How many people actually work for
Utd if they can make that many redundant and the business still function..?!
I googled it. 1,140
Utd if they can make that many redundant and the business still function..?!
I googled it. 1,140
Club ownership | Senior management team talk
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
People saying this club and that club operate with less staff. Well maybe their setup is actually in the 21st century, so can operate with less people efficiently.
Mistakes were made over the last year, and we can't afford too many right now. But the reason we are in such a tight situation is the Glazers and them only.
Manchester United shouldn't have so little room to maneuver. Manchester United should be able to make a couple of mistakes - like all clubs do - without it having big repercussions. Especially when some (ETH, Ashworth) aren't really that expensive in terms of football nowadays.
The Glazers know Jim is impatient and desperate for success, they have that over him
What do you expect a person working for the Glazers (Fergie) or their partner (Ratcliffe) to do.
Ultimately, no matter when Fergie or Ratcliffe think of them, you'd expect them to maintain a good relationship.
Go to their heirs, I presume.
I did wonder.
I think they commited to a system that has become dated, when most of the rooms/boxes were built it was more of a decent steak and a nice red wine type of guest, easily pleased because of the quality of football, you'd probably be looking at a 5% veggie allocation with not much uptake. The same Menu was rolled out across most of the stadium so it was easier, nip next door and see how many cheesecakes they've got spare were running low. Now it's a different food offering in every part of the stadium, one kitchen sent an all you can eat buffet from the left side, a basic plated menu from the right side and a fine dining package from the middle of the pass to the 10 boxes that were on a different menu to the 50 boxes from the next kitchen, the place is tied up in knots, there is no flow to the place, bolt on rooms connected to each other.
The same thing that happened when Malcolm kicked the bucket. We get some funny memes on social media and their hellspawn children inherit the club.
Ratcliffe didn’t just come in and see the debt as he had full access to the accounts for the best part of a year before coming in so knew the state of the club yet instead of giving the parasites a take it or leave it offer which would have see the parasites forced to sell as the club could no longer afford the debt on top of the outgoings.
What Ratcliffe has done is give the parasitic cnuts a fecking lifeline just so Ratcliffe could get a seat at the table, has everyone forgotten that this is a man rapidly approaching his mid 70’s ? Rather than taking a minority share why didn’t he partner up with another multi billionaire and buy the parasites out completely ? Or sell off all interests in Ineos to buy United outright ?
What is Ratcliffe fixing ? We wasted £25 million over a 5 month period in hiring Ashworth, extending ETH after dithering, fired ETH and his staff weeks later, paid to bring in Amorim and his staff then paid off Ashworth on his way out too and all of that is a hell of a lot more than the 450 working class people that have lost their jobs would have earned and I’ve not included spending £180 million on ETH’s players during the summer either.
If they really want to save money why don’t all the directors across both Ineos and the parasites all forgo any salary seeing as their all millionaires and billionaires so don’t need the money, maybe start really showing that Ineos want to “put the Manchester back into Manchester United” and that the club is the most important thing.
I wouldnt call them "Great" people, If I am their partner.
As for Sir Alex, when did I bring him up? I never said an employee should speak out against them, I said if I were an employee at the club, I would start looking for another job as I would be ashamed to be associated with the club at the moment.
Maybe have to hope if not sold the club already their kids want to sell.
Yeah all the focus should be on the Glazers, their combination of greed, neglect and incompetence is the root cause of all the problems. Whether these solutions are justified or correct is something different entirely.
It’s all quite strange though, Glazers are still the majority owners yet the narrative has shifted entirely to blaming SJR for everything. The club is in a state on and off the pitch and won’t be fixed quickly. Any new stadium is years away if it’s even feasible at all, there’s no quick profit from cleaning the books a bit.
If the Glazers aren’t selling up anytime soon, which appears to be the case, this just all feels like a massive waste of time because we’re stuck in limbo with he current ownership as it is.
That would depend on the contents of their respective wills.
You didn't bring Fergie up. But I think it's totally hypocritical to criticise Ratcliffe when he gives them a compliment while Fergie can do the same and get away with it.
For instance, in 2012: "I am comfortable with the Glazer situation. They have been great," he said. "They have always backed me whenever I have asked them. I have never faced any opposition. They have always been as sensible as they can be in terms of financing the club. They have to invest in the team to maintain the value of their asset".
So what if he's their employee? He doesn't need to diss them, of course, but he doesn't have to compliment them either.
Wonder if other board member take turns in taking it for a walkies.His child gets a seat on the board.
That's only full time, the nature of the buisness requires mainly casual/agency staff, particularly in the stadium, the cuts are affecting these two groups too.
The idea would be not to spaff £40m a time on players that aren't adding value when the club can't afford that (somewhat clearly).
This is effectively like cutting costs by giving your kids tesco value noodles for dinner, because you've spent your wages on FIFA coins. The amount wasted on players this season alone would eclipse the cost of a few stewards, admin staff, and some sandwiches
Probably a bunch of their family racing to their houses to find things to sell
Can’t imagine there’s a genuine emotion in that family unless it is money related
Oh and I’ll be fecking laughing my arse off.
The other siblings wanted to sell didn't they. It was these two and the type of shares they held that let them ride roughshod over their brothers and sisters.
I was thinking they might not be far off but they are only in their late 50s/early 60s.
Malcolm ratted about until he was 85.
Any chance their heirs are feckboys/girls who have no interest in football and/or business and just want a few hundred million to party?
