About that FIBA tournament bid

6
Ben D. Kritz

Ben D. Kritz

YESTERDAY’S Times editorial (“National passion, national embarrassment”) made some rather stinging—and completely deserved—criticisms of the Philippines’ failed bid to host the 2019 FIBA World Cup of Basketball, a tournament that was awarded to China.

Advertisements

Although China offered formidable resources to support its bid, including no fewer than eight cities with appropriate venues and a record of experience in hosting large-scale sporting competitions (including the 2008 Olympic Games), the award was not a foregone conclusion. Or at least it wasn’t, until the Philippine delegation led by Samahang Basketbol ng Pilipinas president Manny V. Pangilinan made its clueless, sentimental pitch.

Backed up by actor Lou Diamond Phillips, who brought “being available for the event” to the table, and boxer/itinerant Congressman Manny Pacquiao, who is to basketball what Michael Jordan was to minor-league baseball, MVP’s team went all-in on the “heartware” pitch, essentially trying to convince the FIBA board that the Philippines deserved to host the world tournament because Filipinos really, really, really like basketball, and would help to promote the sport on a global scale because they are among the world’s most active social media users.

As yesterday’s editorial pointed out, “love of basketball” is probably taken for granted; countries that love a different sport, like football or buz kashi, would not be interested in competing to host the FIBA tournament in the first place. To base an entire bid on sentiment was not only lazy, it was mildly insulting to other countries—the Philippine delegation was essentially trying to convince FIBA that Filipino basketball fandom is somehow superior to everyone else’s, which is a weird and ultimately ineffectual argument to make.

Of course, MVP and his team (with special guest star Lou Diamond Phillips) likely felt that they would lose if it came down to a comparison of available facilities, and so sought another angle. Unfortunately, those hard resources —arenas to hold games, roads, rails, and airports to move fans around, and hotel rooms for them to sleep in—are really the only basis for selection. And while China does have more of everything, the FIBA tournament is something the Philippines could easily manage, given the amount of time to prepare for it.

As of now, the country has at least three arenas (the INC-owned Philippine Arena in Bulacan, the Araneta Coliseum, and the Mall of Asia Arena) suitable for FIBA tournament games. By sometime next year, the KJC Kingdome being built by Apollo Quiboloy’s religious sect in Davao and designed to hold about 50,000 people will be completed; an arena at SM Seaside City in Cebu should be ready the following year; and although their future is now in doubt due to the loss of the 2019 FIBA bid, additional arenas in Bacolod and at the Solaire Complex in Parañaque would have also been available.

If the Philippine delegation had focused less on just “puso” and more on how the country is translating its puso into appropriate venues, improved transport infrastructure, and additional lodging—in other words, if it had approached the FIBA bid in a business-minded way rather than appealing to emotion—it would have had a strong chance to win. The fact that China has hosted numerous international sporting events is not a complete advantage; decision-makers who have experienced the atrocious air pollution in Chinese cities, who have been frustrated by Chinese restrictions on the internet, or who may be wary of political fallout might be inclined to give an alternative country a chance, if that alternative could clearly demonstrate its capacity.

The financial windfall that MVP’s team lost by choosing to make a bid presentation that couldn’t have been any more useless had it been presented in the form of an interpretive dance is astounding. According to FIBA statistics, the 2014 tournament hosted by Spain directly contributed 265 million euros (about P13.26 billion) to the Spanish economy. With 672,000 spectators attending 76 games—and all the while eating, drinking, booking hotel rooms, visiting shops and other entertainment, and using local transportation—ticket sales reached 83 million euros (P4.15 billion), while corporate sponsorships, which over the year-and-a-half marketing run-up to the start of the tournament had an estimated reach of 40 million people, generated a further 212 million euros.

The VAT on P4.15 billion in ticket sales alone would be P498 million; a rough estimate of the overall lost tax opportunity for the government is about P1.91 billion.

Those kinds of numbers are not earned with puso, and likewise, losing out on a financial opportunity of that magnitude is not absolved with “sorry, we did our best,” when clearly that is not the case. Certainly, the Philippine team could have done everything right and still lost the bid, and if that were the outcome, they wouldn’t deserve such harsh criticism. But they didn’t do everything right; they carried an obnoxious sort of presumption of the rest of the world’s appreciation for “Filipino spirit” into an investment pitch, and got the result that sort of approach deserved.

ben.kritz@manilatimes.net.

Share.
loading...
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

6 Comments

  1. Yes I believed with the comment of the author of this article. When I was watching the proceedings, I noticed that our team failed to showcase our capability of accommodating the guests and also the past experiences of hosting international events such as ASEAN Games etc. that unlike China was able to showcase the eight (8) cities with world class hotels that are equipped with 100,000 beds. Plus they were able to showcase their experiences when hosting international events such as the 2008 Summer Olympics. Our Philippine team just merely banking on the emotion pumping our left chest with chanting about the love of the game and emphasize the word “puso”. Let us face it, bidding an international event is not just about emotion or love of one’s sport but realities of delivering the goods so to speak i.e. accommodations, transportation, food, venues or security etc. If i were in the team, I would have suggested to MVP that AVP (Audio Visual Presentation) must be focused on the delivery of logistics such as mentioned above. To reiterate, they should have mentioned the capability of the Philippines to accommodate number of guests in all cities where the venues are and our past hosting experiences of international events. The Philippine team miserably missed these in their AVP.

  2. Manny Pangilinan is one of the top CEO’s of the country so he is definitely a facts and numbers man. Maybe he wasn’t serious, he just wanted the publicity.

  3. Basketball lovers would surely choose the Philippines over China. We have passion and we love the sport. Except those who voted are not basketball fans but mindless bureaucrat. The President of FIBA is so rotund hardly an athlete. If infrastructure is the case then only Japan and China will qualify. What happens now to promotion of basketball which the FIBA promotes