Club ownership | Senior management team talk

NZT-One said:
I disagree partly. I am sure it is a non-story, probably something mostly taken out of context. But the overall message isn't a negative one. I am pretty sure at Real or City there aren't any players the club would come out to say they are beyond selling. Consider it as strategic ambiguity. When SAF was the manager, everybody knew he was ready to sell as soon as something happened. This mindset is the right one as it is the opposite of player power.
Click to expand...
I don't think we need to come out saying anyone is unsellable at any price, it could either be ignored or you just state X isn't for sale.

The whole untouchable narrative isn't one any club needs to bother commenting on unless there is significant pressure.
 
saivet said:
I don't think we need to come out saying anyone is unsellable at any price, it could either be ignored or you just state X isn't for sale.

The whole untouchable narrative isn't one any club needs to bother commenting on unless there is significant pressure.
Click to expand...
I haven't followed the news completely, but the club didn't come out with did they? There is a chance, that this could be briefing. There is an even bigger chances that this the result of a 30minutes-session of "what headline could we produce based on that half-sentence?".

Either way, I think, it is the right message to send. No downsides in my eyes. Couldn't care less about whether this or that player feels a little more threatened now. Fact is, many of them had a very very comfortable life and will continue to do so while the club didn't get much in exchange. If (!!!) - if those three young players were specifically singled out, I agree, it is a bit weird, but it might make sense if the person really wanted to drive their point home.
 
Last edited:
NZT-One said:
I haven't followed the news completely, but the club didn't come out with did they? There is a chance, that this could be briefing. There is an even bigger chances that this the result of a 30minutes what headline could we produce based on that half-sentence.

Either way, I think, it is the right message to send. No downsides in my eyes. Couldn't care less about whether this or that player feels a little more threatened now. Fact is, many of them had a very very comfortable life and will continue to do so while the club didn't get much in exchange. If (!!!) - if those three young players were specifically singled out, I agree, it is a bit weird, but it might make sense if the person really wanted to drive their point home.
Click to expand...
Yeap.

 
in the last month we've been told Rashford has been an issue for every manager to deal with, he's on 250k+, can't even make the bench, and openly talks about leaving.

Who is paying him 250k+ per week based on that info?

And that is the problem. We are stuck with these cretins because we are a crap club. We are probably going to have to run out multiple contracts or hope Saudi's want to buy our players because no one else is taking the wages. I hope they are not stupid enough to sell our academy talent, but if you look at only from dollars and cents, they become the cash cows.
 
If Ratcliffe really cared he would not have worsened our situation by getting into partnership with the Glazers!
 
gulli_G said:
If Ratcliffe really cared he would not have worsened our situation by getting into partnership with the Glazers!
Click to expand...
How is this something that's happened? What you're seeing is 100% on the glazers, their greed and their incompetence. Do you think we'd have been better off remaining solely glazer owned?
 
Pickle85 said:
How is this something that's happened? What you're seeing is 100% on the glazers, their greed and their incompetence. Do you think we'd have been better off remaining solely glazer owned?
Click to expand...

The Glazers were at their last legs. The club was simply unsustainable at this point. Sir Jim managed to stop the inevitable ie a full sale
 
devilish said:
The Glazers were at their last legs. The club was simply unsustainable at this point. Sir Jim managed to stop the inevitable ie a full sale
Click to expand...
Rubbish. Because if a full sale was genuinely 'inevitable' then it would have happened. Who was going to buy it in its entirety? And please don't say Jassim...
 
Pickle85 said:
Rubbish. Because if a full sale was genuinely 'inevitable' then it would have happened. Who was going to buy it in its entirety? And please don't say Jassim...
Click to expand...
The glazers was seeking a partial sale long before the sale happened In fact they tried to involve Apollo and they failed. They went for a full sale because they had no choice. What would have happened is that united would be pulled off the market and then placed back again, lowering their price demand this time round. They had no other option simply because the club was/is losing money, the stadium is a mess and the debt was piling up

A full sale was avoidable because sjr made it so by bailing the Glazers out. Fans and the average employee is suffering because of glazers debt and SJR passion project
 
Last edited:
Superden said:
Some of you are so trumpian in your response to journalists.. its weird.

