Structure. Football people in charge. Pushing for young talent. Stadium. Investing in training infrastructure. Professional approach. Hiring a very good manager.
Club ownership | Senior management team talk
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
So far all of that, apart from Amorim is very much up in the air. The whole Ashworth debacle and cost cutting where it actually doesn't move the needle at all reeks more of Nice 2.0 than a professional approach.
It's way to early to call it a failure, but likewise there is nothing that is really a success yet.
Even if an owner wants, he just can't go and give his club loads of money due to the current financial restraints.
United do have to become self-sustainable.
It was never going to be a success within ten months. It was always something that was going to have to be judged long term. Just like it was clear mistakes would be made along the way.
But they did make moves which appear to be positive.
I think its harsh to say that Nice has been a failure. There are plenty of clubs in France bigger than Nice. Top 6 is about right.
Which we were up until 2005.
And water is wet, what’s your point?
Compared to Jim's lofty promises when he bought the club it's 100% a failure
Actually they are paid pennies, a steward at utd makes around £50 per game. The gifts he cut wouldn't even save 50k, this is an organization which makes 650+mn a year. Do you really believe that saving £ 40 per person given as bonus to people making 50 a game is really going to be the answer to united's losses.
United are losing money for a simple reason, the interest costs from glazer's lbo and their complete neglect of infrastructure is what is costing us, operationally United are a profitable company, it's not the part that needs fixing, what United need is a rich guy willing to pay up for the stadium and get rid of the debt something ratcliffe clearly isn't capable of.
Nothing says great structure being put in place like having the ceo of a company that makes 650mn a year having to ask his boss for approval everytime the squad need to take a long flight.
Last edited:
If there is anything beyond doubt, it is that our new minority owner is as big a cnut as they come.
He's just a massive Tory.
That might be my favourite bit:
"We fired so many of your colleagues, so we feel it just wouldn't be right for the rest of you to celebrate christmas in these sad circumstances!"
Oh man this makes for a depressing read
Merry Christmas. My point is this is the end result of taking a viable, self-sufficient organization - community institution if you like - and permitting greedy men to plunge it into debt. The cost to Manchester United has been incalculable, not just in terms of pounds and pence, but in the goodwill of generations of supporters who no longer go to games. Think we can recoup that?
Last edited:
Ineos don't see football as an elite-level sport, they see cycling and sailing as an elite-level sport
If Musk gets his hand on this club we're doomed.
The whole idea of Jim owning the club without having the proper financial muscle to invest was always weird to me. If it's just the case of building a proper football structure, well then we only needed a new CEO. He can't fully own the club, he can't fund the stadium, he can't clear the debt, then what's the added value of his existence really?
The whole idea of Jim owning the club without having the proper financial muscle to invest was always weird to me. If it's just the case of building a proper football structure, well then we only needed a new CEO. He can't fully own the club, he can't fund the stadium, he can't clear the debt, then what's the added value of his existence really?
I didn't read that article and feel that bad about things tbh. We were a mess under the Glazers, and something had to change.
Like someone said further back on this thread this is probably in part about making the point that United aren't going to be seen as a running joke and pushover behind the scenes anymore, rather than how we are going to be in longterm under Ineos.
Like someone said further back on this thread this is probably in part about making the point that United aren't going to be seen as a running joke and pushover behind the scenes anymore, rather than how we are going to be in longterm under Ineos.
I think it’ll take time to undo the Glazer malaise and bloat. INEOS inherited a fecking mess of a club on and off the pitch.
I’ve worked at a company very early in my working career where it was taken over and similar stuff has happened like we’re seeing now such as cut backs on benefits and redundancies. On one hand, it seemed ruthless just to put people out of a job and on the other, there were stories in that company that certain employees were getting paid way over what they actually contributed and they had been there a long time. I don’t doubt that there’s been a bit of gravy train at United under the Glazers due to their passive nature of running the club.
I’ve worked at a company very early in my working career where it was taken over and similar stuff has happened like we’re seeing now such as cut backs on benefits and redundancies. On one hand, it seemed ruthless just to put people out of a job and on the other, there were stories in that company that certain employees were getting paid way over what they actually contributed and they had been there a long time. I don’t doubt that there’s been a bit of gravy train at United under the Glazers due to their passive nature of running the club.
