Tom Van Persie
No relation
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2012
- Messages
- 27,811
This stuff all started earlier in the year before Berrada was on the job. It's part of why Blanc replaced Patrick Stewart as interim CEO. It's a brief from INEOS.Pardon my ignorance but something that I'm curious about. SJR is obviously getting all the blame at the minute for all the negative publicity from cancelling parties, reducing bonuses etc, but is all this not Berrada's job as CEO? Not seeing anyone mentioning him. Is it just that the media get more engagement/clicks via SJR?
United fans seem to forget that we are a business as well as a football club. We aren't a small community club, this is a global organisation with many moving parts. Bottom lines must be met, balance sheets balanced. We need to make money, it may sound harsh but it's the reality. If 70k United fans in Manchester strike and say they won't go to Old Trafford again, another 70k will replace them instantly. Seats will be filled. INEOS know this.What's tone deaf about it? We are a business, with tickets in more demand than Fulham's. The same fans crying about this, are the same ones who want a refurbished Old Trafford/ new stadium, that laugh about how the club's facilities are run down and that want impactful new signings every summer. In order to do these things, we need to generate revenue and keep costs low. If we're being told that other teams at a similar stature are operating with less employees or have higher ticket prices; a smart club, who has debt and are struggling on the pitch would try to ensure that they are at least in the same vicinity of operational efficiency as their competitors, in this case that would mean letting go of unneccesary positions or hiking ticket prices.
Yes, better than nothing i suppose.... Tbh everyone was expecting nothing from Ineos anyway@vanderpants Did you get your £40 M&S voucher?
Worse position than ever. Give over.I never really felt the Sir Jim buy-in was in the best interests of the club from the start and their tenure seems to have been a disaster so far with one piece of negative publicity after another and the club looks in a worse position than ever.
I still fully believe that accepting the offer that was on the table for the Glazers to sell their enrire share holding and leave was the best option for tbe club and feel that the club would likely be in a much better position now if we had have done
I never really felt the Sir Jim buy-in was in the best interests of the club from the start and their tenure seems to have been a disaster so far with one piece of negative publicity after another and the club looks in a worse position than ever.
I still fully believe that accepting the offer that was on the table for the Glazers to sell their enrire share holding and leave was the best option for tbe club and feel that the club would likely be in a much better position now if we had have done
How has it not been? Would you prefer we continued burning through money with no structure and get relegated?
Due to a manager that was hired under the GlazersWe are closer to relegation now than we was at any point under the Glazers control
Yes, better than nothing i suppose.... Tbh everyone was expecting nothing from Ineos anyway
Exactly; we will never make real progress in developing the team on the pitch until the team off the pitch gets things sorted. I suspect Ruben has been told to sort out the squad and avoid relegation as minimum this season, anything else will be a bonus.I guess they'll be unpopular to some for making tough decisions, and doing what needs to be done to fix some of the damage by the previous regime. A bit like labour I suppose
Where's the like button?I never really felt the Sir Jim buy-in was in the best interests of the club from the start and their tenure seems to have been a disaster so far with one piece of negative publicity after another and the club looks in a worse position than ever.
I still fully believe that accepting the offer that was on the table for the Glazers to sell their enrire share holding and leave was the best option for tbe club and feel that the club would likely be in a much better position now if we had have done
Only scouts, moderators, and admins can “like” posts.Where's the like button?
I know, it was a way of saying that I thought the post was good.Only scouts, moderators, and admins can “like” posts.
I understand that contract extension is a thing to forget.Due to a manager that was hired under the Glazers
I think Ratcliffe is taking the Machiavellian approach to running the club. In his political treatise "The Prince", Machiavelli famously argued that in order to be a respected leader, a new ruler must be perceived as incredibly harsh, and must be feared.
This in-turn benefits his subjects, because after an initial "shock and awe" period, there should be a period of stability, as coups and general crime are severely punished which discourages further unruly behaviour.
Longer term, the ruler can start to show more leniency - as his reputation now proceeds him, he no longer risks being seen as a soft touch, his territory is stable and his subjects are happy.
We have heard SJR talk about "dumb money", about a culture of mediocrity etc...I think his goal, in cancelling staff parties, making staff redundant, calling people back into the office, "sacking" SAF etc...is to say "the gravy train is over"...this club is no longer a soft-touch run on sentiment and emotion. It's a business AND it's an elite sports team.
SJR is a very smart man. He's a self-made billionaire. He's not some idiot who "borrowed" £100m from his father and bankrupted just about every business he ever started. He's not some Eton-educated Trust-fund idiot. He made his money through savvy business deals and ruthless decisions. He knows that taking £60 off staff and cancelling a party has no impact whatsoever on the clubs finances and he also knows it will be unpopular...so why do it?
Think about it...we're talking about PSR...but reducing staff bonuses from £100 to £40 does nothing. It doesn't even register. Even removing SAF, for example, only saves £2m per annum. That's less than two months salary for Marcus Rashford.
We saw over the Summer that the club raised more in transfer funds than it ever has before. We saw McTominay leave after being with the club from the age of 6. We saw players released on free transfers. Hangers-on like DvdB moved on for effectively nothing. Rashford will be next, his card is marked. No way on God's green Earth SJR continues to hand him £325K of his hard-earned cash every week.
I honestly believe it's all about setting new standards. Rule with an iron fist, send a message. In time, we'll see this change, I an sure...once the club starts to win again and SJR and his team are satisfied the "cultural reset" is complete, I don't think we'll read stories about staff losing £60 at Christmas.
