Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side

Status
Not open for further replies.
I personally don't see a problem with so many jobs being terminated.

United has been a gravy train, a free ride for years for both players and staff alike. Giving Phil Jones a new 4 year contract so that he could continue to collect wages while constantly lying on the treatment table is just one example of the horrendous financial mismanagement we've seen over the past 10 years. As much as I hate Abu Dhabi FC, there's no way that they would ever do something like that, because they are well run.

If we are going to get back to the top, we need to show both players and staff that we mean business, which means making tough decisions and being ruthless. No more freeloaders collecting a huge wage for doing feck all. No more "Jobs for the lads FC". If you're not pulling your weight then you need to be shown the door.

Also - Feck the Glazers. It's their incompetence and concern for nothing but what they can leech out of the club that has created this awful culture in the first place.
 
simonhch said:
I love how being an owner and operator of Manchester United has somehow been reduced to a popularity contest. “He’s a knob!”. Okay…..do I care? Not really. I assume pretty much everyone with the wealth to buy into a club of United’s size will be considered a knob by the average fan. There’s no such thing as a purely altruistic, warm hearted, morally pure billionaire who is willing to buy the club and run it in a way that meets the approval of all the fans, while simultaneously echoing all their diverse social and political views.

So, aside from clearing the bar of whether the owner in question is not some front for a murderous, human rights abusing regime, all that matters is the job they do as a steward of the club. So far Ratcliffe has invested his own money, something the Glazers have never done in 20 years, made progress on the stadium, started a massive infrastructure improvement project, and overhauled the executive football side of the club with best in class personnel throughout. And it’s not even been six months. Instead, every time some little headline comes out about the new regime not fixing every issue yet, people trot out silly, petty examples like “well at least the IT department is clean” in some reductive effort to justify their own petty jealousy or agenda.

It’s all so stupid. To get United back to the top is a multi-year project, and yet I have seen more positive restructuring and change in the last four months, than I’ve seen in the last 12 years. And for the first time since Fergie retired, been given the feeling that lasting and meaningful change might not just be possible, but is in fact probable. I never wanted a club owned by some bottomless pocketed nation state, I only ever wanted a club that was self sustainable, intelligently and decisively run, and one that was a positive agent for change in both the local community as well as on a wider level through its foundation. Ineos is clearly putting us on a path for the first two, and time will judge on the third. If they are able to collaborate with local and national government to push ahead with the Trafford Park regeneration project, and deliver a Stadium for the North - as envisaged - then they will have done much to deliver on that goal too. The fact that the Manchester United Foundation has been exempted from planned redundancies also shows that they are not completely the cold, cynical bastards that some would have you believe. Although, let’s all be realists here and acknowledge that to run a massive company efficiently, you are going to have to make unpopular decisions along the way, and objective appraisals rather than emotionally subjective reactions will always be the order of the day. Last time I checked United was a publicly listed company, not a non-profit,

In a limited pool of potential new owners, one full of Oligarchs and human rights abusing national wealth funds, for us to get a self made local billionaire, born minutes from the ground, and a lifelong United fan, I’d say we’ve done pretty well for ourselves. I know some of you make an emotional living off hating on everything United, despite your supposed support of the club, and suck on the lifeblood of your hatred for wealthy successful people to sustain yourselves; but it might shock you to know that someone whose scale of wealth you are opposed to on ideological grounds, can actually be right about some things you care about, and might actually be good for your club.

I heavily opposed Brexit, and think it is one of the all time worst self inflicted economic wounds in history. I heavily disagree with anyone who supported it, on either social or economic grounds. I also think Jim Ratcliffe has already done a great job in taking over the running of the club, and have a lot of belief and optimism in his competency and vision for the future. None of these are mutually exclusive concepts. To not be able to see past one issue (“he’s a billionaire, lynch him!”, “he supported Brexit, he’s a cancer on society”) to objectively analyse an unrelated other issue, is just myopic, exhausting, and self defeating.
Click to expand...

