Are you confident of success in the INEOS era?

I still have faith in them

Stadium stuff is exciting and probably their main focus right now. Got people in place but it’s still new.

Transfer window was poor. And they need to make sure Ten Hag is gone soon after the Villa match.
 
Zero confidence, they're proving to be exactly what everyone expected. More of the same.

I won't get tired of saying Radcliffe stole the chance to get rid of the Glazers from us. This won't get better, if anything we're closer of being a mid table team than champions each year.r
 
He should already be gone but if he's not gone Monday morning at the latest I will have zero optimism.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I still have faith in them

Stadium stuff is exciting and probably their main focus right now. Got people in place but it’s still new.

Transfer window was poor. And they need to make sure Ten Hag is gone soon after the Villa match.
Click to expand...
But the cafe were in raptures at the transfer window...

Cleared all the crap / trouble makers out and brought in loads of quality younguns?
 
I thought people rated their transfer window as 8/10 9/10, 10/10 even. Best in class.
 
Sandikan said:
But the cafe were in raptures at the transfer window...

Cleared all the crap / trouble makers out and brought in loads of quality younguns?
Click to expand...
That’s up to them. I said on here before the window that nothing we do will matter if we don’t get a 25+ goal forward. I maintained it was a failure throughout as there were no goals in the team, and I’ve once again unfortunately been proved right when I didn’t want to be
 
I still have faith in them, but they need to sack the manager as soon as possible. I still like what they did in the transfer market and I think competent coaching can do wonders for the squad. Giving Erik another shot was a mistake and a choice I didn't agree with but everybody makes mistakes, it's about how they'll act now.
 
Think it’s pretty harsh to suddenly blame INEOS. They got off to a very impressive start both structure building and transfer. Let’s be honest it surprised many many for good reasons, including me.

At this stage, unless if you was saying their management and boardroom additions & signings were bad / awful in the summer then you can’t really say they are bad now. Things now are really just down to ETH and players.

Of course this can change, but if you were impressed by them in the summer you can’t say they are rubbish 2 months later

Yes they haven’t been perfect etc I thought Bruno getting a new contract was a mistake, and would have preferred a shock statement sale of Bruno or Rashford in the summer, ideally both. The dithering over ETH was good also.


But overall I give them an 8/10 so far. Notmally it would take until next year for that to change, but now it depends on manager and who replaces (if he gets sacked )
 
When The Glazers took over they won titles in their first seasons, does anyone think INEOS could that hmm?
 
The longer that Dutch fraud is our manager, the more convinced I get that Ineos are fecking clueless. A blind person can see that we are going nowhere but the committee of half a dozen experts we assembled cannot see that.
 
You guys are working under the assumption this season's results matter at all to INEOS. They don't. Every move they made was clearly done with an eye to the next 2-3 seasons, not this one. You could finish 10th and it wouldn't matter, because this isn't year 1, it's year 0, as far as they're concerned. It's why they confirmed Ten Hag in the first place
 
giorno said:
You guys are working under the assumption this season's results matter at all to INEOS. They don't. Every move they made was clearly done with an eye to the next 2-3 seasons, not this one. You could finish 10th and it wouldn't matter, because this isn't year 1, it's year 0, as far as they're concerned. It's why they confirmed Ten Hag in the first place
Click to expand...
And evaluating their leadership on a minute by minute basis is incredibly silly and short sighted yet you only need to scroll slightly up to see people getting carried away. Even if we won the first five games it wouldn't prove that their plan is or isn't working.
 
I’ve seen nothing to suggest Man Utd will win another title this century.
 
I'm not sure. It's a lot of hype, attracting people from other clubs. But what have they done so far?

Yes, they will refurb OT, which is welcome, but not exactly a unique intervention. The brand will be fine, but that's not an INEOS thing.

Their dealings with ETH seem muddled, unsettling all parties involved. Who buys the players? And what's the thinking behind the buying policy, as they are not really backing ETH, are they?

It also all seems rather public, which is not a good look.
 
giorno said:
You guys are working under the assumption this season's results matter at all to INEOS. They don't. Every move they made was clearly done with an eye to the next 2-3 seasons, not this one. You could finish 10th and it wouldn't matter, because this isn't year 1, it's year 0, as far as they're concerned. It's why they confirmed Ten Hag in the first place
Click to expand...
What happens in Year 0 affects what you can do and who you can attract in Year 1 and then where you are in Year 2. Fifteen years ago Madrid were in the pits, Barca were running rampant but you guys never accepted wasted seasons like it's becoming the norm at United. Would you have been in a position to sign Ronaldo, Alonso and Kaka without CL football?

