There will be no second-round e-auction for the ICC media rights after a clear winner - or winners - emerged when the sealed bids were opened on Friday. The identity of the winner/s for the right to broadcast ICC events in India has not been disclosed yet - the ICC board makes that call on Saturday after a recommendation is sent to it by the media-rights advisory group appointed to adjudicate on the bidding process.
There has been no official communication from the ICC on whether a solitary winner won both the TV and digital rights or whether there were separate winners in the two categories. What is also not yet confirmed is whether the rights have been sold for four years or eight, as the ICC had kept the tenure of the rights flexible, in order to exploit the best number commercially.
Though the value of the winning bid is unlikely to be made public, the ICC is believed to have set a base price of USD 1.44 billion (for a four-year deal) and USD 4 billion for an eight-year one. Its last rights deal, for eight years, was worth approximately USD 2.1 billion. Because of the changing nature of the market and especially the digital streaming landscape, as well as the increased number of ICC events in this cycle, the expectation was that any new deal would be considerably bigger than the last one.
A total of six packages were on sale with the sealed bids opened on Friday at the ICC headquarters in Dubai in the presence of the bidders. It is learned that four bidders participated, including Disney Star*, Sony, Viacom and Zee.
After facing mounting pressure from the bidders over the past month over concerns about the transparency of the process, the ICC had said that an e-auction would take place as a second round of bidding should the value of the two best bids in the first round be within 10% of each other.
By Saturday, it is expected that the ICC Board comprising 17 directors will discuss the recommendations of the rights advisory group and announce the identities of the winner/s. The five-person advisory group includes ICC chair Greg Barclay, Ross McCollum (the chair of the ICC's Finance and Commercial Affairs Committee), Anurag Dahiya (the ICC's chief commercial officer), Richard Freudenstein (finance & commercial affairs director) and BCCI acting CEO Hemang Amin.
*Disney Star and ESPNcricinfo are part of the Walt Disney Company
TRENTON, Canada
The long-anticipated UN report on the alleged human rights abuses against the Uyghurs should be made public now, Justice for All Canada said Friday.
The Canadian Muslim organization, a long-time champion of the plight of the Muslim minority Uyghurs, agreed with Canada's UN ambassador Bob Rae who said there is "no excuse" for the delay in publishing the report.
"Canada’s UN representative Bob Rae was instrumental in a previous ground-breaking report that set the stage for a global humanitarian response to the Rohingya genocide," Taha Ghayyur, the executive director of Justice For All Canada, told Anadolu Agency in an email interview on Friday.
"Canadian activists are calling for similar swift justice and intervention on behalf of Uyghur Muslims, who are living through one of the worst modern genocides since WWII."
Rae is not buying the line from Michelle Bachelet, UN high commissioner for human rights, who said she is "trying very hard" to issue the report but is under "tremendous pressure."
"There is no excuse for not getting it out," Rae told CBC, Canada's state broadcaster on Thursday. "The only person that controls that is her. It's her report."
"I don't think there's any question at all that the Chinese have been making very strong representations but I don't know under what process a human rights commission would say we're going to allow the perpetrators of this injustice — of this genocide — we're going to allow them to comment and see the report and review it and then get their feedback on it before we publish the report," Rae said.
China has been accused by human rights groups of keeping more than a million Uyghurs in detention camps against their will.
China has denied committing any human rights violation but insists the "re-education camps" were necessary to clamp down on extremism by Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims.
Bachelet earlier promised to make the report public by Aug. 31.
Anadolu Agency website contains only a portion of the news stories offered to subscribers in the AA News Broadcasting System (HAS), and in summarized form. Please contact us for subscription options.
The ICC are about to discover how much their cricket is worth when they open bids for the Indian market from various broadcasters on Friday. At stake are the rights to broadcast ICC events - men's and women's - for the next four or eight years, on TV and digital, straight to your device of choice. And given the massive amounts generated by the bidding for the IPL, there's an expectation that the ICC could benefit from the big money swirling around the game.
Here's what you need to know about the bidding.