Fantastic post. Well said.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
There is a lot of outrage on social media from fans of other clubs over the rumoured redundances with Sir Jim getting slagged off for it, its hilarious how fans of other teams like to get outraged at any thing our club does.

Who actually made the decision on who should and shouldnt be fired? Its been reported that most of the sackings are people within the commercial side of the club which isnt part of Sir Jim's remit its part or the Glazers remit.
Click to expand...

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5462234/2024/05/01/ineos-manchester-united-economic-control/

Glazers gave INEOS commercial side top hence why we got Berrada.
 
simonhch said:
I love how being an owner and operator of Manchester United has somehow been reduced to a popularity contest. “He’s a knob!”. Okay…..do I care? Not really. I assume pretty much everyone with the wealth to buy into a club of United’s size will be considered a knob by the average fan. There’s no such thing as a purely altruistic, warm hearted, morally pure billionaire who is willing to buy the club and run it in a way that meets the approval of all the fans, while simultaneously echoing all their diverse social and political views.

So, aside from clearing the bar of whether the owner in question is not some front for a murderous, human rights abusing regime, all that matters is the job they do as a steward of the club. So far Ratcliffe has invested his own money, something the Glazers have never done in 20 years, made progress on the stadium, started a massive infrastructure improvement project, and overhauled the executive football side of the club with best in class personnel throughout. And it’s not even been six months. Instead, every time some little headline comes out about the new regime not fixing every issue yet, people trot out silly, petty examples like “well at least the IT department is clean” in some reductive effort to justify their own petty jealousy or agenda.

It’s all so stupid. To get United back to the top is a multi-year project, and yet I have seen more positive restructuring and change in the last four months, than I’ve seen in the last 12 years. And for the first time since Fergie retired, been given the feeling that lasting and meaningful change might not just be possible, but is in fact probable. I never wanted a club owned by some bottomless pocketed nation state, I only ever wanted a club that was self sustainable, intelligently and decisively run, and one that was a positive agent for change in both the local community as well as on a wider level through its foundation. Ineos is clearly putting us on a path for the first two, and time will judge on the third. If they are able to collaborate with local and national government to push ahead with the Trafford Park regeneration project, and deliver a Stadium for the North - as envisaged - then they will have done much to deliver on that goal too. The fact that the Manchester United Foundation has been exempted from planned redundancies also shows that they are not completely the cold, cynical bastards that some would have you believe. Although, let’s all be realists here and acknowledge that to run a massive company efficiently, you are going to have to make unpopular decisions along the way, and objective appraisals rather than emotionally subjective reactions will always be the order of the day. Last time I checked United was a publicly listed company, not a non-profit,

In a limited pool of potential new owners, one full of Oligarchs and human rights abusing national wealth funds, for us to get a self made local billionaire, born minutes from the ground, and a lifelong United fan, I’d say we’ve done pretty well for ourselves. I know some of you make an emotional living off hating on everything United, despite your supposed support of the club, and suck on the lifeblood of your hatred for wealthy successful people to sustain yourselves; but it might shock you to know that someone whose scale of wealth you are opposed to on ideological grounds, can actually be right about some things you care about, and might actually be good for your club.

I heavily opposed Brexit, and think it is one of the all time worst self inflicted economic wounds in history. I heavily disagree with anyone who supported it, on either social or economic grounds. I also think Jim Ratcliffe has already done a great job in taking over the running of the club, and have a lot of belief and optimism in his competency and vision for the future. None of these are mutually exclusive concepts. To not be able to see past one issue (“he’s a billionaire, lynch him!”, “he supported Brexit, he’s a cancer on society”) to objectively analyse an unrelated other issue, is just myopic, exhausting, and self defeating.
Click to expand...
Sticky this post please
 
Escobar said:
So wealthy people with different political views are an automatic red flag to you and give you justifiaction to insult them. Basically you are a jealous hater
Click to expand...

I'm sure that the brexeteer billionaires of the world are happy that someone finally stood up for them.
 