And CL footie is a such a low hanging fruit, as bad as we were last season we were, I believe, just 8 points shy of making it and you can pretty much point to matches where, if they had been managed by a competent person, we would have closed the gap.

Ten Hag can't strike the balance between too attacking and too defensive. The sad part is that he doesn't have the goals to show for the risks he takes and its pointless scoring goals if you can't defend. This is who he is and giving him more time is only going to further damage the club, irreparable damage players morale and cost us heavily financially.

That Ineos couldnt see this after the end of last season or after the Liverpool humiliation reflects their incompetence and how we are still in the woods. The Glazers for all their neglect onlyade one big mistake - the failure to recognize the need for a top football operator to run that side for them but they knew when the game was up with a manager.
 
horsechoker said:
And evaluating their leadership on a minute by minute basis is incredibly silly and short sighted yet you only need to scroll slightly up to see people getting carried away. Even if we won the first five games it wouldn't prove that their plan is or isn't working.
Click to expand...
You run a business both in the long and short term. Just because you are taking chronic meds doesn't mean doctors watch you as you bleed out, does it? What happens in the short term affects what you can do in the long term. You don't just watch the team slide like we are doing and just shout long term, you act to stem the slide.
 
AneRu said:
You run a business both in the long and short term. Just because you are taking chronic meds doesn't mean doctors watch you as you bleed out, does it? What happens in the short term affects what you can do in the long term. You don't just watch the team slide like we are doing and just shout long term, you act to stem the slide.
Click to expand...
It's a business not a person.
 
horsechoker said:
It's a business not a person.
Click to expand...
Still, short term malaise and this isn't even short term we are talking about 19 months of sustained decline in form, has the potential kill off a business if allowed to set in. You don't just run a business by saying it's a three year project so we will assess then, you solve short term problems, address issues that emerge and do all the necessary work to stay on course.
 
horsechoker said:
And evaluating their leadership on a minute by minute basis is incredibly silly and short sighted yet you only need to scroll slightly up to see people getting carried away. Even if we won the first five games it wouldn't prove that their plan is or isn't working.
Click to expand...
We need the champions League money though. Top 4 is the minimum requirement.
 
All of the same mistakes are being repeated by this new regime.
 
The amount of knee jerking on this forum is a sight to behold. It's been a terrible 10 years but that doesn't mean that the structure that has had 3 months together cannot function. Just give it time, accept that this year will be sh*te as the last years have been and try to look to the future.
 
AneRu said:
What happens in Year 0 affects what you can do and who you can attract in Year 1 and then where you are in Year 2.
Click to expand...
They obviously don't think so. And can hold up Arsenal and Liverpool as examples of their thinking being right. They want their Klopp, their Arteta, and weren't going to start their project without their guy in place. Hence sticking with Ten Hag

This is evident by looking at the state of your squad at the end of last season, the financial constraints imposed by PSR, and the profile and total cost of your first signing of the summer
 
LawCharltonBest said:
Paul Merson says United won't win the league in the next 5 years and if they do then the manager who does it should be Knighted

Whereas Sir Jim says he thinks it'll be 2 or 3 years before we start looking like the United of old. He certainly has the pockets to make that happen if he wants to.

Even trying to look at it neutrally (let's say INEOS took over Spurs and targeted Berrada & Ashworth etc) I would think a title in the next 5 years - particularly when Klopp and Guardiola are gone - is doable.

Your take?
Click to expand...
It actually pains me to say but Merson could be right. As much as I trust INEOS (well, if they keep ten Hag I'll lose my faith in them for sure) this isn't a Football Manager game, it's real and there's way too much to fix. We've got still too much players to get rid of and so on. It's an awfully slow process unfortunately. And it's not just about us, of course. Even if INEOS do everything right, there's a serious competition as PL is definitely the strongest championship. To win the PL we have to get better but it would seriously help if one (two, three...) of our main rivals would struggle like Chelsea did for years.
 
Only 3 months since walking through the door, with so much that has to be massively overhauled and sorted out, both on and off the field, yet people here expect instant footballing success purely from INEOS taking charge of overall footballing matters.

Of course most would have hoped that new signings and a clear out of players, would start to yield some positive results already, so it’s understandable we’re very frustrated and annoyed that’s it’s been a disaster so far.
INEOS have given ETH a further chance under the new regime and with some new players, but I’m personally confident he’ll get his cards if there isn’t a dramatic turn around in the next few weeks.

As for future success, I don’t think they’re in this game to fail to compete at the top; but that success isn’t going to happen overnight.
 
Banana Republic said:
Only 3 months since walking through the door, with so much that has to be massively overhauled and sorted out, both on and off the field, yet people here expect instant footballing success purely from INEOS taking charge of overall footballing matters.

