You’ve actually hit on what I was thinking, that they’ve used redundancy to get rid of him for whatever reason.
ESPN - Why Manchester United are still a mess under INEOS ownership
- Thread starter Martial'sEmergingSmile
- Start date
Very good post.
Well said brother.
As opposed to what? Not winning feck all under Ineos, but thats OK because Sir Jims a 'wurkin class lad from down t'pit?'
Enjoy being a mid-table team from now on.
Why do we need an explanation? It’s been 5 minutes since they took over, where we were in a mess.
Yes, basically. I would hate to become Manchester City. Would much rather be a genuine club.
But there was no guarantee, that under Qatar, United would have ended up like City. A lot of people just instantly jumped to the conclusion, that being owned by them would have meant United were 'soulless'.
You could easily argue the club feels soulless right now. Remember, despite Sir Jim having a stake in the club, the real owners are still the Glazers.
As pointed out in that article. The reason these stories are coming out is because everyone knows they fecked up by not sacking Eric then triggering his extra year and now seem to have doubled down on it and not got rid of him at the 2nd perfect opportunity.
This is one of the biggest feck ups they could have done and they are rightly being criticised for it.
They've had more than long enough to see how shite he is. They didn't need to be in office to see this. They don't need any more time than they've already had. Nobody needs 3 fecking years to see how bad someone is at their job.
No doubt the "Structure" will be brought up to defend him but if it was that terrible we wouldn't have won two cups. You can't have it both ways. I do wonder what people expect this new structure to magically do to Erik but it won't change the fact he's useless, stubborn, arrogant and delusional.
Nobody likes to see people lose their jobs but reducing the workforce obviously needed doing but the way they've handled this hasn't been great either with the work from home stuff and the I.T department being untidy when you've got Erik and the rest of the old or big contract players still picking up their millions producing shite every week. It's bound to piss people off.
Also with the Sir Alex thing, I agree he should have given it up or greatly reduced it but it then goes back to "sacking Fergie before Eric" which is again ridiculous when he's costing us every day he is here.
I agree with this. People or should I say "some fans" looked at Qatar as though it was going to be some kind of cheat code but it wasn't because they would have had to stick to the rules the same as Ineos so the soulless part is nonsense.
The human rights side to the argument is a very different story though obviously but we're not talking about that part.
Exactly my thoughts.
Personally I think it's better if everyone on every level talks to each other. Otherwise it's always going to be us and them which only helps the divide grow bigger.
We would be a sports-washing device, like city are for Abu Dhabi.
And will continue to drop as long as they don't remove Eric. Managers want to win things as well as players so they won't look to move to a club that seems happy to be in 14th and shite in Europe and have Ajax mk2 on the pitch.
Why is that?
Who are you suggesting we get?
Not sure I believe most of it... But I definitely believe the but about Brailsford.
Man strikes me as a massive cock.
Man strikes me as a massive cock.
Why would you want Manchester United to make a profit? I don’t want the club to make a penny.
So the club can reinvest, build cash reserves to buy new players, expand the stadium etc? If we dont make money, the brand will be devalued making us less attractive to sponsors, players, fans.
Is this a genuine question?
Capitalism is what makes the world work, without profit you would have nothing no investment going forward no improvement in the company no R and D. Wages will not be improved as the company hasn’t got the money to pay wages and without that profit then lay offs happen no matter what the business.
I knew this would happen and it proves my point that the majority of Manchester United football supporters are Labour Union supporters, it’s the way of the world, years ago Ford had a factory at Old Trafford, they moved in a weekend to Dagenham, since then they have moved to Europe and have almost pulled out of the UK entirely because profit is the bottom line.
If United dont make money then we will fall foul of the rules of the PL and won’t be able to invest in new players or attract a new best in class manager.
As the old song goes, money makes the world go around.
Poor recruitment, including manager and players.
I’m not saying don’t make money. I’m saying there’s no need to be profitable.
Also, sponsors, players and fans are not attracted to profit.
This is all wrong. Football clubs should not be a vehicle for wealth generation and success is divorced from profitability.
Why would you possibly think that?
Our goal should be to make £1 profit each year and be exceptionally well run.
It sounds like you have a different definition of "profit" then.
Not at all. Use ‘Generate’ if you like.
But football clubs should not aim to make a profit. How people find that contestable is beyond me.
So they should just lose money every year until they go bankrupt? Because that's the alternative.
I can understand not wanting to distribute profits to shareholders in the form of dividends, but the idea of being against profits that can then be retained and reinvested into the club is incomprehensible.
No. Read it all. I said £1 profit annually.
Every single penny the club makes should be spent on chasing trophies and success.
That’s not some left wing idea, despite what people have said above.
If it helps your point is very obvious and not at all difficult to understand. I've no idea why several posters think you meant we should bankrupt the club, not invest in recruitment or fail to pay players
So, they can make a profit, but have to reinvest it.
That's completely different from "the club shouldn't be able to make a profit".
Because making and reinvesting profits is not the same as not making a profit.If it helps your point is very obvious and not at all difficult to understand. I've no idea why several posters think you meant we should bankrupt the club, not invest in recruitment or fail to pay players
Let’s leave it there and talk football instead.
Quality control
Every single one of those tidbits is 100% conjecture.
The fact that all you bellends lap it up as gospel, just goes to justify the absolute shite that comes out of today's modern 'journalists'.
Is that what happened here, or did we get rid of experienced loyal staff?
The general direction these reorganizations take, is usually layoffs at lower levels and more management, leading to less efficiency and less quality.
Let’s hope that is not the case.
For now I'd get Potter in and perhaps get Roy in to kick some sense of pride into everyone.
Questioning some of their decisions or communication isn't jumping on their back.
Their previous endeavours with Nice have largely been a flop and Brailsfords weird behaviour isn't new either.
I have some faith in Wilcox, Ashworth and Berrada, not so much in Jimmy and Brailsford.
Yes but it was working so well, right?
You've been very angry lately. With Mount injured, all your hate is going to fellow fans. You could at least tag the people you're calling "bellends".