That Jackson piece does appear to be a club briefing to test the waters...

Does anyone think someone like Ratcliffe would hesitate to sell off the likes of Mainoo if it helped balance the books / he felt the price was right? Like he gives a rats arse about fans feelings.
Click to expand...
Yes, I owe the man an apology. It is obviously a briefing. A really dumb briefing though.
 
Superden said:
Some of you are so trumpian in your response to journalists.. its weird.

That Jackson piece does appear to be a club briefing to test the waters...

Does anyone think someone like Ratcliffe would hesitate to sell off the likes of Mainoo if it helped balance the books / he felt the price was right? Like he gives a rats arse about fans feelings.
Click to expand...
No he wouldn't hesitate, and nor should he. Any adult who understands the predicament the club is in understands that tough decisions need to he made to begin fixing a lot of the damage that has been done. The continued cost cutting is helping, and if a good opportunity to sell academy players is there I expect they'll seriously consider, because it helps massively with the team rebuild over the next few years.

But we'll still have to endure emotionally unstable fans crying about old scrooge Jim being mean, and then they'll moan about the team being shit and how we need to buy half a dozen players, without actually thinking about where the money is coming from
 
devilish said:
The glazers was seeking a partial sale long before the sale happened In fact they tried to involve Apollo and they failed. They went for a full sale because they had no choice. What would have happened is that united would be pulled off the market and then placed back again, lowering their price demand this time round. They had no other option simply because the club was/is losing money, the stadium is a mess and the debt was piling up

A full sale was avoidable because sjr made it so by bailing the Glazers out. Fans and the average employee is suffering because of glazers debt and SJR passion project
Click to expand...
Sorry but you have absolutely no clue about any of this. It's all absolute conjecture and pining for a sale to qatar that was never on the cards.
 
AndySmith1990 said:
No he wouldn't hesitate, and nor should he. Any adult who understands the predicament the club is in understands that tough decisions need to he made to begin fixing a lot of the damage that has been done. The continued cost cutting is helping, and if a good opportunity to sell academy players is there I expect they'll seriously consider, because it helps massively with the team rebuild over the next few years.

But we'll still have to endure emotionally unstable fans crying about old scrooge Jim being mean, and then they'll moan about the team being shit and how we need to buy half a dozen players, without actually thinking about where the money is coming from
Click to expand...
I think we have to navigate this tricky period for about 2 to 5 seasons until we get rid of all the toxic contracts and unmotivated slackers accumulated during the Woodward/Arnold/Murtough era. If it means losing out on top tier academy talent coming through, especially if they are demanding similar toxic contracts bleeding us dry, then so be it.

I also don't think that we have put the two lads on the market but it's a message to both them and their hangers on that the honeymoon is over and it can only be a good thing. People bemoan the fact that we can't make good sales, I saw Liverpool rejecting £20m from Palace for an academy kid out on loan recently, but kick up a fuss when the club takes steps to repair the situation.
 
Have we lost our minds? What's the point of selling players we want to keep if their replacement will cost more? And why do we still do stupid briefs like that?

Must feel good for the players to wake up to the news that they're for sale.

Horrible horrible leadership.
 
Pickle85 said:
How is this something that's happened? What you're seeing is 100% on the glazers, their greed and their incompetence. Do you think we'd have been better off remaining solely glazer owned?
Click to expand...
No I wanted a full sale, also this is not 100% on them. Their dad was a chancer, buying stocks here and there. Fergie at the time, was encouraging his Coolmoore friends to buy stocks, probably with a goal to run United with them, they had around 20% or so. And then he got greedy over a horse that was gifted to him, stud rights. Fergie didn't back down and if I remember correctly took them to court. The Coolmoore's to put pressure on Fergie started buying more shares.

Some moronic United fans took Fergie's side and turned up at the homes of the Coolmoore's who were very private people. They got unsettled and approached fellow shareholders and Malcolm who had never intended to buy could not believe his luck and explored and executed a leveraged purchase which the board opposed but could not stop.

So if we are talking 100% blame.for greed it is Fergie's. The unfortunate irony, is the Glazers were just the parasites that came as a result and almost ruined everything Fergie help build.