Of course most would have hoped that new signings and a clear out of players, would start to yield some positive results already, so it’s understandable we’re very frustrated and annoyed that’s it’s been a disaster so far.
INEOS have given ETH a further chance under the new regime and with some new players, but I’m personally confident he’ll get his cards if there isn’t a dramatic turn around in the next few weeks.

As for future success, I don’t think they’re in this game to fail to compete at the top; but that success isn’t going to happen overnight.
Click to expand...
Surely it’s reasonable to expect over a decade of mismanagement to be fixed in a few weeks?
 
giorno said:
You guys are working under the assumption this season's results matter at all to INEOS. They don't. Every move they made was clearly done with an eye to the next 2-3 seasons, not this one. You could finish 10th and it wouldn't matter, because this isn't year 1, it's year 0, as far as they're concerned. It's why they confirmed Ten Hag in the first place
Click to expand...
Not qualifying for the CL next season carries some pretty big financial hits. Not just the normal loss of revenue from the CL (which is pretty damn big), but there are also clauses in some of our sponsorship deals that if we don't qualify for the CL two years in a row the money we get from those sponsors drop by a significant amount. Somehow despite all our issues over the last decade we've never triggered those clauses before, as we've always made the CL at least every second season.

Actually, just googling it and it sounds like that may have changed, or at least the Adidas kit sponsorship anyway. Instead of losing 30% if we don't qualify two years in a row (which would have been about £22m), it's going to be a £10 loss every season we don't qualify. So I guess for next season specifically it won't hurt as much as it would have under the previous deal.

But that £10m loss in sponsorship from Adidas (and almost certainly more from other sponsors) plus not getting the money from the CL itself has a very significant impact on our finances over the next couple of years. INEOS will certainly care about the results this season due to that.
 
Not sacking ETH after an FA cup fluke was bad but then continuing with him now when it's clearly not working will completely turn me off them if he survives the international break
 
I'm just glad we have a proper structure/management set up. I like their summer transfer business a lot. Let's wait and see what they'll do with the manager position, how soon they get rid of ETH and who they'll get.
 
At least the defence and midfield are fixed now with the addition of Mazraoui, Yoro, De Ligt, Ugarte. Also past players like Martinez, Mainoo, Garnacho, Bruno, Dalot and Casemiro have also proven themselves in defence or midfield.

Upfront there is Rashford, Hojlund and Zirkzee.
 
I have no idea why people are giving them benefit of doubt considering their track record with cycling business as well as Nice. They bottled the first big decision in their tenure by failing to get rid of Ten Hag in the summer. How are they any different to Glazers who also made their big decisions based on fan sentiment? This fanbase is full of emotional sentimental fools who have learned square root of feck all in past 10 years so it wasn't really a surprise vast majority of them started to band together to keep him after cup success. But, INEOS caving into the sentiment and going for a cowardly and safe option makes them no different to Glazers.

To make things worse, we were promised "proper footballing structure" whereby manager is a cog in a wheel as rest of the club including footballing side was going to be modernized. Yet, one thing which they did was extend Ten Hag contract which meant he had complete control over transfers (despite wasting £400m in previous two). So, once again, haven't they compounded problems for us, just like Glazers did with previous managers by allowing them to waste large amounts of money by giving them transfer control? (LVG, Mourinho and Ole)

Folks don't realize but ten Hag has set us back by few years by wasting an enormous amounts of money on players who are simply not good enough and we are looking at a big gaping hole to move them on, something which no ownership (save for oil money) can help us swallow including INEOS if it means a £600m bill. They have failed at every juncture when it comes to helping us on the football side, I have absolutely zero faith in them considering how lethargic they are in his sacking too.
 
GlazersHater said:
Zero confidence, they're proving to be exactly what everyone expected. More of the same.

I won't get tired of saying Radcliffe stole the chance to get rid of the Glazers from us. This won't get better, if anything we're closer of being a mid table team than champions each year.r
Click to expand...
This is an actual danger. Everyone refers to I row being in charge, but they only have a 21.89% voting stake. (The rest of the 25% is made up of class B shares which don’t amount much of anything).

But we don’t k is how much autonomy Ineos actually have. We DO know they are not free to bring an actual cash-rich investment partner to self finance things like debt.

They could be hamstrung when footballing decisions come head to head with accounting decisions: e.g. buyouts on fired managers.

All Ineos is really doing is providing a seemingly magic shield. Every United fan I know are acting like there is a definitive “new era” and the Glazers are gone. But, ironically, Ratcliffe’s involvement could have saved them from being ousted entirely.