Escobar said:
So wealthy people with different political views are an automatic red flag to you and give you justifiaction to insult them. Basically you are a jealous hater
Click to expand...

You don't become a billionaire without being, at least somewhat of, a twat.
 
It sounds like nonsense but if it is remotely true it will be so funny :lol:

Both of them have been in Chelsea's Academy

 
pratyush_utd said:
17m saving for non essential expenses is huge saving.
Click to expand...
Yup.

Very rough numbers (before the accounting experts pounce), but in my industry where EBITDA is around 10%, to make £17m profit we would need to increase turnover by £170m. When you look at it that way it’s not such a bad decision.
 
Wibble said:
I'm sure that the brexeteer billionaires of the world are happy that someone finally stood up for them.
Click to expand...
I doubt the opinion of jealous people on a football forum is hurting them too much. And if yes they buy another yacht to get over your harsh words
 
simonhch said:
I love how being an owner and operator of Manchester United has somehow been reduced to a popularity contest. “He’s a knob!”. Okay…..do I care? Not really. I assume pretty much everyone with the wealth to buy into a club of United’s size will be considered a knob by the average fan. There’s no such thing as a purely altruistic, warm hearted, morally pure billionaire who is willing to buy the club and run it in a way that meets the approval of all the fans, while simultaneously echoing all their diverse social and political views.

So, aside from clearing the bar of whether the owner in question is not some front for a murderous, human rights abusing regime, all that matters is the job they do as a steward of the club. So far Ratcliffe has invested his own money, something the Glazers have never done in 20 years, made progress on the stadium, started a massive infrastructure improvement project, and overhauled the executive football side of the club with best in class personnel throughout. And it’s not even been six months. Instead, every time some little headline comes out about the new regime not fixing every issue yet, people trot out silly, petty examples like “well at least the IT department is clean” in some reductive effort to justify their own petty jealousy or agenda.

It’s all so stupid. To get United back to the top is a multi-year project, and yet I have seen more positive restructuring and change in the last four months, than I’ve seen in the last 12 years. And for the first time since Fergie retired, been given the feeling that lasting and meaningful change might not just be possible, but is in fact probable. I never wanted a club owned by some bottomless pocketed nation state, I only ever wanted a club that was self sustainable, intelligently and decisively run, and one that was a positive agent for change in both the local community as well as on a wider level through its foundation. Ineos is clearly putting us on a path for the first two, and time will judge on the third. If they are able to collaborate with local and national government to push ahead with the Trafford Park regeneration project, and deliver a Stadium for the North - as envisaged - then they will have done much to deliver on that goal too. The fact that the Manchester United Foundation has been exempted from planned redundancies also shows that they are not completely the cold, cynical bastards that some would have you believe. Although, let’s all be realists here and acknowledge that to run a massive company efficiently, you are going to have to make unpopular decisions along the way, and objective appraisals rather than emotionally subjective reactions will always be the order of the day. Last time I checked United was a publicly listed company, not a non-profit,

In a limited pool of potential new owners, one full of Oligarchs and human rights abusing national wealth funds, for us to get a self made local billionaire, born minutes from the ground, and a lifelong United fan, I’d say we’ve done pretty well for ourselves. I know some of you make an emotional living off hating on everything United, despite your supposed support of the club, and suck on the lifeblood of your hatred for wealthy successful people to sustain yourselves; but it might shock you to know that someone whose scale of wealth you are opposed to on ideological grounds, can actually be right about some things you care about, and might actually be good for your club.

I heavily opposed Brexit, and think it is one of the all time worst self inflicted economic wounds in history. I heavily disagree with anyone who supported it, on either social or economic grounds. I also think Jim Ratcliffe has already done a great job in taking over the running of the club, and have a lot of belief and optimism in his competency and vision for the future. None of these are mutually exclusive concepts. To not be able to see past one issue (“he’s a billionaire, lynch him!”, “he supported Brexit, he’s a cancer on society”) to objectively analyse an unrelated other issue, is just myopic, exhausting, and self defeating.
Click to expand...

