Club ownership | Senior management team talk

Big Ben Foster said:
Ok, even if we were to concede all that, you're still ignoring the Ashworth decision and the assistants who were hired and fired this season.

Which goes back to my main point, the penny pinching doesn't move the needle much when they're making costly, poorly thought out footballing decisions.
Click to expand...

Again, I have given you this number multiple times, its cost us £10.4m to get rid of Ten Hag, Ashworth and the staff.

Now, lets say 250 staff members were on a 25k salary average, that is £6.2m a year penny pinch. Now add to that SAF and all the other people who's fees have been revoked. SAF was paid £1m a year.

Now add another 250 staff, so now we are circa £15m saved. Say lunch for only those staff made redundant is £3 per head per day, that is £500k saved. Add to that all the other cuts, you are looking at staffing cuts of £20m a year.

They are looking at getting rid of all our high earners, Rashford, Sancho, Antony, Mount, Shaw, Bruno, Casemiro, out of those I would say 4 might leave in the summer which is a further saving of £40m a year.

So you think £60m saving a year is less than what it cost to get rid of Ten Hag and his staff?
 
mitchmouse said:
Is Ratcliffe related to the fecking Glazers? I said he was the shite option as soon as I heard he was pro Brexit
Click to expand...

He's worse than the Glazers - the Glazers were happy to sit back and watch things burn, Ratcliffe is out front throwing gasoline on top.
 
romufc said:
Again, I have given you this number multiple times, its cost us £10.4m to get rid of Ten Hag, Ashworth and the staff.

Now, lets say 250 staff members were on a 25k salary average, that is £6.2m a year penny pinch. Now add to that SAF and all the other people who's fees have been revoked. SAF was paid £1m a year.

Now add another 250 staff, so now we are circa £15m saved. Say lunch for only those staff made redundant is £3 per head per day, that is £500k saved. Add to that all the other cuts, you are looking at staffing cuts of £20m a year.

They are looking at getting rid of all our high earners, Rashford, Sancho, Antony, Mount, Shaw, Bruno, Casemiro, out of those I would say 4 might leave in the summer which is a further saving of £40m a year.

So you think £60m saving a year is less than what it cost to get rid of Ten Hag and his staff?
Click to expand...
Your posts are nothing but bad-faith straw men.

I criticized a few cases of clear penny-pinching and your rebuttal is to bring up the entire estimated impact of all cost cutting (which you should note I never said shouldn't be done).

Also it's funny how back-of-the-envelope calculations are fine when you do them to push your viewpoint, but unacceptable when used to push back against your arguments.
 
romufc said:
I am not defending them, they have been in charge for a year, they are tasked to make us better from the mess Glazers have left us in.

Right, so should we stop buying players then? Keep the staff and stop buying players in the transfer window, that way no cost cutting will be required and you wont need to moan about spending millions on players and management.

YOu are right, they should have kept Ten Hag, it would be cheaper right?
Click to expand...
We should absolutely do much better with our transfer dealings and also with our coaching / management staff. Spending 10s of millions on sacking people youve hired / extended isnt exactly a great cost cutting approach.

Heres a Newsflash - The costs of making the rum decisions that INEOS have already made, are not in any meaningful way going to be mitigated by the cuts being made to non-playing staff perks. So the idea that they are being made as per some genius plan to improve Utds chances of on and off-field success are nonsense. So why do them? Because they can, and it gives the appearance of doing something, anything. When in reality, them being on the scene pretty much keeps the Glazers on the scene, and so the mess they have made cant be cleared up at all, as they are still effin making it by leeching hundreds of millions out of the club.
 
romufc said:
Again, I have given you this number multiple times, its cost us £10.4m to get rid of Ten Hag, Ashworth and the staff.

Now, lets say 250 staff members were on a 25k salary average, that is £6.2m a year penny pinch. Now add to that SAF and all the other people who's fees have been revoked. SAF was paid £1m a year.

Now add another 250 staff, so now we are circa £15m saved. Say lunch for only those staff made redundant is £3 per head per day, that is £500k saved. Add to that all the other cuts, you are looking at staffing cuts of £20m a year.