They won't die, they'll be reanimated in an even uglier, lizard type form.
I always struggle with posts like this. Because I’m never sure if it’s ill informed, wumming or blinkered. And what makes it worse is the vast majority of this stuff is public information (unlike a lot of clubs, we’re listed).
“admirable” The Glazers wasting over half a billion but Ratcliffe knocking £100m off our RCF (and other stuff) is admirable? Half a billion pounds gone in seven years, and not a single penny put in and for the first time ever, someone stops dividends, injects own money and reduces our debt/debt servicing costs. That’s not admirable, that’s a fecking lifesaver for a business that was close to running out of cash so would have failed, taken on more expensive debt or gone to some tw@ttish US fund who’d milk us for years. I don’t like any of those options t.b.h.
What other buyers? The imaginary bid from Jassim? Again, public information. Ratcliffe wanted to buy the lot/majority and was quoted $10bn.. market cap was about 4 I think, it’s under 3 now. Ratcliffe and his team have done more deals of this size (and bigger) than the Glazers could dream of, he doesn’t need to copy like some moron in a classroom exam.
Ten Hag would have got that compensation if we’d sacked him before, we didn’t give him a new contract, we took up the option with same comp terms. Was the decision flawed… yes, I think it was, did it cost us $s… no. Ashworth… absolutely.
What are the senior management paid? How much are the high ranking members paid? You’ll have that info yes?
The company I work for makes billions a year, it has never offered free lunches and the sector hasn’t since I was 18 on £4k/year. I’ve got mates in the motor industry, engineering, IT, aerospace, retail … none get free lunches or ever have, regardless of salary. It’s a media headline made in heaven for them and yet again, glosses over what the Glazers have done and why we’re in this situation making shitty decisions like redundancies. They’re PEANUTS compared to the goblins disasters, but that’s how you turn a business around.. you make savings and that includes tough/shitty decisions.
I could make a top ten of reasons we’re in this situation.. the Glazers would be all of them.
.
.
.
Is Ratcliffe a multi billionaire… yes. Do people tend to like rich businessmen… not as a rule. Has he made some mistakes … yes. Are they in the same ballpark of ‘cost’ as the Glazers mistakes… not even 1%. Are most of these decisions a result of a decade+ of Glazer moronic mismanagement… absolutely.
Jim Ratcliffe is just as greedy, vile, disgusting and leeching as the Glazers...if anything he's even worse, given he's supposed to be a 'fan'.
He's purely in it to make money...the idea he's doing this for the benefit of the club is absolute fantasy.
He isn't, but even if he was then to do this he's going to have to massively improve the facilities, and get us competing again, to be able to make a profit on the inflated price he paid for his 25 % share.
I don't see the downside.
How does he make money by loading up to £2bn more debt onto the club (taking it to around £3bn in total)?
Or if you think it’s to build the stadium and THEN sell, he will be like 81 years old when that happens. Is there much point.
Hmm maybe we need to get Ineos an assistant like Karl. He made Homer a genius.
My take is he’s had the opportunity to have his dream role, running United. Paid a premium to do this, bitten off a lot more than he can chew. Cannot afford to make us good again, running us like a corporate business rather than a football club and he’s doing a terrible job.
Selfish is the word I would use.
Yeah he's gonna be rolling in it any day now...
Any day now...
Watch...
Any day now...
It's journalistic bear-baiting. I can't say I care for INEOS but, as you've said, the root of the problem is, and will remain as long as they do, the Glazers. Greedy men have been the ruin of this great club. The rot started with Martin Edwards whose eye was always on how much money he could line his pockets with. Taking a leaf from the Irving Scholar book of how to monetize a club and exploit fan loyalty, he set about it with gusto. Once the PLC came into being, United became fair game. I don't need to reheat the history of that time but the chance to stop the leveraged buyout was there but spurned. Who knows how it would have turned out if the Nomura bid had materialized but greed won out .
Two things which I find a bit ironic.
1) Jim made all the staff that work from home come into.the office. What's the chances the food bill has now skyrocketed due to more staff there? hence the reason for these cuts.
2) Jim is a bit Brexit supporter. Brexit caused the pound to collapse against the dollar. Our biggest issue is our debt is in dollars while we are earning pounds.
1) Jim made all the staff that work from home come into.the office. What's the chances the food bill has now skyrocketed due to more staff there? hence the reason for these cuts.
2) Jim is a bit Brexit supporter. Brexit caused the pound to collapse against the dollar. Our biggest issue is our debt is in dollars while we are earning pounds.
Good post.
If he works for free
He is absolutely only in it for the money... I think it borders on delusion to claim otherwise.
For him to make money doesn't require him to do anything other than keep people spending whilst shedding spending...if people think "there's no downside" whilst doing it, even better.
Look, I can admit I could be totally wrong and I really hope we are but I think there is zero chance that the club is going to be challenging any time soon.
Well he's supposedly Britain's richest man, so I'd say that counts by any metric.
In what universe am I cheering for the Glazers?
Of course he's those things, that's how you become a billionaire. He's nowhere near as bad as the Glazers though, and anyone who thinks that after the last 20 years need to get their heads checked!
These cuts are hard to swallow, but he's having to make them because the club is incredibly close to going bust. The debt is coming home to roost. If he hadn't injected his own money we probably would have already gone under. Well, we wouldn't have, because the Glazers would have sold us to private equity instead, who would have cut it up and sold it off, piece by piece
Which is like double what arsenal employ