This is the ninth in a series exploring the future of cricket by Eddie Fitzgibbon, a Wisden board member and strategic advisor specialising in cricket with a focus on the USA market and sports technology. Read part one, part two, part three, part four, part five, part six, part seven and part eight and get more from Eddie on his Substack and connect with him on LinkedIn.

I hadn’t planned to write this piece immediately. But sometimes, the market proves a thesis faster than you expect.

Over the last few weeks, three seemingly unrelated events collided. First, the rumours surrounding JioStar sent tremors through the sport’s financial foundations. Second, the Perth Test finished in two days, exposing the volatility of our marquee assets. And finally, ARES Management publicly declared cricket an “institutional-grade asset class”, a signal that the big money is finally watching.

Taken together, these events highlighted exactly what we discussed in Article 3: Cricket’s Hidden Goldmine. In that piece, I argued that the ‘smart money’ needs to look past the trophy assets of teams and leagues to build the ‘picks and shovels’ infrastructure of the game.

What I described then as an investment opportunity has, in light of these recent weeks, become a structural necessity. This article explains why.

In complex systems, the most dangerous moments are not always the loud crashes. They are the quiet tremors, the hairline fractures that appear in the foundation long before the building actually shakes.

For the past month, the global cricket industry has been trying to distinguish signal from noise.

The noise has been deafening. First came the reports that JioStar – the merged entity holding the keys to the sport’s treasury – was seeking to restructure its massive ICC media rights deal. Then came the swift, official denial: a joint statement assuring the market that the contract remains “fully in force.”

On the surface, business as usual has resumed. The panic has subsided. But for those of us who analyse the architecture of the sport, the signal remains blaring. The fact that a single rumour could send shockwaves through every cricket boardroom reveals an uncomfortable truth.

This is not just about the huge Indian media market. It is about a structural design flaw that affects everyone, from the wealthiest Full Members in Melbourne and London to the emerging Associate Members in Kathmandu and Lagos.

Cricket is operating on a Tentpole Economy.

We have built a global skyscraper supported by a tiny cluster of massive financial ‘Tentpoles’: the mega-value media rights deal and the marquee bilateral series (The Ashes and India tours). The entire ecosystem relies on the dividends from these few, high-stakes assets.

Whether those pillars are cracking or just creaking under the weight of market saturation, the lesson is the same: We cannot build the next hundred years of the game on a foundation that shakes every time a media conglomerate reviews its balance sheet or a Test match ends in two days.

Tentpole 1: The ‘Big Number’ (Media Rights)

The JioStar scare served as an involuntary stress test for the ecosystem. Why did it gain traction? Because it aligned with a strategic reality: the assumption that rights values will infinitely compound is colliding with economic gravity.

Uday Shankar is not just the architect of the modern game’s economy; as Vice Chairman of JioStar, he is the primary gatekeeper of its capital. Sitting at the helm of the Disney-Reliance powerhouse, he understands the intersection of media and commerce better than perhaps anyone. His warning – “if we don’t bid for the next cycle of ICC rights, it won’t dent our business” – was a strategic signal.

It was a declaration that for media giants, cricket is becoming just one asset in a diversified portfolio. But for the ICC and its members, that broadcast deal is the entire portfolio.
The official denial buys peace for today. But the leverage has shifted. We are witnessing the first signs of a ‘repricing cycle’. The noise was the rumour; the signal is that the sport’s primary revenue engine is no longer immune to market correction.

Tentpole 2: The Marquee Series (The Ashes & India Tours)

It is tempting to think this is just an ICC issue. But the Tentpole Economy leaves even the wealthiest boards exposed.

Look at Perth just a few weeks ago. Cricket Australia is a commercial superpower. Yet, their financial health is overwhelmingly tethered to their own ‘Tentpole’: the marquee series.
The first Ashes Test in Perth against England concluded in under two days. In fewer than 48 hours, the match was over. With it, an estimated AU$3–4 million in revenue reportedly evaporated from the board’s bottom line.

This wasn’t a governance failure; it was product volatility. It proved that even the biggest boards are perilously dependent on a tiny cluster of marquee fixtures delivering perfect outcomes. When a ‘Tentpole’ match shortens, whether through brilliant bowling or fickle weather, the commercial model, built on five days of ads, tickets, and hospitality, collapses.

If you are a smaller board, you rely on the ICC distribution. If you are a big board (ECB or CA), you rely on both ICC distributions and the Ashes or India coming to town. In both cases, the economy is narrow. There is no safety net.

The Trickle-Down Effect: Kathmandu, Lagos, and Tokyo

To understand the consequence of this fragility, we have to look away from the centre. This is where the Tentpole Economy hits hardest and where I am most interested.

Consider the Nepal Premier League (NPL). As I wrote recently, Nepal has all the makings of the first great cricket nation of the 2030s.