They are looking at getting rid of all our high earners, Rashford, Sancho, Antony, Mount, Shaw, Bruno, Casemiro, out of those I would say 4 might leave in the summer which is a further saving of £40m a year.

So you think £60m saving a year is less than what it cost to get rid of Ten Hag and his staff?
Click to expand...

If you have to penny pinch on a lunch allowances, chances are you're a shit business owner

Plus those 250 employees has a job to do regardless of how Inefficient they are. Cutting 250 employee will take a toll somewhere. Even if their job is only cleaning tables it'll meant that players has to clean their own tables. How's that for morale

I'm amazed United has 200 employees they can cut.
 
Someone said:
It's so sad to see people in our fanbase defending these cuts. It's so insignificant that even the Glazers never thought of doing it.

Ratcliffe in all honesty is a horrible person, which comes as no surprise based on what we knew about him prior to the purchase. But I never thought he'd be worse than the Glazers.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense, why is the club in a position that cuts are being made?. How can any Utd fan defend the Glazers, they loaded the club with debt, sucked out huge sums of money for themselves, cost huge sums in interest and have created more debt.

How are you impressed by the Glazers doing nothing to sort out the clubs finances?. The logic is just baffling.

These cuts are shit but this is what happens in companies all over the world when the business is failing and losing money. None of the people let go are responsible for this mess, the ones who are will still make hundreds of millions before they leave.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
Your posts are nothing but bad-faith straw men.

I criticized a few cases of clear penny-pinching and your rebuttal is to bring up the entire estimated impact of all cost cutting.
Click to expand...

The thing you are ignoring is, you can't pick and chose can you? The owners have to look at it as a whole club, not oh this only costs £1000 so lets leave it. You are looking at one item only, rather than the big picture. You dont throw away pounds and save millions, you have to save the pounds too.
 
Sky1981 said:
If you have to penny pinch on a lunch allowances, chances are you're a shit business owner

Plus those 250 employees has a job to do regardless of how Inefficient they are. Cutting 250 employee will take a toll somewhere. Even if their job is only cleaning tables it'll meant that players has to clean their own tables. How's that for morale

I'm amazed United has 200 employees they can cut.
Click to expand...

You do realise majority of businesses don't give free lunches? Are they all bad businesses?

Well, if the business is making 100m losses a year, would you rather go bankrupt or make harsh choices?

Oh yeah you are so concerned about the player morale, players who are paid millions and cannot perform, they should be sacked too then.
 
The biggest drain on the clubs finances is the cost of the leveraged buyout. Unless INEO are going to deal with that, everything else is just BS.
 
Superden said:
We should absolutely do much better with our transfer dealings and also with our coaching / management staff. Spending 10s of millions on sacking people youve hired / extended isnt exactly a great cost cutting approach.

Heres a Newsflash - The costs of making the rum decisions that INEOS have already made, are not in any meaningful way going to be mitigated by the cuts being made to non-playing staff perks. So the idea that they are being made as per some genius plan to improve Utds chances of on and off-field success are nonsense. So why do them? Because they can, and it gives the appearance of doing something, anything. When in reality, them being on the scene pretty much keeps the Glazers on the scene, and so the mess they have made cant be cleared up at all, as they are still effin making it by leeching hundreds of millions out of the club.
Click to expand...

Again, can you show me where it was free to sack Ten Hag in the summer?

Newsflash - It would have cost millions to sack him in the summer too.

The Glazers are not going to sell, so do you want us to try and improve our position or give up and say.. we are happy where we are until the Glazers sell because we dont want to hurt player / staff morale by sacking them. I understand you would rather us make 100m losses yearly than try do improve, but I would rather us try and change things to improve and not give up until the Glazers sell.

I have explained a few times, the cost of non playing staff savings, such as SAF, other icons, 500 staff and other costs could save us up to £22m a year.

I know for you £22m might not seem much, but that is 25% of the losses we are making.
 
How can 200 fired people change operations in United? Are we going to have self cash registers in megastore or what is going to happen? I would understand if we reduce like 50-75 positions, but another 200?
 
