Australian states oppose private investment in BBL [Source: AFP]Australia’s Big Bash League is one of the biggest T20 franchise tournaments in the world, attracting global talent each year. The rapid evolution of the format has also driven a significant surge of private investments in the leagues, notably from India-based businesses.The recent multi-billion-dollar valuations of IPL franchises, the Royal Challengers Bengaluru and the Rajasthan Royals, were a good example of how lucrative the franchise leagues have become. Yet, despite the loads of money on offer, Cricket Australia’s plans to open the BBL to private investment have taken a serious jolt, as they now look for different options to attract capital. BBL privatisation hits a setback Over the past few years, leagues like CPL, SA20, The Hundred, MLC and ILT20 have explored inviting investment from private entities and have successfully attracted Indian franchises to buy teams in the leagues. Every big league in the world currently has Indian owners, including MI, Sun Group, and RPSG Group, among others. Cricket Australia recently showed their willingness to replicate the same model and bring IPL franchises on board to invest in the BBL and buy franchises. However, after Cricket New South Wales and Queensland refused the proposal, they will now look at different ways to pump money into the league. Currently, the BBL teams are run by the state associations, for eg, NSW operates both the Sydney Sixers and the Sydney Thunder. According to the latest, the association prefers funding from wagering partnerships and other alternatives rather than privatisation. Similarly, Queensland has opposed the idea of the CA. Also Read: MS Dhoni Ruled Out Of Full IPL 2026? Report Claims CSK Stint Done And DustedCA explores a hybrid model for BBL privatisation After the idea of privatisation was declined by two states, the CA chief has assured alternative solutions for the situation. For now, Western Australia, Tasmania and Victoria are on board for the idea, with South Australia likely to give a go-ahead as well. Till the time Queensland, who operate the Brisbane Heat and NSW join the others, CEO Todd Greenberg feels the hybrid model is the way to go, with some teams bringing private capital for now before the others join. "Option A for us has always been that we do it at the same time to extract the maximum value in the market. But clearly, we're not at that point, so we now have to reassess what comes next. We've just moved to trying to analyse what a different model might look like, and is there a model where some states are taking private capital and some states aren't?" Greenberg said. Why are Queensland and NSW opposing BBL privatisation? Going from the current model of the BBL to making it a proper franchise league is a big step for all the states involved. While some are enthusiastic about the money, opportunities and connections it would bring, only two states remain susceptible to the idea. According to Queensland Cricket, bringing private players into the league would be detrimental to cricket in the country, as they would not invest the money into the grassroots. Additionally, like SA20, the Hundred and the other leagues, private investment means the branding and colours of the franchises would change, which could potentially take away the identity of the league. However, Greenberg believes the investments are inevitable and would eventually happen if the CA wants to compete with the rest of the world. “[On rebranding and colour changes] That's a decision well down the track. There'll be some states that will have a great affinity to their brand and their colours, and there'll be some states that don't. I'm sure there'll be some investors who will look at brands and colours and see that as a huge part of their investment, and others who won't,” Greenberg concluded. Also Read: Faf du Plessis Becomes Franchise Team Owner With Ex-Teammate
