Q1. What did Sahara bid for the team sponsorship
once again knowing that they have been in dispute with the BCCI already over
the termination of the IPL team Pune Warriors? Sahara chairman had already
pointed out in the past that it is not easy working with the cricket board.
A1. From the time, we first announced our disassociation with
the BCCI, a number of cricketers had requested ‘Saharasri’ Subrata Roy Sahara
to please continue with the sponsorship stating that they had donned the logo
of Sahara on their chest for years and they want to retire with the same logo
on their chest. There was strong insistence from various Indian cricketers.
Still, we had no intention to bid for the sponsorship of India Cricket Team,
till even 5 days back. But in the past couple of days, there were number of
calls from senior cricketers (both past and present) and some senior members of
BCCI to ‘Saharasri’. All of them vehemently requested him to continue with the
sponsorship of Indian Cricket Team. Considering their insistence, we decided to
bid for the sponsorship of the Indian Cricket Team.
Q2. Sahara picked up the tender document on
Saturday and were told on Monday afternoon they are ineligible
to bid. What happened on Mondaywhen Mr. N Srinivasan and the rest of the
board members, along with their lawyers, met Sahara officials? What explanation
did they give?
A2. At 3 PM Sahara, under its company Sahara India
Financial Corporation Limited (SIFCL), & Star TV network submitted the
closed bid including Eligibility requirement & Financial Bid towards the
Indian Cricket team sponsorship to the BCCI committee at Park Sheraton Hotel,
Chennai. The BCCI asked both the bidders to go out of the room so that they could
evaluate the Eligibility Bid amongst themselves. Both the Bidders were kept out
for an Hour while the eligibility was being evaluated Post this, only Sahara
was asked to come inside the room. The Board told Sahara that they are
ineligible because of their current dispute with BCCI towards the IPL
Franchisee under Sahara Adventure Sports Limited. I myself representing Sahara
told BCCI that the Bidding Company (SIFCL) is in no dispute with BCCI and has
always paid towards all sponsorship obligations thus there is no reason for
ineligibility.
BCCI then informed that the ITT has a clause
which can bar even a group company from bidding incase any other group company
is in dispute with BCCI. I asked BCCI that in that case why is BCCI till date
accepting payment from Sahara towards Team sponsorship and then why is Indian
Cricket team still wearing Sahara Logo on the clothing till date, even after
the dispute o IPL franchisee which happened with Sahara Adventure Sports Ltd.
To this BCCI did not had any suitable answer. Then Mr. N. Srinivasan said that
“I can also speak about a lot of things that Sahara has said about us in the
last few months”. Finally Mr. Sundar Raman again told Sahara that their Bid was
Ineligible.
Q3. Does Sahara believe that BCCI deliberately
found them ineligible so that they could hand over the sponsorship rights to
Star? Did Sahara smell any foul play or favoritism towards one particular
party?
A3. The reason of ineligibility for Sahara, as cited by BCCI, is
that one of our company, Sahara Adventure Sports Ltd., which held the Pune IPL
franchisee, is in dispute with the Board. The fact is that even when this IPL
dispute was on-going, we had made regular payments for the sponsorship of
National India Cricket Team. In fact, we have never defaulted on the payments.
During all this period, BCCI had been accepting all the payments from
Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. and our logo was very much
present on the Team jersey even till today and shall remain till
December end 2013. Our question is why all this while, BCCI didn’t found us
ineligible as a sponsor. Even 48 hours before the bid, when we bought the
bidding form and were discussing the various modalities continuously with the
Board, even before 3:00 p.m. when we submitted our bid, they
didn’t even once mention that Sahara is ineligible to bid for the sponsorship.
It was during the bid only, that they mentioned for the very first time that
Sahara is ineligible. It is very apparent to naked eye that BCCI had foul
intentions and was making a mockery of the entire bidding process.
Q4. BCCI has accused Sahara of defaulting on
payments and continuously missing deadlines. What does Sahara have to say about
it?
A4. We have never defaulted even once on our payments. As
mentioned earlier, even during dispute regarding the IPL Pune franchisee, we
ensured timely and regular payments to BCCI for sponsorship of India Cricket
Team. We have till now paid more than Rs. 1,000 crores to BCCI for Indian
Cricket Sponsorship, since our association in 2001. This is apart from the
Franchise Fee for Pune Warriors which Sahara kept on paying since year 1
despite being given false assurances of justice. It was only when BCCI
defaulted on its promises that we were left with no option but to hold back the
bank guarantee
Sahara had raised the issue regarding
significant reduction in the number of matches which was one of the most
important basis and criteria for the bid, since 2011. BCCI had made
pre-bid representations that 94 matches will be held in every season and then
arbitrarily reduced the number of matches from 94 to 74 & then 76. Sahara
had placed its bid for the IPL franchise based on the representations
of BCCI which were false. The reduction in the number of matches has
had a substantial financial impact due to the reduction in the central revenues
under the Franchise Agreement.