Ratcliffe is another chancer who probably is only worried about fracking rights around OT.
 
Last edited:
Someone said:
Have we lost our minds? What's the point of selling players we want to keep if their replacement will cost more? And why do we still do stupid briefs like that?

Must feel good for the players to wake up to the news that they're for sale.

Horrible horrible leadership.
Click to expand...

We're not actively trying to sell any of the young players but nobody is unsellable if enough money comes in. It shouldn't really come as a surprise that everyone has a price. It would still take a ridiculous bid for the club to sanction the sale of someone like Mainoo as obviously, as you say, we'd have to replace him and we're already light in midfield.
 
gulli_G said:
No I wanted a full sale, also this is not 100% on them
Click to expand...
There isn’t a Utd fan alive who didn’t want a 100% sale, including Ratcliffe. That goes without saying. Sadly, the reality is that was NEVER going to happen. Not to Jim, not to Qatar or anybody else. The Glazers key motivation (as ever) was to line their own pockets first and foremost, not to give up their cash cow/golden goose.
Fans act like it was a straight choice between INEOS or Jassim, forgetting the hedge fund investors who were also circling. I really think the Qatar interest was a non-starter, so the other option would have been bankers further asset striping the club., and a further slide into sporting irrelevance.
Jim did the only deal that he could. It was the only deal the Glazers would sanction, without throwing billions of good money after bad. It was always the Glazers who were in control of the process. This gets lost sometimes.
gulli_G said:
Ratcliffe is another chancer who probably is only worried about fracking rights around OT.
Click to expand...
Hard to take your posts seriously when they end with stupidity like this.
 
United fans will never learn.

False reports come out with click bait headlines - United fans all go in and discuss the incorrect news to death.

United fans then talk about how we shouldn't give attention to click bait journalist who just want to drive hits.

Its the same journalists, the mirror, mail, Jason Burt (Rashford's mouthpiece)

They have all had shockers since June getting majority of their stories wrong.

Yet fans get overly worried when the same journalists publish stories.
 
Pickle85 said:
Sorry but you have absolutely no clue about any of this. It's all absolute conjecture and pining for a sale to qatar that was never on the cards.
Click to expand...
No business can afford keeping losing huge amounts of money year in year out especially one whose infrastructure is in ruins and there's little to no financial growth. That's pretty obvious, I mean water is wet obvious. Now we know that prior to the takeover talks, the Glazers had explored multiple partial sales including that with Apollo. Those failed miserably. We also knew that their value was so OTT that only two buyers remained till the end. One was Jassim. God knows what happened with that. The other was SJR who gave in to almost everything they wanted including him being a minority shareholder which would allow him to play real life FM while the Glazers retaining the majority of the shares. SJR kept the Glazers in.

But that's the tip of an iceberg. Not only did INEOS kept the Glazers and the debt which were the two red lines the majority of fans had (pro Qatar, pro INEOS etc). He's also doing things that the Glazers never dared doing. That including showing SAF the door, hiking ticket prices, cutting funds to charity and firing a horde of people. The Glazers had never gone so far on their own. Now there's talk that we might even sell academy players that we need to make money. It seems that sky (or the pit) is the limit for local boy who understand what Manchester United is all about.
 
Plant0x84 said:
There isn’t a Utd fan alive who didn’t want a 100% sale, including Ratcliffe. That goes without saying. Sadly, the reality is that was NEVER going to happen. Not to Jim, not to Qatar or anybody else. The Glazers key motivation (as ever) was to line their own pockets first and foremost, not to give up their cash cow/golden goose.
Fans act like it was a straight choice between INEOS or Jassim, forgetting the hedge fund investors who were also circling. I really think the Qatar interest was a non-starter, so the other option would have been bankers further asset striping the club., and a further slide into sporting irrelevance.
Jim did the only deal that he could. It was the only deal the Glazers would sanction, without throwing billions of good money after bad. It was always the Glazers who were in control of the process. This gets lost sometimes.

Hard to take your posts seriously when they end with stupidity like this.
Click to expand...
Hold off on the personal attack, it was a flippant comment.
 
