Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side
- Thread starter Solius
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
- Status
I think the playing squad have had their wages slashed a bit already by failing to get into the CL but I get your point, they’re paid far too much in general for what they actually produce. I expect that to change now though and any signings made from here on out will be on a more realistic wage within a structure. Hopefully the days of the likes of Sancho and Rashford on over 300 bags a week are very much over!
right, sorry, I just don't click on Daily Mail
Some stupid comments on here about the forthcoming job cuts probably little mommy’s boys that will never have to struggle the people losing their jobs might be women with convenient jobs around chil care or just putting a bit extra in the house it might be older people who have been there years and got no chance of getting another job people like sir tax exile couldn’t give a flying feck about the working class
Yeah apparently the players all had their pay cut by 25% after failing to qualify for the Champions League.
Yes but it was clearly stated in their contracts that if they fail to achieve certain goals, their pay will be cut. So I don't think this can be compared to mass layoffs
Most of these people wouldn’t have been hired in the first place in a club that had proper direction. It’s a fluid industry, people know that getting in. most would be just as quick to leave if they got offered a better job elsewhere and as I said above, Utd is probably still pretty good for the CV.
If they're saving tens of millions it won't be your average employee working in the office, it will be execs on £100K+ salaries plus bonuses...
Right so what exactly do you want them to do? Just keep employing the staff that aren’t even needed and keep treading water or actually try and run the club like it should be?
The article makes for some sad but interesting reading. We missed out on so many talented players because of our indecisiveness. But it's encouraging to read that our scouting network had identified and flagged players like Caicedo, Neto, Musiala and Sesko quite early on in their careers.
Hopefully that decisiveness will change now with the people now in charge. Also interesting detail that Vivell was Berrada's pick.
250 job losses, man. I can’t read that and be happy. Football is cool and all, but feck me.
Feel for those people and I hope they land on their feet.
Feel for those people and I hope they land on their feet.
The people being laid off will recieve generous redundacy payouts with some of the older ones who have there years recieving enough money to see them through to retirement.
Not all of them won't no, length of service is always taken into account when these things happen and I guarantee of people have been there less than 2 years they'll get a nominal payment or feck all
Again I would say this applies far more to our players, otherwise we wouldn't be 8th in the league. We've always managed to be in the top 5 teams for revenue generation worldwide, whereas on the field we've been nowhere near the top 5. One could argue that the non playing staff have done a far far better job than these overpaid players. Yet they're getting the chop first. Let INEOS cut the wages of these players first, then they might be able to justify making hundreds of people jobless.
When see the word streamlining being used it’s just another word for more profit I must be a minority I’m more concerned with people losing their jobs than buying some more overpaid Dutchmen
Generous? You mean less than 20% of what one of our players makes in one week? If that's generous, what the hell are we calling what the players are on then?
Exactly this. We're going to happily spunk this money on overpriced shite this summer and before people go off on me for daring to suggest that United might sign overpriced shite, just look at the last 11 years.
Hey it's worth it though to pay £150k per week to a player with a year's prem experience or £200k per week on a defender who can't get a look in for his national team and can't cement a place in his last two teams. It's Alan at reception that's the problem though. Oh wait Alan's just the easy target.
United are now at the behest of an ultra capitalist so it will be basic redundancy money which is shit
It's obviously shit but you can absolutely see the logic to it without being labelled a heartless monster.
This place will justify extortionate transfer fees and wages but then is all about austerity when it comes to the people right at the bottom. This is meant to be a left leaning forum too. Jesus wept.
What's the logic? United's off the field performance has been miles better than on the field, so what logic is there in firing off the field staff. These guys account for a few percentage of our overall wage bill.
How is there just a few of us against this?
I'm not going to argue the difference between normal employees and premier league footballers.
There is a new interesting article from Mark Critchley and Laurie Whitwell with and interview and info from Lynden Tomlinson
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5539692/2024/07/03/dan-ashworth-manchester-united-recruitment/
Interesting details about Musiala, Caicedo, Sesko, Neto etc.
One part about Stefan Bajcetic was really the cherry on the top of incompetence. We agreed 250k transfer, but our negotiations manager Sam Barnett (appointed by Judge) decided to ring his dad who is an ex-player of Celta and current employee to try and persuade him to pull the kid from the club and save 150k.
Now the kid is in Liverpool and highly rated.
This is the kind of stuff I expect INEOS to fix immediately.
The first two are particularly gutting but just shows what we all knew about how bad Murtough and Woodward were. Like another poster said it's encouraging our scouts identified them early one but disgrace they got ignored. Certainly wouldn't have needed to sign so many now if they got listened to.
