NEW DELHI: London-based Genius Sports has bid Rs 64.39 crore per year, or approximately Rs 2,129 crore over 20 years, for the commercial rights of the Indian Super League (ISL) and Federation Cup. FanCode’s bid for the same properties stands at roughly half of that: Rs 36 crore for the first year, or Rs 1,190 crore over 20 years. These are the two options in front of the All India Football Federation (AIFF) and the 14 ISL clubs after the tender bids were opened on Friday (March 27).Both stakeholders in Indian football are at different ends over the two bids. Because of the structure of the two bids, the ISL clubs feel FanCode is a better deal, while the AIFF, which is running the league and had invited the bids, finds the Genius Sports offer to be more favourable.
The difference lies in the details of how the commercial rights pool will be allocated between AIFF, clubs and the eventual winner of the tender.
How the revenue will be shared
Under the revenue sharing model proposed in the tender, AIFF will take home a fixed 20 per cent of the amount that the bidder puts in. Thereafter, at the end of the season, 70 per cent of the net revenue will be shared with the AIFF and rest will go to the commercial partner. Of that 70 per cent that AIFF received, 60 per cent will go to the clubs involved.It must also be taken into account that in the case of net losses, they get transferred to the next year. So, the challenge gets compounded for the second year as the challenge of breaking even, let alone making profit, becomes even higher.
File photo of the Indian jersey with the AIFF logo.
Why AIFF want Genius Sports
On the face of it, Genius Sports is the bigger bid and helps the cash-strapped football body. They make money regardless of what happens at the end of a season. However, with the sports tech company putting in Rs 64.39 crore each year, the challenge of bringing that back and more will be higher. In that scenario, clubs will get smaller, if any, share of funds.
Why clubs prefer FanCode
Clubs and the Dream11-owned company both are targeting a long-term approach and a feasible financial structure. Because FanCode will put in Rs 36-plus crore every year, the chances of breaking even and making profit are higher. In that scenario, clubs have the chances of making money although it means AIFF’s direct and immediate share is smaller.
BIDS AND AIFF’S TAKE HOME
1. FanCodeFirst year spend: Rs 36 croreAnnual increments: 5 per centTotal spending over 20 years: Rs 1,190 crore (approximately)AIFF’s share in the first year: Rs 7.2 crore (20 percent)AIFF’s share over 20 years: Rs 238 crore (approximately)2. Genius SportsFirst year spend: Rs 64.39 croreAnnual increments: 5 per centTotal spending over 20 years: Rs 2,129 crore (approximately)AIFF’s share in the first year: Rs 12.87 crore (20 per cent)AIFF’s share over 20 years: Rs 425.80 crore (approximately)
Why invite 15+5 year bids in the first place?
East Bengal vs Mohammedan Sporting during the ongoing ISL season. (Image: AIFF)
In most sports, or even with most brand associations, short term deals are preferred over long term associations. CEAT Tyres has been linked with the Indian Premier League (IPL) since 2015, having first come on as ‘strategic timeout’ sponsor for three seasons at a reported Rs 12-15 crore. In 2018, the contract was renewed for five seasons. And by 2024, when it was renewed again, the valuation was at Rs 240 crore for five years or Rs 48 crore a year — a four-time increase in nine years.Returning to Indian football, AIFF are selling rights to their properties for 15-20 years at prevailing rates when the market is not favourable to the sport’s future, considering we’re admist a truncated season that got underway five months late.
Former AIFF General Secretary Shaji Prabhakaran has advocated for a smaller commercial rights window. (Image: X)
Former AIFF General Secretary Shaji Prabhakaran made the same arguement on social media. “Indian football deserves a more favorable [sic] commercial roadmap. This 15-20 year deal will make football suffer,” he wrote on X.“The current bids don’t offer the sustainability needed for AIFF or its clubs. “AIFF must avoid long-term traps, limiting partnerships to 2-3 years is essential while the market undervalued (current market for football in India).“Let’s build an ecosystem that actually guarantees revenue distribution where it’s needed most: the clubs,” he continued.Now, the onus is on the ISL clubs, which have been bleeding money already, to discuss and share their views with the AIFF on what the roadmap for the next two decades of Indian football will be. This enormous decision could be taken as early as Sunday when the AIFF Executive Committee are presented with the bid evaluation report.