This is not the only time
that BCCI has treated Pune Warriors India with disdain and in an
unfair manner. Right from day one, when the rule of player retention was
altered prior to IPL Season 4 (which was the 1st year of PWI in the
League) all our requests for seeking a level playing field by having an Open
Auction for the players were turned down. The original Franchise document of
2008 had a provision of Open Auction every three years. Hence, when
constituting a new team we were deprived of the opportunity to bid for players
of the likes of Sachin, Dhoni, Sehwag, Watson, Malinga etc.
Despite assurances given in a meeting between
Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara and Mr. N. Srinivasan, President – BCCI in
February 2012, subsequent to which a joint media statement was issued whereby
both parties agreed to start the arbitration proceedings to address
Sahara’s claim for a reduction in franchise fee for 74 matches. However,
in contravention of the understanding reached between the parties, no steps
were taken by BCCI to address our long standing demand of the reduction of
the Franchise Fee. In fact, far from starting the
arbitration, BCCI has thwarted the process.
Even before the start of IPL 2013 season,
‘Saharasri’ Subrata Roy Sahara himself wrote to the BCCI President
expressing his concerns. The BCCI President chose not to respond himself,
instead deputing his agency to send a denial for consideration. Mr. Rajiv
Shukla had met Mr. Roy before Season 6 and assured him that all issues will be
resolved and requested him to be patient. When the Season was on, the payment
of the last installment for the Season was discussed and every time Sahara was
assured that the issue will be resolved and a mutually agreeable solution will
be arrived at. However, again in stark contravention of the understanding and
betrayal of trust, our Bank Guarantee was invoked. BCCI waited before
conducting this act of betrayal because any such move midway through the
tournament would have jeopardized their broadcaster commitments.
This made it evidently clear
that BCCI did not want to honour their promises. Therefore due to non
fulfillment of reciprocal obligations of BCCI and failure to keep its
promises as given in Feb 2012, Sahara was left with no option but to hold back
the Bank Guarantee till promises and obligations were fulfilled. But instead of
fulfilling its promises and obligations, BCCI went ahead and
terminated the Contract, though itself it is in breach.
Q5. Going forward from question number 4, Bombay
high court had asked Sahara to submit the bank guarantee proportionate to the
reduced number of matches. Had the bank guarantee been provided, the dispute
would have been settled. What does Sahara have to say about it?
A5. No. Sahara was asked to submit 80% of the total franchisee fee
of Rs. 170 crores annually as bank guarantee. However, our contention was that
in the past 3 years, we had already paid 25% extra per year which totaled to 75%
of an annual payment. So this excess payment should have been considered as the
guarantee, rather than a fresh guarantee of 80%. Moreover, it was an interim
order and would not have settled the dispute.
Q6. Does Sahara believe Mr. N Srinivasan has anything
in particular against them? Because in the past, Sahara has always enjoyed a
cordial relationship with the BCCI and
Q10. What is wrong with Indian cricket
administration as of today? Why are so many controversies coming out one after
another?
A6 and A10. It looks like that BCCI is a
promoter led private company which is working according to whims and fancies of
one individual. It is very
unfortunate that because of one man, the sport of cricket in India has to
suffer. Our past experience with BCCI was of a Board keen to work and
collaborate in the interest of the development of the game. Today, the title
sponsorship has been given for Rs. 1.92 crore per match when our bid price was
Rs. 2.35 core, per match.
Q7. Sahara was paying Rs 3.34 cr per match for
sponsorship of the Indian team. With Star bagging the deal for so less,
having the rights been undervalued? Sections of the sports industry believe
Sahara was over-paying. What does Sahara have to say about it?
A7. I don’t think so. Infact, I believed that this time, they
have undervalued the amount. As for our earlier bid, when we won the
sponsorship in 2010 for Rs. 3.34 crore per match, Sachin Tendulkar,
Rahul Dravid, VVV Laxman, all were in their peak during that time and the World
Cup was also about to happen in 2011 in India. The base price that
time was Rs. 2.5 crore. Also the cricket viewership in recent times has dropped
and in the meanwhile other sports like Hockey, Badminton, etc. are gaining
popularity along with development of celebrities in other sports.
Q8. Will Sahara associate itself with Indian
cricket any more in the future?
A8. We have certain big plans for promotion of various sports
including cricket in India, which will be shared by ‘Saharasri’ Subrata Roy
Sahara at an appropriate time.
Q9. Does Sahara believe that they overpaid to
buy Pune Warriors? Is that where all the trouble with BCCI begin?
A9. Our IPL bid for Pune franchisee was based on the BCCI’s pre-bid representations that 94
matches will be held in every season. Later, BCCI arbitrarily reduced the
number of matches from 94 to 74 & then 76. In addition to that, we were not
given level playing field by not having an open auction. This reduced our
access to ace players. Hence, it affected our on-filed performance as well as
marketability of the franchisee. This along with other issues of uneven
treatment made the franchisee unviable for us.