Possibly the best post I’ve read in this forum , certainly up there. Well done Sir, I salute you.
 
simonhch said:
I love how being an owner and operator of Manchester United has somehow been reduced to a popularity contest. “He’s a knob!”. Okay…..do I care? Not really. I assume pretty much everyone with the wealth to buy into a club of United’s size will be considered a knob by the average fan. There’s no such thing as a purely altruistic, warm hearted, morally pure billionaire who is willing to buy the club and run it in a way that meets the approval of all the fans, while simultaneously echoing all their diverse social and political views.

So, aside from clearing the bar of whether the owner in question is not some front for a murderous, human rights abusing regime, all that matters is the job they do as a steward of the club. So far Ratcliffe has invested his own money, something the Glazers have never done in 20 years, made progress on the stadium, started a massive infrastructure improvement project, and overhauled the executive football side of the club with best in class personnel throughout. And it’s not even been six months. Instead, every time some little headline comes out about the new regime not fixing every issue yet, people trot out silly, petty examples like “well at least the IT department is clean” in some reductive effort to justify their own petty jealousy or agenda.

It’s all so stupid. To get United back to the top is a multi-year project, and yet I have seen more positive restructuring and change in the last four months, than I’ve seen in the last 12 years. And for the first time since Fergie retired, been given the feeling that lasting and meaningful change might not just be possible, but is in fact probable. I never wanted a club owned by some bottomless pocketed nation state, I only ever wanted a club that was self sustainable, intelligently and decisively run, and one that was a positive agent for change in both the local community as well as on a wider level through its foundation. Ineos is clearly putting us on a path for the first two, and time will judge on the third. If they are able to collaborate with local and national government to push ahead with the Trafford Park regeneration project, and deliver a Stadium for the North - as envisaged - then they will have done much to deliver on that goal too. The fact that the Manchester United Foundation has been exempted from planned redundancies also shows that they are not completely the cold, cynical bastards that some would have you believe. Although, let’s all be realists here and acknowledge that to run a massive company efficiently, you are going to have to make unpopular decisions along the way, and objective appraisals rather than emotionally subjective reactions will always be the order of the day. Last time I checked United was a publicly listed company, not a non-profit,

In a limited pool of potential new owners, one full of Oligarchs and human rights abusing national wealth funds, for us to get a self made local billionaire, born minutes from the ground, and a lifelong United fan, I’d say we’ve done pretty well for ourselves. I know some of you make an emotional living off hating on everything United, despite your supposed support of the club, and suck on the lifeblood of your hatred for wealthy successful people to sustain yourselves; but it might shock you to know that someone whose scale of wealth you are opposed to on ideological grounds, can actually be right about some things you care about, and might actually be good for your club.

I heavily opposed Brexit, and think it is one of the all time worst self inflicted economic wounds in history. I heavily disagree with anyone who supported it, on either social or economic grounds. I also think Jim Ratcliffe has already done a great job in taking over the running of the club, and have a lot of belief and optimism in his competency and vision for the future. None of these are mutually exclusive concepts. To not be able to see past one issue (“he’s a billionaire, lynch him!”, “he supported Brexit, he’s a cancer on society”) to objectively analyse an unrelated other issue, is just myopic, exhausting, and self defeating.
Click to expand...

Great post.

It's a shame a lot of the things you are addressing in your post is being led by staff members.
 
simonhch said:
I love how being an owner and operator of Manchester United has somehow been reduced to a popularity contest. “He’s a knob!”. Okay…..do I care? Not really. I assume pretty much everyone with the wealth to buy into a club of United’s size will be considered a knob by the average fan. There’s no such thing as a purely altruistic, warm hearted, morally pure billionaire who is willing to buy the club and run it in a way that meets the approval of all the fans, while simultaneously echoing all their diverse social and political views.

