Given a budget of 3.000.000$, as I grossly calculated, it would mean to pay 250 people (players, unpires, coaches, maybe some clerical staff to boot) 1.000$ a month (on the average).
This would not be appealing at all in England or Australia given the gap in cost of living. In Zimbabwe, as I wrote, it wouldn't make you rich but it wouldn't be ditched by many players. at least 200 would sign for it.
So most of the budget from ICC wouldn't be touched.
On the other hand, by having 200 people committed to be cricketers 12 months a year, you may reasonably expect to have decent local leagues and hopefully some stars will come out of the pool in a few years.
You don't have a serious business with less than 200 staff. You can't have serious business if people are not allowed to commit for the whole year.
The other, not too expensive issue, is YouTube video coverage.
By televising Zim leagues in a proper way you may get audience (from elsewhere) and hopefully sponsorship. Sponsors are not to be madatorily aiming at the Zimbabwe market. Sponsors are where the YouTube audience is.
Presently YouTube Zimbabwe cricket broadcasting is unacceptably too poor. YOn the other hand you can get decent footage with an investment which is not prohibitive at all.
To give an example: last week of April and first week of May the European Cricket Series (ECS) were held in Milan, on the ground of MilanCC, the club where I'm the president.
I first thing acknowledge that the quality of my ground is indecent comparing to most of grounds in Zimbabwe. Secondly ECS is a meaningless T10 tournament with some chapters in continental Europe.
Given that, all matches were YouTube televised with adequate cameraman (one only) skill.
Average viewership was around 2.000 in a Country, as Italy, where cricket is an extremely marginal sport.
https://www.ecn.cricket/series/fancode- ... 3-ecs23296