Zed 101 said:
I was interested to know if maybe we just have too many staff, think I read we had somewhere near 1200 staff, it seemed a lot of staff (over 500 in admin roles) assuming a lot of matchday staff, I work for a County Council and we have less thank 2k staff, seems madness to me that a club needs over 500 administrators

but then I looked into how many staff at other teams like City, Chelsea, Arsenal etc... and they have 2-3 times that number of staff 2-3.5k staff, it seems absolute madness

Feel very sorry for anyone, anywhere who loses their job but from a pragmatic point of view they are either in a job that is required or one that is not
Click to expand...
So do United if you count matchday staff. We did have a very high number of employees prior to the first round of redundancies, we still do relative to most clubs.

Based on The Athletic figures we were at just over 1,100 prior to the initial 250 cut, so with the additional 150-200 cuts will likely now be dropping to 750-800 which is still slightly higher than Arsenal, but less than Liverpool.
 
Remember the geese said:
No white text. I actually support the fact that someone is trying to rescue us from our financial issues. Yet the majority of course, just want to criticise him.
Click to expand...
There are certain things I agree with and it seems like he wants to cut it all down to build it back up. But some decisions are so draconian and will evidently make the club a terrible place to work. Cutting employee lunches is a crazy move for a business our size. Of all the decisions this is an odd one to state ‘I like what he’s doing’.

Reputable journos are saying that it’s becoming a pretty toxic place to work and that mood is not sustainable.
 
Superden said:
The biggest drain on the clubs finances is the cost of the leveraged buyout. Unless INEO are going to deal with that, everything else is just BS.
Click to expand...
Yep. They are papering over the cracks.

The whole thing is more fecked than I thought reading that statement. A big ticket increase is coming next.
 
macheda14 said:
There are certain things I agree with and it seems like he wants to cut it all down to build it back up. But some decisions are so draconian and will evidently make the club a terrible place to work. Cutting employee lunches is a crazy move for a business our size. Of all the decisions this is an odd one to state ‘I like what he’s doing’.

Reputable journos are saying that it’s becoming a pretty toxic place to work and that mood is not sustainable.
Click to expand...

If that is the case, better for United, there will be voluntary redundancies as no one wants to work at a toxic place right? How come I have not seen any journalists come out and tell us how many people have quite because its toxic place to work.

No one is forced to work at United, if they feel its toxic, they should quit.

Its laughable to think that a business that is making huge losses for 5 years will not make harsh decisions.
 
macheda14 said:
Cutting employee lunches is a crazy move for a business our size.
Click to expand...
Interesting because I had to pay for lunch at the last three large businesses I worked for, all of whom were significantly bigger businesses than Manchester United.
 
DavidDeSchmikes said:
Click to expand...

So 4 weeks of Mason Mount's wages then? The players are the problem, not the common worker trying to put food on the table for their family. I maintain that we have the greediest most underserving bunch of players in the league. Even during COVID they refused to take a paycut whilst the Liverpool players did, players who you could argue actually deserved their wages a lot more. Our players need to take a minor pay cut and do their bit which would save the jobs of hundreds of average working people.
 
Woodzy said:
He's worse than the Glazers - the Glazers were happy to sit back and watch things burn, Ratcliffe is out front throwing gasoline on top.
Click to expand...
Not really sure how you have come to that conclusion. Accepting that there is an issue is the first step towards solving it. The club can no longer to keep it's head in the sand and just move on as usual business.
 
Devil_forever said:
So 4 weeks of Mason Mount's wages then? The players are the problem, not the common worker trying to put food on the table for their family. I maintain that we have the greediest most underserving bunch of players in the league. Even during COVID they refused to take a paycut whilst the Liverpool players did, players who you could argue actually deserved their wages a lot more. Our players need to take a minor pay cut and do their bit which would save the jobs of hundreds of average working people.
Click to expand...

If that is how we look at it.. we might as well sack all the players and give their wages to staff, whats the point of having footballers?

Oh wait, its the footballers that bring the money into the club.

The players are not the only problem though are they? Do you think it was the players fault we got a 1 out of 5 food hygeine rating? Or is it the players fault our stadium roof is leaking?

Is it the players fault that we negotiated huge deals for players?

If you actually notice, INEOS are also trying to reduce player wages.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
Ok, even if we were to concede all that, you're still ignoring the Ashworth decision and the assistants who were hired and fired this season.

