations while South Australia are somewhere in the middle (although proposed the opt-in model). After some talk that states that don't opt-in at the first stage could, effectively, have to pay a tax, that won't be the case.
And then there's the players' body, the Australian Cricketers' Association (ACA) , who are now the major player in all of this. While CA believes they can move forward with privatisation, the ACA are adamant that isn't the case until a new pay deal with the players is thrashed out to reflect the influx of money that would come from the sales. CA chief executive Todd Greenberg conceded the two parties are a long way apart but was confident a deal will be reached. But there's quite a lot of grey areas in this, and it could get messy.
If we assume things do go ahead, how will the sale model work?
Renegades will be sold 100% to private investors. For anyone else who takes that route, it is up to those states to decide but it's expected to be up to a 49% stake offered up for sale.
What does it mean for team names and colours?
It is highly likely, if not inevitable, that investors with teams in other leagues will want to align names and kits with wider brands, as was the case in the Hundred. It is all but certain the Renegades moniker won't exist next season, while CV has already trademark options for what Stars may be called in the future. However, there is also a belief in the current strength of the BBL. "Ultimately, that's a decision for us to make with each of the states," Greenberg said. "I think there's really strong brands in the Big Bash and that's been evidenced over time."
Why is CA doing this?
Their view is that it's essential to secure the future of the game in the country, not just the BBL, while also competing with other leagues, most significantly the SA20, amid concerns that local Australian stars could be lured away. Some of the major disagreements in the process have stemmed from a belief that CA's financial modeling has been too dire, a view held especially strongly by NSW who also believe that, if more money is needed, there are other ways to find it. However, CA is adamant that the move has to be made now.
"I think standing around and waiting is a poor strategy, particularly in a global environment that's moving at lightning speed," Greenberg said. "You don't have to be Einstein to look around the world and see what's happening in our window for the Big Bash. There are leagues all over the world growing with private capital and putting salaries up for players.
"So we can't afford to sit around and wait. Waiting is a bad strategy. We have got to get involved and we've got to make some key decisions. And that's why today is a fundamental decision for Australian cricket to make. This is a big moment in time for the game."
What does this mean for a BBL window?
For the foreseeable future, it won't be completely free of Test cricket, unlike what the ECB have done to leave August for the Hundred. Both the CA chief executive and chair were very strong in saying the Boxing Day and New Year Tests aren't going anywhere (at least until 2032 and, in reality, likely beyond). How potential investors view that when it comes to player availability remains to be seen, but the point was made that the schedule will be clearly known to anyone looking to buy stakes in BBL clubs. When it comes to overseas tours, such as the one next January when Australia head to India, Greenberg said they were a once-in-four-year event but there is further work being done to leave January clear of international cricket post the Sydney Test.
How much money could all this make?
That's hard to say right now given the process has yet to fully begin. "One billion dollars" has been used frequently, which is a nice round number which makes a good headline. CA has already talked about the significant interest there has been from various investors and there's little doubt there will be some big numbers attached to the clubs that sell.
What have the states said?
More will emerge over the coming days, but here's a flavour of the reaction:
Victoria "Cricket Victoria has been a long-time supporter of Cricket Australia's strategy to address its balance sheet, preserve the competitiveness of the Big Bash competitions, and put Australian cricket on healthy footing to lead the game well into the future. The global cricket landscape is evolving, with increased private investment in the Big Bash needed not only to keep pace with international competitions, but also to invest in the competitions' growth, fan engagement and commercial capability."
Queensland (Chair Kirsten Pike and CEO Terry Svenson). "The proposed self-determination model will need to be carefully examined and no doubt there are likely to be further questions and clarification … We will closely monitor the sales process and at this stage, intend to retain 100 percent ownership of the Brisbane Heat, but of course remain open to private investment at the appropriate time."
Western Australia (John Stephenson, WA Cricket CEO) "The WACA Board is carefully considering Perth Scorchers' involvement in Cricket Australia's newly approved opt-in privatisation model for the Big Bash Leagues, and expects to formalise its position shortly. We will communicate that decision as soon as it has been made. The history, culture and connection with Members and fans that have built this Club into one of the most powerful forces in Australian sport are not things we take lightly, and will remain central to every conversation throughout this journey."