Cricket in Nepal has always been more than just a game. It’s a mirror of our aspirations – a mix of hope, passion, and sometimes, politics. As the Nepal Premier League (NPL) gears up for its second season in few days time starting November 17, the excitement is not just on the field. This year, the real (dramatic) game began much earlier – in the bidding room for its OTT broadcasting rights.
Two contenders took part in the bidding process:
- A joint venture between MSM Video Pvt. Ltd. and Sushree Media Pvt. Ltd.
- Dish Home, a household name in broadcasting.
When the dust settled, Dish Home walked away with the rights. But not quietly. The losing bidder – MSM & Sushree JV – has now taken their frustration beyond cricketing boards and straight to the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), even alerting the International Cricket Council (ICC), alleging the deal was unfair.
So what really happened? Let’s peel this back, layer by layer.
The numbers that started it all
At the heart of the debate lies a simple question:
Did the Cricket Association of Nepal (CAN) make the smarter financial decision?
Here are the offers, stripped to their core (we’re just reviewing the financial side for the article; even if CAN did also review technical aspect in their decision making):
| Bidder | Minimum Guaranteed Amount to CAN | Revenue Share to CAN | Revenue Share to Bidder |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSM/Sushree JV | NPR 5.23 crore | 15% | 85% |
| Dish Home | NPR 4.11 crore | 71% | 29% |
At first glance, it’s easy to think – “why would anyone take the smaller guarantee?”
But as with most business stories, the truth is in the fine print.
The minimum guarantee is a floor, not a ceiling
In these kinds of deals, the minimum guarantee means CAN gets that money no matter what happens. Even if only a few people buy the OTT pass, CAN still pockets that guaranteed amount. But the revenue share determines how much more CAN could make if sales soar.
The NPL’s streaming pass is priced at (there’s another level in between, which we are skipping for the case) :
- NPR 300 for viewers in Nepal
- USD 10 for international audiences (≈ NPR 1,410)
That means every fan tuning in from abroad could bring in more than four times what a domestic fan pays. So, depending on how many tickets sell – and where – the math changes fast.
Crunching the scenarios
Let’s imagine three possible outcomes and see how much CAN would actually earn:
| Total OTT Sales Revenue | CAN’s Earnings – JV Deal (15%) | CAN’s Earnings – Dish Home (71%) | Who Wins? |
|---|---|---|---|
| NPR 4 crore | 5.23 crore (guarantee applies) | 4.11 crore (guarantee applies) | JV |
| NPR 10 crore | 5.23 crore (share < guarantee) | 7.10 crore (share beats guarantee) | Dish Home |
| NPR 20 crore | 5.23 crore (cap hit) | 14.2 crore (huge upside) | Dish Home |
In short:
- The JV deal offers CAN a better safety net.
- The Dish Home deal offers a higher ceiling – but only if OTT sales explode.
So CAN had to bet on what they believed in more: safety or growth.
The business bet
Dish Home’s offer is essentially a growth gamble. By taking a lower guarantee and a much higher share (71%), CAN positioned itself to win big – but only if NPL’s OTT platform performs. It’s a bold play, betting on the future of digital cricket viewership in Nepal and the diaspora.
Meanwhile, the JV’s proposal was the safe investor’s pitch: higher guarantee, lower share, less risk. It’s predictable and comfortable, but also limits how much CAN can earn if the league takes off.
From a purely business standpoint, Dish Home’s structure looks smarter if the confidence in the product is high. A league trying to expand its brand – with a rising fan base and better production value – should ideally take the bigger slice of upside.
Where the storm began
But the losing bidders didn’t see it that way.
According to reports in OnlineKhabar, the MSM & Sushree JV filed a petition at the CIAA claiming that the selection process was unfair and lacked transparency. They’ve also reached out to the ICC, arguing that the evaluation process – particularly on the financial side – did not properly weigh their higher guaranteed amount.
Their claim is that the deal has caused “financial loss” to CAN by ignoring the higher guaranteed sum. The counter-view, of course, is that the higher revenue share from Dish Home could easily compensate for that difference, and more, if the NPL’s OTT platform gains traction.
At the core of it, both sides are right – depending on what happens next.
Beyond the numbers: What this means for Nepali cricket
For fans, this battle might feel not so important but its impact could be very real. If the OTT platform succeeds, CAN stands to earn far more funds for grassroots cricket, better facilities, and stronger domestic tournaments. If it fails, critics will say the decision was a misstep.
For CAN, the coming weeks will test more than just its legal standing. It will test its strategic foresight – whether it truly saw where Nepali cricket is headed.
The JV may win the moral argument on paper, but if the numbers start to favour Dish Home during the league, the decision could look visionary in hindsight.
Final over: The real game is off the field
This season, the NPL’s real scoreboard won’t just show sixes and wickets, but it’ll also show subscriber numbers, international log-ins, and revenue graphs. The fans might cheer for wickets, but CAN’s future might depend on how many of those fans also pay for a digital pass.
So when the first ball is bowled this November 17, remember – there’s another match happening quietly in the background.
One fought not on grass, but in boardrooms, spreadsheets, and maybe, courtrooms.
Because in modern cricket, the business of the game has become the game itself.