Plant0x84 said:
There isn’t a Utd fan alive who didn’t want a 100% sale, including Ratcliffe. That goes without saying. Sadly, the reality is that was NEVER going to happen. Not to Jim, not to Qatar or anybody else. The Glazers key motivation (as ever) was to line their own pockets first and foremost, not to give up their cash cow/golden goose.
Fans act like it was a straight choice between INEOS or Jassim, forgetting the hedge fund investors who were also circling. I really think the Qatar interest was a non-starter, so the other option would have been bankers further asset striping the club., and a further slide into sporting irrelevance.
Jim did the only deal that he could. It was the only deal the Glazers would sanction, without throwing billions of good money after bad. It was always the Glazers who were in control of the process. This gets lost sometimes.
Click to expand...

This is the problem with fans, they think it was black and white, Jim Vs Jassim.

"We should have been sold to Qatar".. makes 0 sense because the Glazers were never selling the club.

After a decade of the club being ran so poorly, do people think that it was flick the light switch job?

Harsh decisions have to be made before you can enjoy the good.. its like renovating a house that has damp, leaks, cracks. You cannot just put a lick of paint and new furniture and think its going to be okay..

You have to strip it all back and build, sometimes meaning it takes longer and a change.
 
AneRu said:
I think we have to navigate this tricky period for about 2 to 5 seasons until we get rid of all the toxic contracts and unmotivated slackers accumulated during the Woodward/Arnold/Murtough era. If it means losing out on top tier academy talent coming through, especially if they are demanding similar toxic contracts bleeding us dry, then so be it.

I also don't think that we have put the two lads on the market but it's a message to both them and their hangers on that the honeymoon is over and it can only be a good thing. People bemoan the fact that we can't make good sales, I saw Liverpool rejecting £20m from Palace for an academy kid out on loan recently, but kick up a fuss when the club takes steps to repair the situation.
Click to expand...

I agree I think this is the current stage we are at of having to try and reset wages and rid ourselves of players who are tough to get rid of. Players and agents are going to be demanding the previous going rate when players were over valued and over paid but it can’t be given to them.

Cost cutting should stop the huge losses but the club needs 2-3 years of better figures to help with PSR significantly.

We’ll get a better idea of what is going to happen over time in terms of the ownership. In two years when they refinance the biggest loan there will have to be some sort of change of approach as well.
 
romufc said:
This is the problem with fans, they think it was black and white, Jim Vs Jassim.

"We should have been sold to Qatar".. makes 0 sense because the Glazers were never selling the club.

After a decade of the club being ran so poorly, do people think that it was flick the light switch job?

Harsh decisions have to be made before you can enjoy the good.. its like renovating a house that has damp, leaks, cracks. You cannot just put a lick of paint and new furniture and think its going to be okay..

You have to strip it all back and build, sometimes meaning it takes longer and a change.
Click to expand...

That’s all absolutely true but the problem is if you’re going to make wholesale changes then the changes you make have to work. So far the signings have been questionable, the ETH contract extension and the hiring and firing of Ashworth is nothing short of a farce whilst it’s also being briefed our entire squad is for sale…..I mean talk demotivating a squad of players who already have a questionable work rate to begin with.

We’re still going round in circles
 
Castia said:
That’s all absolutely true but the problem is if you’re going to make wholesale changes then the changes you make have to work. So far the signings have been questionable, the ETH contract extension and the hiring and firing of Ashworth is nothing short of a farce whilst it’s also being briefed our entire squad is for sale…..I mean talk demotivating a squad of players who already have a questionable work rate to begin with.

We’re still going round in circles
Click to expand...


I mean I would question the hierarchy if we are 13th and none of the squad is for sale.

The signings: De Ligt is probably our best defender, Ugarte is showing why we bought him and Yoro is still young. ZIrkzee is the only questionable one out there.

If the squad is 13th and worried about being sold, then they should be sold.... It is clear that the players have a weak mentality and we can see it from the main culprit.

Dropped and cries instead of knuckling down and showing why he should play.. instead he has thrown his toys out the pram.

If it wasn't for the manager and INEOS backing him, Rashford would still be protected.
 