Which goes back to my main point, the penny pinching doesn't move the needle much when they're making costly, poorly thought out footballing decisions.
Click to expand...

But the bad football decisions made in the last 12 months don’t cause all these cuts. If they keep running the club how it has been run, keep making bad decisions then the whole thing is pointless.

These cuts do not stem from Ashworth and ETH, if they were both still here these cuts would still be made. We used to budget for being in the quarter final of the Champions League and now we have to budget for not even being in Europe.

Unfortunately the people being punished by these cuts are not responsible but that’s the same for all of us.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
Not really sure how you have come to that conclusion. Accepting that there is an issue is the first step towards solving it. The club can no longer to keep it's head in the sand and just move on as usual business.
Click to expand...

Look, I was all for this club being run more efficienitly, but we are doing things that are creating a very toxic environment and doesn't even come close to solving United's problems on the pitch.

What does saving £1m a year on staff lunch solve in the long run?
 
Roboc7 said:
But the bad football decisions made in the last 12 months don’t cause all these cuts. If they keep running the club how it has been run, keep making bad decisions then the whole thing is pointless.

These cuts do not stem from Ashworth and ETH, if they were both still here these cuts would still be made. We used to budget for being in the quarter final of the Champions League and now we have to budget for not even being in Europe.
Click to expand...

They dont get that, fans who see cuts can only see ETH and Ashworth as a reason why these cuts are happening, ignoring the 100m losses we suffering yearly.
 
JediSith said:
Anyone who can’t see that INEOS was simply a lightning rod strategy or proxy restructuring is blind and has no idea about how cunning business can be. All I will say is imagine if all these cuts were being done directly by Glazers, with no INEOS as a shield.
Click to expand...
You can bet SJR has crunched the numbers but i never understood why he’d willingly spend a fortune to be a human shield to the rats as he tried to sort things out.
 
romufc said:
If that is how we look at it.. we might as well sack all the players and give their wages to staff, whats the point of having footballers?

Oh wait, its the footballers that bring the money into the club.

The players are not the only problem though are they? Do you think it was the players fault we got a 1 out of 5 food hygeine rating? Or is it the players fault our stadium roof is leaking?

Is it the players fault that we negotiated huge deals for players?

If you actually notice, INEOS are also trying to reduce player wages.
Click to expand...
These footballers haven't done such a good job of doing their basic job description have they? The fact is, the average worker is losing their only source of income due to these underperforming, overpaid bunch. All I suggested was that they could take a minimal pay cut which would save literally hundreds of jobs, i apologise for being so heartless to these overpaid, underperforming, lazy entitled millionaires, some of whom think it's funny to poke fun at single mothers. These players haven't done the job they're grossly overpaid for, for over a decade, any other worker would have been fired for far less.
 
We’re doing shit on the field, staff are being made redundant off it and the club is openly trying to sell our better players to raise money

Imagine how fecked everything must be behind the scenes. There’s no coming back the club is finished.
 
romufc said:
Exactly, all I hear is ohh.. lets punish the overpaid players, they are mercenaries, which is true, I agree they need to be reigned in.. INEOS have done that, trying to get rid of all these high earners.

However; there is alot of backroom staff that run United, scouts, stats people, catering, the list goes on.. why are they immune to criticism?
Click to expand...

No business can keep going with big losses year after year. And I get that lots of the decisions now are horrible on a lot of people. We could take that discussion, but it’s actually not the same discussion. A company, for whatever reasons, doing losses year after year, must do exactly what Ineos does now. It must be leaner, it must get profitable again, or else it’s bankruptcy next. So the other discussion goes down to "doing the right thing" and go bankrupt at the same time.
 
UnitedSofa said:
Click to expand...

hq720.jpg
 
NotChatGPT said:
It doesnt benefit the Club and its supporters to Get control over our insane expenses before it goes tits up?
Click to expand...

Yeah but it’s a sham isn’t it

The debts dwarfing all these small savings, the Glazers taking money out over the years I could go on there’s one reason this is all happening
 
It does seem like it's all too much at once, which reeks of desperation which means they know what is coming down the road. I'd say we are done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.