So, aside from clearing the bar of whether the owner in question is not some front for a murderous, human rights abusing regime, all that matters is the job they do as a steward of the club. So far Ratcliffe has invested his own money, something the Glazers have never done in 20 years, made progress on the stadium, started a massive infrastructure improvement project, and overhauled the executive football side of the club with best in class personnel throughout. And it’s not even been six months. Instead, every time some little headline comes out about the new regime not fixing every issue yet, people trot out silly, petty examples like “well at least the IT department is clean” in some reductive effort to justify their own petty jealousy or agenda.

It’s all so stupid. To get United back to the top is a multi-year project, and yet I have seen more positive restructuring and change in the last four months, than I’ve seen in the last 12 years. And for the first time since Fergie retired, been given the feeling that lasting and meaningful change might not just be possible, but is in fact probable. I never wanted a club owned by some bottomless pocketed nation state, I only ever wanted a club that was self sustainable, intelligently and decisively run, and one that was a positive agent for change in both the local community as well as on a wider level through its foundation. Ineos is clearly putting us on a path for the first two, and time will judge on the third. If they are able to collaborate with local and national government to push ahead with the Trafford Park regeneration project, and deliver a Stadium for the North - as envisaged - then they will have done much to deliver on that goal too. The fact that the Manchester United Foundation has been exempted from planned redundancies also shows that they are not completely the cold, cynical bastards that some would have you believe. Although, let’s all be realists here and acknowledge that to run a massive company efficiently, you are going to have to make unpopular decisions along the way, and objective appraisals rather than emotionally subjective reactions will always be the order of the day. Last time I checked United was a publicly listed company, not a non-profit,

In a limited pool of potential new owners, one full of Oligarchs and human rights abusing national wealth funds, for us to get a self made local billionaire, born minutes from the ground, and a lifelong United fan, I’d say we’ve done pretty well for ourselves. I know some of you make an emotional living off hating on everything United, despite your supposed support of the club, and suck on the lifeblood of your hatred for wealthy successful people to sustain yourselves; but it might shock you to know that someone whose scale of wealth you are opposed to on ideological grounds, can actually be right about some things you care about, and might actually be good for your club.

I heavily opposed Brexit, and think it is one of the all time worst self inflicted economic wounds in history. I heavily disagree with anyone who supported it, on either social or economic grounds. I also think Jim Ratcliffe has already done a great job in taking over the running of the club, and have a lot of belief and optimism in his competency and vision for the future. None of these are mutually exclusive concepts. To not be able to see past one issue (“he’s a billionaire, lynch him!”, “he supported Brexit, he’s a cancer on society”) to objectively analyse an unrelated other issues are just myopic, exhausting, and self-defeating.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of this. I couldn't give a toss about who or what our owners vote for. It's all about what they do for United, and I don't see much to complain about with Sir Jim so far. Berrada, Ashworth, Wilcox, and Vivell? Just one of those would have improved things massively on the last 13 years, and he's hired all of them.

It will still take time, but he's quickly put some good foundations in, and running a lean organisation is just what he does. A saving of 17 million a year is probably worth 30-40 million of hypothetical new revenue, which is close to a well-negotiated De Ligt. It’s BIG money if you are capable of negotiating good deals on new players. There might be mistakes. it's not as if it's been easy-going at Nice, but he's put an executive management team together much more quickly at United…
 
Last edited:
Are there any potential backroom staff hiring(especially for the pre-season)?

Fitness trainer? set piece coach? sports psychologist? Head of Performance?

We need these positions massively
 
thisisnottaken1 said:
Got to say, I absolutely am pleased with how INEOS are handling things. This wouldn’t have happened if the Glazers were still in control of the footballing side of the club.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right. Going forward I just hope we diversify a bit more from Holland looking at the list above
 
Completing the senior appointments, plans for the ground, Carrington improvements, progressing new players (with a plan!), selling players.

Not only are Ineos/team doing very well, they’re showing up just HOW shite the previous people in control were.

I was confident but I’ll admit I didn’t expect this much, this quickly. It’s so nice to see a club run well… long may it continue
 
Looks like we’re moving on Zirkzee, Ugarte, De Ligt and Branthwaite all at the same time. Never thought I’d see the day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.