The Hundred could be scrapped

[Ali TT]

Viewing figures of the Hundred

BBC

2021: 1.021 million
2022: 714k
2023: 771k
2024: 578k

Sky

2021: 431k
2022: 266k
2023: 275k
2024: 198k

Is this per match? Wonder if there was any difference between games on during the Olympics and those afterwards

Just seen this on twitter: Yorkshire subject of £50m takeover bid from Sunrisers Hyderabad after talks with Rajasthan Royals stall.

How did we end up selling or trying to sell a couple of our top clubs (Hampshire and assuming Yorkshire still fit in that category) and give away the best month of summer to an international rival?

What happens if the IPL franchises decide between them to use the ECB's brainchild as an extended net and field 'development' teams?

Have they done this in the Caribbean or SA? Suspect this is more about financial benefit to the owners than the development of Indian cricketers, who I think are still prevented from playing in overseas "T20" leagues. Not saying that this makes this all a good thing though.

 

[Third_Man]

Have they done this in the Caribbean or SA? Suspect this is more about financial benefit to the owners than the development of Indian cricketers, who I think are still prevented from playing in overseas "T20" leagues. Not saying that this makes this all a good thing though.

I don't know as I don't follow franchise leagues that closely but if they haven't that doesn't mean that they couldn't. There has been a change, a relaxation in terms of allowing Indian players to play in the Championship even in the Blast for some from time to time.

Any sale of clubs or franchise must surely be to secure their future and game in general rather than swap control for short term cash injection. If there is any "financial benefit" as suggested, to be had why hand it over? As you say not every decision has been successful and some more in luck than design.

 

[Third_Man]

Probably need to change the thread title as at best will become a routine T20, 120 ball franchise. The One Hundred and Twenty. Anyhow:

Daniel Gidney, big, big fan of the Hundred, looking forward to his 51% share of a franchise, has had a few words in the Times:

“...he also believes the competition must be careful about how it spends the income it receives from the sale of the eight teams to private investors.
“The Hundred needs more overseas stars but the money from the sale of the teams should go on infrastructure or debt reduction,” he said. “It shouldn’t go on players’ salaries, absolutely not.
“If the bottom rung of the Hundred becomes 60 grand rather than 30 grand, that’s more than some of my young players are earning. If they can be paid more for doing nothing and sitting on a bench than for playing a whole season, that’s a nightmare.”

Just like he's careful how Lancashire don't spend their money.

 

[GirthQuake]

Just seen this on twitter: Yorkshire subject of £50m takeover bid from Sunrisers Hyderabad after talks with Rajasthan Royals stall.

How did we end up selling or trying to sell a couple of our top clubs (Hampshire and assuming Yorkshire still fit in that category) and give away the best month of summer to an international rival?

What happens if the IPL franchises decide between them to use the ECB's brainchild as an extended net and field 'development' teams?

An IPL franchise is not the BCCI. Their interests are often not aligned including permission for Indian players to feature in leagues overseas. An IPL franchise cannot send ''development teams'' to leagues abroad in contravention of BCCI's policy. That'd be the surest way to have their franchise privileges stripped and for the players to be blacklisted.