But here is the harsh reality: Nepal’s rise is fueled by spirit, but its structures are funded by grants. Like Nigeria, Japan, and almost every Associate nation, their ability to build stadiums and pathways is overwhelmingly dependent on the surplus generated by the Tentpoles.

Those ICC distributions, recently increased by 10% for 2026, are funded almost exclusively by the ‘Big Number’ media rights. If the Media Tentpole wobbles, or if the Bilateral Tentpole fractures (causing big boards to hoard cash), the shockwave hits Kathmandu first. We risk starving our most exciting growth markets at the exact moment they are ready to sprint.

The Governance Lens: Why Roger Mitchell is Right

This is where the industry should listen to voices like Roger Mitchell, a sharp analyst of sports finance.

In a timely analysis, Mitchell reminds us that industries relying on monopoly-like structures eventually meet market forces. “Specificity of sport”, the idea that fans will pay any price forever, is not a long-term strategy.

Mitchell argues that no sport is immune to repricing. When you have a single dominant buyer (JioStar) or a single dominant product (The Tentpole Series), you do not have a robust market; you have a dependency.

What we witnessed with the JioStar news and the Perth result was the realisation that the extraction model, relying on a few massive events to subsidise the world, cannot get us to the next stage of growth.

The Solution: The Third Column

So, how do we fix it? The answer is not to squeeze more money from the media partners. The answer is to plant a new foundation. We need to build what I call the Third Column of the cricket economy.

If Column 1 is The ICC & Governance (The Rule of Law), and Column 2 is The Tentpole Assets (Media Rights & Marquee Series), then we are desperately missing Column 3. Columns 1 and 2 have been, and always will be required, Column 3 is needed to capitalise on cricket’s growth potential.

Column 3 is Private, Institutional Capital.

We are already seeing the first wave of this type of capital arriving. In the US, investors have poured millions into Major League Cricket (MLC). In the UK and India, franchise values are soaring. But look closer at where that money is going: it is mostly flowing into teams and leagues. It is “trophy capital”, that is, investors buying a slice of the glitz, chasing the next valuation bump of a franchise.

That is welcome, but it is not enough.

The real opportunity, the one that firms like ARES Management, Bruin Capital, and even dedicated cricket-specific funds are built for, is not in buying a team, but in capitalising the ecosystem itself. As ARES recently noted, “Cricket is becoming an institutional-grade asset class for the first time”.

“Institutional-grade” does not mean buying a jersey sponsor or a team. It means investing in the infrastructure, the data spines, women’s cricket and the real estate that allows the sport to function 365 days a year, regardless of whether a Test match goes five days or two.

What the Third Column Builds

This Third Column is not an abstract financial concept. It is the concrete pouring into the ground.

• Infrastructure Investment: Currently, Japan or Nigeria cannot build stadiums because the “Tentpole” money is drip-fed annually. A “Third Column” fund builds multi-use entertainment districts that monetise 365 days a year – community centers, concerts, conferences, retail – where cricket is the anchor tenant, but not the only tenant. This insulates the asset from the volatility of the cricket calendar.
• Technology Spines: This brings us back to the “Platform vs. Product” debate. Private capital can fund the unified digital spine that connects a fan in New York to a league in South Africa, creating a direct-to-consumer revenue stream that sits entirely outside the volatility of broadcast rights negotiations.
• Volatility Buffers: Imagine a structure where private capital underwrites the risk of the calendar. If a Tentpole asset underperforms (like the Perth Test), the diversified yields from real estate or tech assets cover the shortfall.
• The High-Growth Assets like Women’s Cricket: Institutional investors aren’t just looking for safety; they are hunting for growth. As Ares Management highlighted, the “women’s side of the equation” is a primary driver for capital entering leagues like The Hundred. With women’s matches drawing 320,000 spectators in 2024 and delivering growth where traditional formats have plateaued, this sector offers the kind of “early-stage” upside that mature men’s leagues cannot. Private capital funds the professionalisation like equal prize money and full-time contracts, that transforms this from a development project into a tier-one asset. (We will explore this the women’s cricket opportunity in depth in an upcoming article).

The Choice Ahead

The recent news cycle was not a crisis but it was a warning shot. The denial from JioStar and the ICC has bought the sport time. The question is: what will we do with it?

We can go back to business as usual. We can celebrate the excitement of cricket in Nepal while ignoring the fragility of the funds that support it. We can chalk the Perth Test up to “just cricket” and ignore the hole in the balance sheet.

Or, we can recognise the signal in the noise. The Tentpole Economy has reached its load-bearing capacity. The next decade of growth must be built on a new, wider foundation.

The first wave of capital bought the teams. The next wave, the smart money, will build the game itself. The tremors have stopped for now, but the opportunity to reinforce the foundation has never been more urgent.