At the moment, we're all feeling it. Staff have lost bonuses or been made redundant. Fans have seen ticket prices increase. Players have been let go or face uncertain futures. The executive team is not safe, as we saw with Ashworth, nor was SAF.
Just a couple of times, He is a nice bloke, much friendlier than Eric. At the moment it seems ok, he doesn't give them a lot of time off which could become an issue which Eric found outWell shucks.
Met Ruben yet? How's the staff taking to him?
This post is becoming more and more astute by the day. High profile sacrificial lambs at every corner of the business.I think Ratcliffe is taking the Machiavellian approach to running the club. In his political treatise "The Prince", Machiavelli famously argued that in order to be a respected leader, a new ruler must be perceived as incredibly harsh, and must be feared.
This in-turn benefits his subjects, because after an initial "shock and awe" period, there should be a period of stability, as coups and general crime are severely punished which discourages further unruly behaviour.
Longer term, the ruler can start to show more leniency - as his reputation now proceeds him, he no longer risks being seen as a soft touch, his territory is stable and his subjects are happy.
We have heard SJR talk about "dumb money", about a culture of mediocrity etc...I think his goal, in cancelling staff parties, making staff redundant, calling people back into the office, "sacking" SAF etc...is to say "the gravy train is over"...this club is no longer a soft-touch run on sentiment and emotion. It's a business AND it's an elite sports team.
SJR is a very smart man. He's a self-made billionaire. He's not some idiot who "borrowed" £100m from his father and bankrupted just about every business he ever started. He's not some Eton-educated Trust-fund idiot. He made his money through savvy business deals and ruthless decisions. He knows that taking £60 off staff and cancelling a party has no impact whatsoever on the clubs finances and he also knows it will be unpopular...so why do it?
Think about it...we're talking about PSR...but reducing staff bonuses from £100 to £40 does nothing. It doesn't even register. Even removing SAF, for example, only saves £2m per annum. That's less than two months salary for Marcus Rashford.
We saw over the Summer that the club raised more in transfer funds than it ever has before. We saw McTominay leave after being with the club from the age of 6. We saw players released on free transfers. Hangers-on like DvdB moved on for effectively nothing. Rashford will be next, his card is marked. No way on God's green Earth SJR continues to hand him £325K of his hard-earned cash every week.
I honestly believe it's all about setting new standards. Rule with an iron fist, send a message. In time, we'll see this change, I an sure...once the club starts to win again and SJR and his team are satisfied the "cultural reset" is complete, I don't think we'll read stories about staff losing £60 at Christmas.
At the moment, we're all feeling it. Staff have lost bonuses or been made redundant. Fans have seen ticket prices increase. Players have been let go or face uncertain futures. The executive team is not safe, as we saw with Ashworth, nor was SAF.
Just read this piece by Jamie Jackson https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ited-marcus-rashford-cultural-reboot-garnacho
Wow. The club clearly just gave this to Jackson and it essentially blames Marcus Rashford for the decline of Manchester United. Who's gonna touch Rashford now?
What on earth are you on about?!!their tenure seems to have been a disaster so far with one piece of negative publicity after another and the club looks in a worse position than ever.
It’s just so destructive to the culture of the club, one to the very few things left from our glory times. No way it’s a net positive to save those 20 fecking thousand pounds. It’s as sad - if not more sad - than our results on the pitch. And it makes me very sad there won’t be another Kath Phipps, that the club employees feel abandoned by the club for the first time in decades. All to save a fraction of a weekly salary of one player or a fraction of what Ratcliff earns daily.
If I were not a United fan I’d probably actively cheer for our further downfall and would welcome the news our management is so out of touch
Spot on. Jimmy really has no fecking clue what he is doing with a football club. Him and the marginal gains fraud need to get as far away from the running of the club as possible.
While I wouldn't go that far, the penny pinching on things like the staff party and cutting the 100 quid bonus for office staff is just so mean and petty, especially in the context of the amount they've paid out for mistakes like keeping ETH on and the Ashworth debacle. The savings on the staff party and bonus along with the proposed cuts to the 40k they give to the disabled fans association wouldn't cover someone like Casemiro's weekly wages.
It really does leave a bad taste in the mouth.
Yet, people will still keep going and paying for season tickets etc. whatever the club charges. These are the really 'hard-nosed' business men, who will probably finish up making the Glazer's look 'saintly' by comparison?It really does leave a bad taste in the mouth.
It’s just so destructive to the culture of the club, one to the very few things left from our glory times. No way it’s a net positive to save those 20 fecking thousand pounds. It’s as sad - if not more sad - than our results on the pitch. And it makes me very sad there won’t be another Kath Phipps, that the club employees feel abandoned by the club for the first time in decades. All to save a fraction of a weekly salary of one player or a fraction of what Ratcliff earns daily.
If I were not a United fan I’d probably actively cheer for our further downfall and would welcome the news our management is so out of touch
If you can’t think for yourself - I don’t mean that rudely though it might come across that way - you’re going to think much of what they do is a disaster because of how the media make money from United.I never really felt the Sir Jim buy-in was in the best interests of the club from the start and their tenure seems to have been a disaster so far with one piece of negative publicity after another and the club looks in a worse position than ever.
I still fully believe that accepting the offer that was on the table for the Glazers to sell their enrire share holding and leave was the best option for tbe club and feel that the club would likely be in a much better position now if we had have done
Money that goes into infrastructure can be offset against FFP/PSR though, can't it?