People get a little too sensitive and off topic regarding the sale process, which is understandable cause it was generally frustrating but the issue here isn't about Ratcliffe, Ineos, Qatar, Jassim or any other. Bottomline is:

-United's most important matter as an institution was clearing the debt from the leveraged buyout.
-The Glazers won't clear the debt as long as they are around, because it's not in their best interest (which highlights why it was such an aberration in the first place).

Therefore, the logic conclusion was that any deal other than a full sale was basically kicking the can down the road. Maybe the Glazers wanted a full sale or maybe they didn't, we will never know for sure. But what's sure is they accepted a deal that works for them as they can keep getting paid, have to do even less work and need to worry less about PR blowback since the new partner will deal with that.

Jury is still out on the new football administration but early signs don't look that promising tbh. And a general law in most organizations is that if you implement actions in the detriment of the current staff you're gonna have disgruntled employees, suboptimal performances, most processes going through the motions at best and (particularly in companies with a more public profile) the ocasional leak to the press here and there. Which could be necessary depending on the financial urgencies but as a whole IMO it doesn't contribute to a winning culture, which is what I imagine most fans expect.
 
Pickle85 said:
How is this something that's happened? What you're seeing is 100% on the glazers, their greed and their incompetence. Do you think we'd have been better off remaining solely glazer owned?
Click to expand...
The people who lost their jobs probably would’ve been better off.
 
Krakenzero said:
Jury is still out on the new football administration but early signs don't look that promising tbh. And a general law in most organizations is that if you implement actions in the detriment of the current staff you're gonna have disgruntled employees, suboptimal performances, most processes going through the motions at best and (particularly in companies with a more public profile) the ocasional leak to the press here and there. Which could be necessary depending on the financial urgencies but as a whole IMO it doesn't contribute to a winning culture, which is what I imagine most fans expect.
Click to expand...

Do you realize we are not a charity? You talk about actions to detriment staff and have suboptimal performances but for the last 10 years the staff have been overpaid and we have had suboptimal performances too, neither did we have the winning culture in the last 10 years.

INEOS are completely right to make the cuts they have been making, most companies get paid well if the business is doing well. When you have a business failing and staff being paid bonuses, high wages, it will fail.

They are trying to fix a problem that has been going on for a decade. Emotions have to be taken out of this.
 
romufc said:
Do you realize we are not a charity? You talk about actions to detriment staff and have suboptimal performances but for the last 10 years the staff have been overpaid and we have had suboptimal performances too, neither did we have the winning culture in the last 10 years.

INEOS are completely right to make the cuts they have been making, most companies get paid well if the business is doing well. When you have a business failing and staff being paid bonuses, high wages, it will fail.

They are trying to fix a problem that has been going on for a decade. Emotions have to be taken out of this.
Click to expand...

The staffs salaries are dwarfed by the millions we have to pay out due to the massive blunders on the parts of Ineos, ie keeping Ten Hag over the summer and the Ashworth farce.
 
Krakenzero said:
People get a little too sensitive and off topic regarding the sale process, which is understandable cause it was generally frustrating but the issue here isn't about Ratcliffe, Ineos, Qatar, Jassim or any other. Bottomline is:

-United's most important matter as an institution was clearing the debt from the leveraged buyout.
-The Glazers won't clear the debt as long as they are around, because it's not in their best interest (which highlights why it was such an aberration in the first place).

Therefore, the logic conclusion was that any deal other than a full sale was basically kicking the can down the road. Maybe the Glazers wanted a full sale or maybe they didn't, we will never know for sure. But what's sure is they accepted a deal that works for them as they can keep getting paid, have to do even less work and need to worry less about PR blowback since the new partner will deal with that.

Jury is still out on the new football administration but early signs don't look that promising tbh. And a general law in most organizations is that if you implement actions in the detriment of the current staff you're gonna have disgruntled employees, suboptimal performances, most processes going through the motions at best and (particularly in companies with a more public profile) the ocasional leak to the press here and there. Which could be necessary depending on the financial urgencies but as a whole IMO it doesn't contribute to a winning culture, which is what I imagine most fans expect.
Click to expand...

The Glazers diluted shares for infrastructure investment from SJR and I expect the same will be done for the first loan when it is refinanced or a large percentage of it.