Also I might have misunderstood, but I read that as the Glazers expecting Ineos to buy them out fully at some point this coming year, and if they don't they could enforce a full sale elsewhere as the majority shareholders.
If Musk were to be involved in any capacity, regardless of how superficial, then I'm out.
It's all well and good that SJR is a Man Utd supporter and would like to help to transform the club. But he is 72 y/o. There is a certain risk that when the time comes and someone has to take over, will the new owner (SJR's son? or others) show the same interests in Man Utd? It will be another Glazers 2.0 situation where the owners have zero interest in the club and let a banker ruined it for 2 decades.
This is the kool aid people need to stop sipping on. Just because this is how it goes in a new acquisition doesn't mean they are doing it right.
Take the £40 steward bonuses or Christmas party or even the staff redundancies, the money Ineos has saved doing those things is a lot less than what it has cost the club to keep Ten Hag extend his contract by 1 year and then pay it off when firing him, same for Ashworth signing and firing. Just firing ten hag and signing Ashworth cost us 20mn, then there's paying him off when firing him. The pennies Ratcliffe has pinched on his cost saving measures are nowhere near the actual cost united have to pay for his bad decisions.
Even the one thing everyone seems to cheering on, the structure being put in place is of little value given the structure seems to be all dependent of ratcliffe giving the go ahead on every small thing. Given the complete mess that was the Ashworth appointment, it seems very much to me that Ratcliffe has done exactly what people complained about Woodward, he found a bunch of big names and signed them, with little thought in terms of actual vision or cohesive planning, except he did it with management guys regarding whom people have a lot less open knowledge about.
Decisions on managers or even DoFs can be wrong and might need to be corrected. That's part of the cost of doing business in football. You can't always get it right, in any case it's expenses connected with the actual football.
But then there's this:
(from the above link Athletic article)
This is where I start seething. How much are newly hired consultants Interpath Advisory getting paid to advise the club to not pay their long-serving employees any longer?
Anyway, enough of this for today. Happy holidays everyone.
The risk is there with every owner. He may lose interest, he may suffer from financial difficulties. There are tons of scenarios. Who would have foreseen Abramovich having to sell Chelsea because Russia started a war?
So the fact our part-owner is 72 years old doesn't bother my the least.
I wonder if he came in to get the shit in order and then sell to a bigger buyer
Success is what then for you? Being first in the league?
That's the ultimate goal but not realistic yet. Less pr drama. Good structure means a well oiled machine top to bottom, better work and training environments for players. Manage to create a good environment for all teams including youth and womens. Boardroom without drama. Money guys NOT involved in football decisions.
Mr Musk Mr Bezos please can I have a stadium
Jesus wept
Jesus wept
"The shift from Glazer ownership to INEOS has been dramatic. But the working relationship between Ratcliffe and the American siblings has been described as friendly and running smoothly. Sources who know both parties suspect that is because the Glazers are happy for Ratcliffe to take the lead so long as there is the idea he will one day buy their remaining stake."
Most important thing from the article.
Most important thing from the article.
Maybe not but money talks. THE SEC filings are there to see and the Chelsea bid is clear to see as well.
They were only looking to put BILLIONS on the line for football clubs, not sailing and cycling teams.
Ever heard of a firm of consultants working cheap? Me neither. Ah well, Merry Christmas one and all.
Based on headlines alone, it seems like they are trying to fix the club through grinding austerity.
Would be good with some headlines like “Ineos initiates roof fixing project” or something like that.
Would be good with some headlines like “Ineos initiates roof fixing project” or something like that.
It's not a failure purely because it's too soon to say, but I'm utterly lost on why any United fan would waste breath trying to defend Ratcliffe. Considering how much everyone hated the Glazers and the supposed reasons why.
Can’t make a thread, but the state the Glazers put the club in should see them arrested.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg1v37ggy7o
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg1v37ggy7o
We need positive news from the club, like setting sure standard and route for new stadium & stuff.
Atm it's just like our Estonian government, just cuttings costs everywhere - but it has to be done, for better future.
Atm it's just like our Estonian government, just cuttings costs everywhere - but it has to be done, for better future.
At least Estonia guarantees a right to the internet. Our staff likely have to paid for Wifi access.