Last edited:
It’s interesting to see the vitriol coming INEOS’s way due to some of the decisions taken. People cry out for changes at the club then get upset when those tough decisions are made. Can’t have it both ways. The problem was with the old regime doing everything wrong and now we’re having to course correct. It’s a shame that many people are losing their jobs, but I’m sure they’ll be fine. I’ve been through it myself and know what it feels like. Hopefully the club will support those affected in looking for new work.
Facts. Football has gone off the deep-end if fans are cheering for this and
/or running interference talking about “streamlining”. I’d rather sign one less player this summer if it meant 250 people didn’t lose their jobs just like that.
No worries, not clicking on Daily Mail is perfectly understandable.
Basically Liverpool have just over 1000, City, Spurs, Arsenal and Chelsea have between 600 and 800 ish.
We have over 1100 currently.
Good to see these changes happening in the ground, big things have small beginnings and all that.
It’s not something to cheer but it’s not something to criticise either. This was inevitable, just like Arnold and Murtough getting the boot, just like there will be huge changes to the squad and now there is a new structure there will more comings and goings behind the scenes.
The club has been run by incompetent people for nearly two decades, a lot is going have to change to get it back on track.
Glad for this as I was about to comment that just because we have more staff than our contemporaries doesn't necessarily mean anything. We could have hired people inhouse to do things that other clubs are hiring consultancy firms and the like for. And like this tweet suggests, we hired people for a specific focus that other clubs might not have.
Comparing direct numbers without context of the roles and duties isn't wise.
You're wrong
Not to come across as defending Murtough here but a lot of those appear to have been mostly Woodward. Also, as the article said Murtough was implementing changes to get us more data-focused and was instrumental in getting us to sign Garnacho. Mostly sounds like the hesitancy and similar came directly from the top, Woodward and up.
There's no moving forward without fixing the mistakes made in the past. We start with the reduction of the staff and hopefully overpaying for players is next.
I’m not unless you know the criteria of how/why people have been let go and it is in some way unfair and/or if people haven’t been given a decent redundancy package.
Bizzare logic and justification, unless these hires were on the football side rather than business side they have no relation to how we were run on the football side poor spending wasn't down to a marketing team getting hired or a business consultant being brought in, are ineos not going to try and increase revenues?
How do you know they got ignored. Players go to clubs where they will play or sometimes where they get big money as a 16 year old to do nothing like odegaard. I remember the caicedo transfer discussion before he went to Brighton. We were in the mix but we couldn't sell the project to him, the first team coach who was ole probably couldn't guarantee him the football he wanted.
There was a thread yesterday about a guy who 'discovered haaland' months after ole told united to sign him. Haaland went where his career would progress and made smart choices. Scouting is so so overrated on this forum, what is important is creating space for these players and having that as an essential part of the project. Look at mejbri, amad or pellistri, nice to sign talents, but no opportunities at all for them, they all would have been better at brighton
How do you know they got ignored. Players go to clubs where they will play or sometimes where they get big money as a 16 year old to do nothing like odegaard. I remember the caicedo transfer discussion before he went to Brighton. We were in the mix but we couldn't sell the project to him, the first team coach who was ole probably couldn't guarantee him the football he wanted.
There was a thread yesterday about a guy who 'discovered haaland' months after ole told united to sign him. Haaland went where his career would progress and made smart choices. Scouting is so so overrated on this forum, what is important is creating space for these players and having that as an essential part of the project. Look at mejbri, amad or pellistri, nice to sign talents, but no opportunities at all for them, they all would have been better at brighton
Maybe INEOS have outside consultant companies they can outsource those jobs we are cutting and that would cost less than having full-time employees on payroll. Corporate audits always lead to cost cutting moves like this, my employer went through 2 of those in 2019 and 2023 and the results are always the same - cut jobs, optimise the processes, streamline, outsource to countries with cheap labor bla bla bla corporate garbage.
Just for reference, the INEOS Mercedes F1 team, where they have 1/3 of the company has about 1200 employees which is the highest number from all F1 teams from the unofficial sources online I can see.
Just for reference, the INEOS Mercedes F1 team, where they have 1/3 of the company has about 1200 employees which is the highest number from all F1 teams from the unofficial sources online I can see.
Last edited:
You said it can't be criticised - now you're adding qualifiers to said statement, proving that it can indeed be criticised. Again, you're wrong.
United isn't an institution that's in risk of going kaput by next week or something - I say that to say that there are potential measures that could be broached to prevent job loss of this scale. It's OK if you're with this in pursuit of sporting success - I'm not gonna turn around and call you a monster, but to read potentially 250 people are losing their jobs and saying it can't be criticised is crazy.
- Status