The Glazers best hope of getting their money in the timeframe they want is SJR. The idea that billionaires, states or corporations are lining up to buy the club has been disproven. The only person who is going to pay them the kind of prices they want per share now is SJR.

The club has been neglected and poorly run for nearly two decades unfortunately it’s not a quick fix and mistakes are going to be made. We have to see what happens over next 2-3 years and if INEOS get enough right to see clear and sustainable improvement.
 
Lyng said:
The staffs salaries are dwarfed by the millions we have to pay out due to the massive blunders on the parts of Ineos, ie keeping Ten Hag over the summer and the Ashworth farce.
Click to expand...

I see that you are one of those that thinks mistakes cannot be made?

You do realise that sacking Ten Hag in the summer came at a cost as well, or do you think that it was going to cost £0?

Instead of keeping Ashworth on his millions salary, they got rid before his 6 month probation = no sacking fee.

INEOS obviously made mistakes but fans like you acting like previous regime didn't make more mistakes... paying £85m and 200k wage for Antony.. Hojlund, Casemiro... whilst also paying high salaries to everyone.

You cannot undo 10 years of mismanagement in 6 months, they went to get the best in class and realised that Ashworth wasn't a good fit, it happens. However; instead of keeping it and saving face, they realised it and got rid.
 
Roboc7 said:
I agree I think this is the current stage we are at of having to try and reset wages and rid ourselves of players who are tough to get rid of. Players and agents are going to be demanding the previous going rate when players were over valued and over paid but it can’t be given to them.

Cost cutting should stop the huge losses but the club needs 2-3 years of better figures to help with PSR significantly.

We’ll get a better idea of what is going to happen over time in terms of the ownership. In two years when they refinance the biggest loan there will have to be some sort of change of approach as well.
Click to expand...
Not only PSR but I think our situation financially is much worse than just funds for transfers otherwise Ineos wouldn't be taking such drastic measures to make the club leaner. There will be pain along the way but until we clear the toxic contracts and avoid adding more we are in for a period of pain.

Now the issue is that people see the situation we are in, know what needs to be done but scream when every tough measure is taken. Now the fact that we are going to need refinancing and fresh funds, for the debt and stadium respectively, the books will need to be painting a substantially different picture then to what they are now for the club to get loans on any reasonable terms.

I wouldn't be shocked if Ineos, having seen the scale of the disaster, are just now content to wait for the lapsing of their exclusive period, whilst cleaning up the books, so that they sell along with the Glazers for a tidy profit.

The problem with United is we have become too big for our own good and there really is no financial middle ground for us. To service the debt whilst concurrently building a new stadium we need to be permanent fixtures in the CL but to do that you need to be spending around £500m in transfers and wages per year, given where we are, meaning that you need your revenues to be touching a billion. Tough ask in the PL.
 
romufc said:
I see that you are one of those that thinks mistakes cannot be made?

You do realise that sacking Ten Hag in the summer came at a cost as well, or do you think that it was going to cost £0?

Instead of keeping Ashworth on his millions salary, they got rid before his 6 month probation = no sacking fee.

INEOS obviously made mistakes but fans like you acting like previous regime didn't make more mistakes... paying £85m and 200k wage for Antony.. Hojlund, Casemiro... whilst also paying high salaries to everyone.

You cannot undo 10 years of mismanagement in 6 months, they went to get the best in class and realised that Ashworth wasn't a good fit, it happens. However; instead of keeping it and saving face, they realised it and got rid.
Click to expand...

Fans like you.....so fans of the club instead of fans of Ineos you mean?

The glazers are the reason we are in this mess to begin with.
But some of us have had worries about Ineos due to heir previous massive failures at Nice and Lausanne. And so far the only really positive thing is Amorim.

You really believe they managed to get rid of Ashworth for nothing? We also only have the clubs briefs to know whether he was an issue or not. What we do know is Jimmy and Brailsworth have repeatedly not managed to live up to their lofty promises whenever they have gotten involved with a club.

So yes mistakes will be made and are absolutely okay, but it is extremely naive to just believe Ineos will magically come good for us, when so far there is nothing that points in that direction.

And before you accuse me of it, No I never wanted Qatar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.