Why ICL failed?(Compiled from various sources)

The major difference between ICL and IPL was that ICL was a private league upfront, IPL was termed as a BCCI , therefore government, sponsored league.

While ICL had the first-mover advantage (the league was launched immediately after India’s win in the 1st T20 World cup), IPL took time in creating a business model and even got the backing of the ICC.

Because they were unsanctioned by the ICC, the teams do not have access to the best facilities across the whole country or access to the best players, limiting their ability to generate high gate revenues. This lack of transparency leads to questions regarding the overall viability of the ICL’s business model.

ICL could not raise much money and hence, the quality of ‘cricketainment’ and the marketing was not up to the mark.

Even the stadia where the ICL matches were played weren’t well-known. Media analysts say poor home cable penetration of the Zee Sports channel translated into

poor viewership and advertising for ICL. The highest TRP generated was 0.5 In ICL, many of the players were retired cricketers. Hence, the involvement of fans was low. Another interesting dimension was added to the titan fight when BCCI announced that

players who had joined ICL would never be allowed to play for the national team. Also, Kapil Dev (the key sporting figure around whom ICL banked for the seious cricketing

image) was expelled from the National Cricket Academy. Independent analysts have had difficulty gauging the financial viability of the ICL due to the

lack of transparency of the league’s operations. Terms of contracts are hidden and advertising revenue from match telecasts — considered

to be a major contributor to revenues — have never been disclosed.