Why do I even need to know about ICC rights when all I care about is who my team plays next? Because, ultimately, the money from these rights forms a chunk of the money that makes the rich (India, England and Australia) richer but keeps the game going in the smaller member countries. So, if you care about that, you probably better care about this too.
Fine, so what's being bid for?
A whole bunch of events from 2023-31: 16 men's events (over eight years between 2023-31) and six women's events (over four years - between 2023-27). World Cups, Champions Trophy, T20 World Cups, U19 World Cups, you name it, every ICC event - men and women - you watch until 2031 will be part of this deal.
Brought to me by? As ESPNcricinfo understands it, one or more of Disney Star*, Sony, Zee, Viacom and Amazon.
And am I watching it on my phone, TV, tablet? Either, both, all. For the first time, the ICC has unpacked its rights. No longer is it selling one set of TV rights to the highest bidder; it is now selling its rights as separate packages of TV only, digital only, and TV and digital combined. All three are for four or eight years. In case any of the packages are sold for only four years, the ICC will open another window to sell the rights for the second four-year period.
That sounds like bidding could get complicated. That's exactly what four of the main broadcasters in the running thought, and several emails were sent to the ICC about the lack of transparency in the process. And as a symbolic protest, they didn't initially attend some training sessions - or "mock auctions" as they called them - designed to familiarise them with the process.
Expand.
Disney Star, Zee, Sony and Viacom expressed various concerns over the transparency of the bidding process. TL;DR: the broadcasters were unhappy with the fact that the bids were not going to be shared once opened, among those who bid; that there was no clarity about how close the highest bids needed to be to trigger a second round of bidding; and they wanted to know more about how the ICC would judge a bid for a four-year deal against a bid for an eight-year deal.
What happened next? The four broadcasters eventually did go ahead and put in bids, and according to some reports, the clarity they wanted has been given. For example, according to a report in the Times of India, broadcasters have been told that if a bid is within 10% of the highest bid/combination bid, it will trigger a second round of bidding - only this time through an e-auction (more on that shortly).
There has also been some more information around a pre-determined multiplier, which will be used to judge an eight-year bid against a four-year one. The ICC will look at the best bids for both tenures and then look at the ratio between the two, compare that with the multiplier, believed to be set at 2.8. If the ratio for eight years exceeds the multiplier, then the ICC will pick the winner for the eight-year bid. If the ratio is less, then the highest bid for four years will be selected.
I'm sorry, what? Here's an example. If the best four-year number is 100 and the best eight-year number is 270, the ratio is 2.7 (270/100). That is below the 2.8 multiplier set by the ICC. So in this case, the ICC will go with the highest bidder for four years. But if the best bid for four years is 100 and the highest bid for eight years is 300, then the ratio of 3 means the ICC will pick the highest bid for eight years.
Does that mean there could be an e-auction, like the one at the IPL?
Only, as we say, if the second-best bid is within 10% of the best bid; the first round of bidding is the old-school, sealed-bid methodology, which the ICC says has worked best for years (some broadcasters wanted an e-auction from the start, after the success of the IPL). The ICC also argue that the unbundled nature of their rights offering means that it is too complex for a simple e-auction process. In fact, at first they had ruled out an e-auction but have since stepped back from that. The e-auction, if needed, will take place a few days later.
Why have they gone to the Indian market first? In short: money. It is cricket's biggest market and as the IPL rights proved, there is massive appetite among the biggest broadcasters there for more cricket content. The ICC is banking on the belief that since two different broadcasters - Disney Star and Viacom - have won the TV and digital rights respectively for next five-year cycle of the IPL, both as well as other participants will bid aggressively to bag the second biggest rights in cricket, that of the ICC.
Underpinning this is also simple maths: by unbundling its package of rights into men's and women's events, into digital and TV, by going into different territories, they stand to make much more money than they have in previous cycles.
