What’s being sold, why some states oppose the plan, and what happens next

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Cricket Australia (CA) is pushing forward with the next phase of its Big Bash League (BBL) privatisation strategy, even as key states like New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland continue to resist the proposal. The governing body is now set to test the market value of select franchises, including the Melbourne Renegades, Perth Scorchers, and Hobart Hurricanes, by inviting expressions of interest from global investors. This move marks a significant step toward reshaping the financial structure of the BBL.

At the core of the plan is a shift in ownership dynamics. While state associations currently operate BBL teams under long-term leases, CA retains full ownership of all eight franchises. The proposed model would allow states to sell between 49% and 75% stakes to private investors, with the option for some teams to be fully sold. A partial sale would still enable states to retain control over cricketing decisions, while also unlocking immediate financial returns and long-term revenue-sharing opportunities.

The valuation exercise is expected to offer clearer insight into the commercial appeal of BBL teams. Estimates suggest franchises could be valued anywhere between AUD 80 million and AUD 180 million, depending on market interest and stake size. The process mirrors the model used in England’s The Hundred, where significant private investment has already flowed into teams, boosting overall league valuation and financial sustainability.

However, the proposal has not been universally welcomed. NSW has put forward an alternative self-funding model, emphasizing revenue optimisation through broadcast deals, ticketing, and commercial partnerships rather than external investment. A key concern raised is the potential increase in ties to wagering-related revenue streams, which the state body opposes on ethical grounds. Queensland, on the other hand, has questioned whether increased player salaries—one of the drivers behind privatisation—are necessary at all.

There are also broader concerns within Australian cricket. Some stakeholders believe the BBL remains financially stable without external capital, especially given its historical profitability. Others worry about the influence of overseas investors, particularly owners from the Indian Premier League (IPL), who have already made their presence felt in other global T20 leagues. Instances of rebranding and operational control in similar ventures have raised questions about preserving the identity and autonomy of BBL franchises.

Despite the resistance, several states—including Victoria, Western Australia, and Tasmania—are open to exploring private investment. South Australia has adopted a more cautious approach, preferring to observe initial outcomes before committing. This split among stakeholders highlights the complexity of implementing a unified strategy across Australian cricket.

Looking ahead, the market-testing phase will be crucial in shaping the next steps. It will provide CA with concrete valuation benchmarks and help identify potential investors and their expectations. If the returns align with stakeholder interests, the process could move toward formal auctions and eventual stake sales. At the same time, CA will need to address concerns around revenue distribution, governance, and long-term league integrity to ensure broader acceptance.

The outcome of this initiative could redefine the future of the BBL—balancing commercial growth with traditional structures—while determining how Australian cricket positions itself in an increasingly competitive global T20 landscape.