FANG to the IPL: When Big Business Bats for Itself

ISSUE No 4

Cap-i-tal-ism noun An economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

The 2010’s were a game changing decade for both big tech and franchise cricket. Technology surged forward at an unprecedented pace, powered by giants like Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google (FANG). Meanwhile, cricket saw a financial revolution with the explosion of T20 leagues like the Indian Premier League (IPL), Big Bash League (BBL), Caribbean Premier League (CPL), turning a once modest paying profession into a multi-million dollar industry.

Both sectors boomed- but here’s the question. When the biggest players aren’t just leading the market, they are the market, is that good for long term growth?

By the end of the 2010’s, FANG controlled almost everything:

Facebook (now META) owned Instagram and WhatsApp, dominating social media. Amazon crushed retail competition acquiring Whole Foods, Zappos and others in the process. Netflix locked in exclusive content, acquired studios and revolutionized the way we consume entertainment. Google (Alphabet) dictated search results and online advertising and data.

These companies didn’t just grow with the market, they became the market. They absorbed or eliminated competitors, ensuring that even in a world of constant innovation, most roads led back to them.

Cricket had its own version of market consolidation. Before the 2010’s player salaries were modest compared to other global sports. Then the T20 leagues exploded, and with them, so did the money. Pre 2010’s, elite cricketers earned USD $100K to $500K annually, post 2010’s top IPL players make USD $1M to $3M per season.

While this is an incredible time for players and fans, it also meant that franchise cricket started controlling the game. Players can now prioritize league contracts over national duty. Amongst the smaller nations, test cricket has struggled for relevance. Cricket’s financial success has started to reshape the sport. Are we going more toward a football model where players only represent their country in world events & qualifiers, and franchise cricket dictate the livelihood of the players and the sport?

When a few companies, leagues, or owners control everything, innovation slows, diversity shrinks and the ecosystem becomes too dependent on a select few.

Whether its tech shaping our digital lives or cricket redefining sports careers, we have to ask. Growth is great, money even better but is too much power in too few hands a problem?