I'm not sure how it has taken this long to get to the crux of this: how much money are they expecting to make? Nobody can be certain but here are some facts. In the last cycle, the ICC sold its rights for just over US$2 billion. But that was a different, linear world: that figure was for all rights on all platforms globally. For this cycle, the ICC is believed to have a benchmark figure in mind, an "asking price" of $1.44 billion for a four-year deal and $4 billion (1.44 multiplied by 2.8) for an eight-year deal. That is double the last deal for eight years, and it is only a benchmark figure - so the minimum they expect - and it is only for the India market.
Expectations have risen not just because of the way broadcasting and the digital landscape has changed since the last cycle, but because there is more content. There were six men's events in the previous eight-year cycle, whereas there will be one annually in this next cycle. Six of the eight events fall in the Indian time zone; India play host to three men's event; four of the eight events in the next cycle take place during the Diwali festive season when the Indian market is usually in spending mood.
Separate women's rights will help. An element of development still remains, in that the highest bid will not necessarily guarantee the winner. The ICC is keen to find the right broadcasting partner who can promote women's cricket globally. The highest bidder(s) will make a presentation in front of the Media Rights Advisory Group (MRAG) - formed specifically to adjudicate the bidding - to showcase how they aim to help women's cricket grow, and that will not just be limited to the global events but the overall game.
*Disney Star and ESPNcricinfo are part of the Walt Disney Company.
Less than a week away from the bid submission date for ICC's broadcast rights in its biggest market, significant concerns remain among media companies in India, concerns that manifested themselves through the absence of four major broadcasters from 'mock auctions' organised by the ICC on Wednesday.
Disney Star*, Zee, Sony and Viacom, the companies which recently participated in the highly competitive e-auction for the IPL rights, did not attend training sessions the ICC had set up ahead of the actual submission of the bids for the next cycle of ICC events. The sessions are intended to familiarise bidders with the platform through which bids will be submitted.
A number of bidders have completed the sessions or are scheduled to do so on Thursday and the ICC, for their part, are expecting the rest to provide slots to do so in the next couple of days.
Those who have stayed away from the sessions have raised concerns to the ICC around the transparency over the process of awarding these rights, for ICC events from 2023 to 2031. ESPNcricinfo has learnt that all four broadcasters are uncomfortable with the fact that the bids will not be made public, or even shared among those participating in the process.
The ICC has reserved the rights to conduct an e-auction in the event of the top bids being close, or not meeting the ICC's expectations - the broadcasters are believed to be unhappy about the opaqueness in this instance of what would be considered close. They say it is reasonable to expect to know what margin of difference would trigger a second round of bidding.
Until recently the ICC had ruled out an e-auction, their chief commercial officer Anurag Dahiya arguing that the way they were unbundling their rights - for men's and women's events separately, for digital and TV and across four- and eight-year packages - meant it would be too "complicated" for an e-auction of the kind the BCCI held for the IPL.
But ESPNcricinfo understands that if a second round of bidding is now needed, that will take place as an e-auction. Broadcasters are also seeking more clarity from the ICC as to how bids for a four-year package and an eight-year one will be judged against each other. It is understood that the ICC has an algorithm in place and a multiplier figure that produces the best benchmark figure for them to be able to compare bids across different durations and platforms. That mechanism is not public, however.
The bids are meant to be submitted by August 22, when the technical elements will be assessed and due diligence carried out to make sure each one meets ICC requirements. The financial aspect of the bid will be kept with an independent body and will not be opened until August 26. The ICC is believed to not want a public opening in case the bidding is competitive and close enough that there may be a need for subsequent rounds.
The ICC continue to work through clarifications with the bidders but it is unlikely that any part of the bidding process will change now - as bidders have suggested different processes, changing it now might seem to be favouring one bidder over another, a situation the ICC want to avoid.
The game's governing body sent out its first Invitation to Tender (ITT) for its rights in June, for TV only, digital only and for both; women's event rights have been unbundled from that of men's events and packages are available for four and eight years.
*Disney Star and ESPNcricinfo are part of the Walt Disney Company
Sadik will be remembered “for her significant contributions to women’s health and rights and population policies and for her tireless efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,” the UN chief said.