There is a weird dynamic that needs to be resolved at United.
 
Bluelion7 said:
This is an actual danger. Everyone refers to I row being in charge, but they only have a 21.89% voting stake. (The rest of the 25% is made up of class B shares which don’t amount much of anything).
Click to expand...
That's not the case. Ratcliffe bought 25% of the Class A shares and 25% of the Class B shares, meaning he had 25% of the voting power. He then invested a further 200m which bought his shares up to 27.6% of each, and by the end of the year will invest a further 100m at which point he'll have 29% of each lot of shares and 29% of the voting power.

Oh, and also it's the Class A shares which don't have much voting power, while Ratcliffe and the Glazers are the only owners of the Class B shares which have 10 times the voting power.
 
There's a picture of Jim Ratcliffe celebrating INEOS Britannia's LV Cup win in Barcelona yesterday which will pit them against Team New Zealand in the America's Cup next week, doubt he's that involved in Utd's day to day operations. He fully owns INEOS Britannia and is listed as a Team Principal so that's likely his priority given that Britain have never won the America's Cup and last qualified for the final series in 1964. Winning the AC is a much bigger achievement than any trophy Utd could possibly garner in the near future, and I do hope the Team New Zealand gets beat so we see the back of the AC75s.
 
MadDogg said:
That's not the case. Ratcliffe bought 25% of the Class A shares and 25% of the Class B shares, meaning he had 25% of the voting power. He then invested a further 200m which bought his shares up to 27.6% of each, and by the end of the year will invest a further 100m at which point he'll have 29% of each lot of shares and 29% of the voting power.

Oh, and also it's the Class A shares which don't have much voting power, while Ratcliffe and the Glazers are the only owners of the Class B shares which have 10 times the voting power.
Click to expand...
Yep. Total misinformation being posted by @Bluelion7
 
Captmfla said:
At least the defence and midfield are fixed now with the addition of Mazraoui, Yoro, De Ligt, Ugarte. Also past players like Martinez, Mainoo, Garnacho, Bruno, Dalot and Casemiro have also proven themselves in defence or midfield.

Upfront there is Rashford, Hojlund and Zirkzee.
Click to expand...
Help us out with a wink when you're being ironic.

Some might think you were being sincere with this post :lol:
 
Jeffthered said:
I'm not sure. It's a lot of hype, attracting people from other clubs. But what have they done so far?

Yes, they will refurb OT, which is welcome, but not exactly a unique intervention. The brand will be fine, but that's not an INEOS thing.

Their dealings with ETH seem muddled, unsettling all parties involved. Who buys the players? And what's the thinking behind the buying policy, as they are not really backing ETH, are they?

It also all seems rather public, which is not a good look.
Click to expand...

I think superficially the way they handled ETH during that FA cup Final period appeared muddled.

But if I think deeper and put myself in their shoes they were most likely taking a holistic view on the managerial situation, weighing up all the pros, cons , mitigating situations and most likely any better options.

Pros. We can’t deny ETH had a good first season.

Cons: Bad league and CL second season. But got to the FA cup final, which we won.

Mitigating circumstances. Last season we were ravaged by injuries. No proper structure above him.

Better options? Were there any better options? Maybe, maybe not.

So what they decided was to keep ETH. I think the new contract was forced due to the news leaking and having to give him credibility. But ideally they should have only kept him with the view of reassessing where we are come Oct/Nov. Now it’s Oct there are no excuses. He needs to go. Ideally they will already have a replacement lined up. If they don’t then it’s pretty bad handling.
 
MadDogg said:
That's not the case. Ratcliffe bought 25% of the Class A shares and 25% of the Class B shares, meaning he had 25% of the voting power. He then invested a further 200m which bought his shares up to 27.6% of each, and by the end of the year will invest a further 100m at which point he'll have 29% of each lot of shares and 29% of the voting power.

Oh, and also it's the Class A shares which don't have much voting power, while Ratcliffe and the Glazers are the only owners of the Class B shares which have 10 times the voting power.
Click to expand...
My apologies, the Forbes and NY times articles were rather dry and I mixed up A and B,. They also listed other shareholders besides the Glazers and Ineos that had enough to earn a percentage of voting right, but that could be old news. 21.8,25,27 … dithering really.

It really doesn’t change the concern though, does it? Do they have a detailed outline of what constitutes “footballing decisions” vs everything else? Would,say, a buyout of a coach be a football decision? Would they have to get approval first because of the financial outlay?

Do they have an agreed plan in place for the Glazers to move on?

Or are the Glazers free to collect money from the team, hold the team back from real change, and allow Ineos to take what in the past would be their heat?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.