"CWI’s 2025 financial report, it’s PR,”

Cricket West Indies’ (CWI) recently released financial report has come under heavy criticism from renowned chartered accountant and economist Mariano Browne, who has described it as a “PR document." In a review of its financial performance, CWI disclosed that revenue was down from just over US$88 million in 2024 to close to US$41 million for the year 2025. It further revealed that in 2025 it recorded a net income loss of US$28.5 million, compared to a net surplus of US$22.6 million in 2024. CWI also said its cash resources had fallen from US$17.5 million in 2024 to US$1.7 million in 2025.

The report failed to provide necessary details on how the money was being utilized. It gives a top line that says "$88 million," but how is it broken down? How did it go between the various tours? What did the various tours contribute? “Those numbers are not in the document, and it has to be intentional because they said they were going to be transparent, but if you’re going to be transparent, then you need to know what the numbers are, and those numbers are not visible. “So from that basis, all you’re doing is making an objective assessment on the very large numbers, not on the actual details that happened. What tour contributed what? Did they make more money on this tour? Did they lose money on that tour? You can’t tell that, and you can’t come to any conclusions on that. You just know that this is the total amount of cash that they generated, and that’s it,” Browne said.

“…It doesn’t speak with any degree of confidence in terms of what is going to happen next year and how much cash they’re going to generate. They did say that they don’t owe any bank any money and they are negotiating new contracts and sponsorship deals, but no details are given with regard to what the sponsorship deal means in the form of cash or what it would pay for.” Browne maintained that while the report was “nice and glossy and looks good," it did not give a clear understanding of the operations of West Indies cricket. When asked to rate it, he said based on what was presented he had no choice but to give it a failing grade. “As a comprehensive report on the state of West Indies cricket, it would get zero. On the basis of a financial statement to give me an insight, it would get a minus. In terms of a PR document, it will be a big plus because it’s PR,” Browne said.

@sgtdjones

As a PR document it would fail for me, as we just losing money, in my opinion. And our opinion is all we can give, if he says it lacks facts.

If that's the case they here needs to be some sort of forensic audit of the accounts.

Also, the ftp gives boards advanced notice of when the likes of England and India will be touring and thus they should be preparing themselves for how to best spend money when they will have touring nations that don't bring in revenue.

@natty_forever

Natty, you’re right to call it what it is; the document reads more like a polished PR release than a transparent financial statement.

If Cricket West Indies insists on positioning itself as a private entity, one that enjoys tax concessions and privileges unavailable to ordinary Caribbean citizens, then it carries an even greater obligation to disclose its finances with clarity and completeness. What’s presented falls short of that standard.

There is no meaningful breakdown of revenue streams: nothing that clearly shows what is earned from individual tours, which tours operate at a loss, or how television rights, gate receipts across the region, ICC distributions, and sponsorship income are accounted for. Equally absent is any serious treatment of the financial implications of using government-funded stadiums or the quantifiable benefit of tax exemptions.

On the expenditure side, the opacity continues. There is no detailed accounting of cash reserves, interest income, or outstanding bank loans. Head office costs are not properly itemized; rent, administrative salaries, and operational overheads are bundled or implied rather than transparently stated. The same applies to coaching structures: no clear picture of what is spent on coaches across territories or the true cost of staffing tours and hosting series.

Perhaps most concerning is the lack of accountability in developmental spending. Funds reportedly distributed to territorial boards are not accompanied by verifiable documentation showing how those monies are used. Without that, claims of investment in the game remain unsubstantiated.

Even governance costs, such as board of directors' expenses, are either vaguely presented or omitted altogether.

In short, the absence of granular, verifiable detail suggests this is not a transparent financial disclosure but a curated narrative. For an organization benefiting from public concessions while operating in a region where cricket holds deep cultural and economic significance, that is simply not good enough.

Sarge

@natty_forever

I stand by my comment.

The incompetent CEO is useless. and must, be released./fired.

Sammy tweeted:

If the CEO is useless, why should I buck the trend

@Edrich

Your comment is shyt so fucking what. Just another low life Yaadie hater.

@WI_cricfan

Which came first, the chicken or the egg...

@Edrich

The incompetent CEO is useless. and must, be released./fired.

How can a new CEO be responsible?

He hasn't had the time to develop plans that must be approved by an outdated board of directors.

Then he has a battle with the stakeholders.

What did the last CEO accomplish in over a decade at the helm?

@sgtdjones

The truth does not matter to the lickers! And as a result of all this licking, nuff shyt they spewing.

"CWI president, Dr Kishore Shallow welcomed Dehring’s appointment, describing him as “the best of the best”."

@sgtdjones

the financial graph, is showing a precipitous line , throughout the tenure of the current, CEO.

Usually when you go to the grocery store the receipt shows how much the chicken, lettuce and onions cost. They don't just give you the total price. It seems Cricket West Indies live in a completely different world from everyone else.

@Edrich

the financial graph, is showing a precipitous line , throughout the tenure of the current, CEO

A precipitous drop would imply a sharp, clearly visible decline tied to his time in charge. But the scenario shows he's just stepped in while the organization was already in the red, and the early period of his tenure is taken up with assessment, audits, and planning. That phase typically doesn’t produce a dramatic new drop; it reflects conditions he inherited.

“Any financial graph would show a steep decline that began prior to the current CEO’s appointment. When he took over, the organization was already operating at a loss. His initial months have been focused on reviewing audited financials and developing a recovery plan, rather than producing immediate changes in performance. As a result, no new precipitous drop can be attributed specifically to his tenure so far.”

In other words, the “precipitous line” belongs to the period before he arrived, not to the actions he’s taken since.

@sgtdjones

He was hired to charge the tide, not make worse.