Nafis Sadik joined the UN Population Fund in 1971, becoming the first woman to head a major UN program that is voluntarily funded.
(AA)
Nafis Sadik, a Pakistani doctor who championed women’s health and rights and spearheaded the breakthrough action plan adopted by 179 countries at the 1994 United Nations population conference, has died.
Her son Omar Sadik said his mother died of natural causes at her home in New York on Sunday night, four days before her 93rd birthday.
Nafis Sadik joined the UN Population Fund in 1971, became its assistant executive director in 1977, and was appointed executive director in 1987.
She was the first woman to head a major United Nations program that is voluntarily funded.
In June 1990, Perez de Cuellar appointed Sadik to be secretary-general of the fifth UN International Conference on Population and Development in 1994, also known as the Cairo conference.
She became the architect of its groundbreaking program of action which recognised for the first time that women have the right to control their reproductive and sexual health and to choose whether to become pregnant.
At the Beijing women’s conference a year after Cairo, Sadik told delegates: “The first mark of respect for women is support for their reproductive rights.”
“Reproductive rights involve more than the right to reproduce,” she said.
“They involve support for women in activities other than reproduction, infact liberating women from a system of values which insists that reproduction is their only function.”
We are profoundly saddened to learn of the death of Dr. Nafis Sadik, Former @UNFPA Executive Director.
We extend sincere condolences to Dr. Sadik’s family, the people of Pakistan and all who are mourning her loss.
Natalia Kanem, current executive director of the UN Population Fund, said “millions of girls and young women have grown up knowing that their bodies belong to them, and that their futures are theirs to shape” since Cairo.
After her retirement from the Population Fund in 2000, Sadik served as special adviser to the secretary-general and special envoy on HIV/AIDS in Asia and the Pacific.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said Sadik will be remembered “for her significant contributions to women’s health and rights and population policies and for her tireless efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,” his spokesman said.
Born in Jaunpur in British-ruled India, Nafis Sadik received her medical degree from Dow Medical College in Karachi and began her career working in women’s and children’s wards in Pakistani armed forces hospitals from 1954 to 1963.
The following year she was appointed head of the health section of the government Planning Commission.
In 1966, Sadik joined the Pakistan Central Family Planning Council, the government agency responsible for carrying out the national family planning program. She rose to be its director-general in 1970.
She also served an internship in gynaecology and obstetrics at City Hospital in Baltimore and continued her medical education at Johns Hopkins University.
The state response has been "insufficient to reduce the levels of violence, prevent abuses committed by criminal organisations and adequately protect communities in the territories," according to the report.
Despite the peace agreement signed by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas and the government in 2016, violence has intensified.
(AP)
More than 562 human rights defenders were killed in Colombia between 2016 and 2021, according to a report by the United Nations Human Rights Office.
The report, published Tuesday, revealed that at least 22 human rights defenders have been killed this year in Colombia, where rising violence perpetrated by criminal organisations that seek control of territories for drug trafficking is having a "devastating" effect. The number could be much higher, the report said, as the UN office has received up to 114 complaints, many of which are still in the process of being verified.
The state response has been "insufficient to reduce the levels of violence, prevent abuses committed by criminal organisations and adequately protect communities in the territories," according to the report.
Despite the peace agreement signed by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas and the government in 2016, violence has intensified.
After signing the peace deal, a FARC unit of dissidents said it would not lay down arms and would continue fighting. Other armed groups such as the National Liberation Army and the Gulf Clan also remain.
"In some places these groups seem to supplant some of the State's own functions and regulate many aspects of community life, even making decisions on family issues or local justice," said Juliette De Rivero, Colombian representative of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, during the presentation of the report.
Achieving peace with all the criminal armed groups that still have a significant presence in the country is one of the biggest challenges that incoming President Gustavo Petro faces when he takes office August 7.
The report said the current military strategy has failed to stop armed groups' expansion and urged the incoming government to prioritise tackling violence that is particularly affecting women, children, indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, community leaders and human rights defenders.
