Sir Alex Ferguson's ambassadorial contract has been axed

[pocco]

Nope. We've won two trophies, they've won fu*k all. They've won 4 FA Cups in the last 20 years and routinely bottle it when they look like winning something. They've almost become a slightly better version of Spurs.

In our worst ever era since the late 80s, we've won more in the last 10 years than they have in double that time.

We've spent £600m on a midtable, misfit team, and won two minor trophies. They've spent less and have assembled a young team with a good coach, who are on the cusp of challenging for major titles. I would swap two trophies for that any day. If we were in their position now the United fan base would be bouncing. How much good feeling are those two trophies bringing us right now?

I'll ask you a question, which fanbase is happier now? More optimistic?

 

[acnumber9]

Got the feeling that ratcliffe is not into "leaving a legacy" with United, but instead just become another business for him.

You think the billionaire tax dodger that tried to buy Chelsea just wanted another asset? Their immediate priority was cost cutting.

 

[Isotope]

You think the billionaire tax dodger that tried to buy Chelsea just wanted another asset? Their immediate priority was cost cutting.

Yes. It's just this "legacy" voice was so loud during the discussion about INEOS takeover.

Anyway. I'm probably just a bit emotional with this SAF news. That Glazer didn't spend a penny when bought United and now worth 4+ billions, has SAF to thank for. Now they can hide behind this minority holder INEOS who also want to recoup their investment.

 

[acnumber9]

Yes. It's just this "legacy" voice was so loud during the discussion about INEOS takeover.

There’s no doubt he speaks well but the facts have been there from the outset. At best they’ll be a more efficient version of the Glazers but he’s a businessman, with shareholders to satisfy.

 

[golden_blunder]

While the sentimentality is nice, it has to stop. We have to move forward. 2million a year is a lot of money.


Ferguson will always be number 1 at this club. Nothing will ever change that.

Nothing says you’re number 1 like getting rid of your paid role and telling you to keep the feck away from the dressing rooms and training grounds.

 

[Chumpsbechumps]

Yes. It's just this "legacy" voice was so loud during the discussion about INEOS takeover.

Anyway. I'm probably just a bit emotional with this SAF news. That Glazer didn't spend a penny when bought United and now worth 4+ billions, has SAF to thank for. Now they can hide behind this minority holder INEOS who also want to recoup their investment.

At his age SJR didnt buy United to make money, buying an EPL club these days is not a prudent way to try and make money. Owning a club is a billionaires boy club thing, its either for status and/or a front to sports wash (or use it for some other nefarious means).

Whether SJR actually is a United fan or not, hes bought it for possibly a challange and/or the status it brings. Id say the cost cutting is simply about making the club more sustainable. Hes not even taking any dividends and he stopped the American goblins from taking them aswell.

 

[Isotope]

At his age SJR didnt buy United to make money, buying an EPL club these days is not a prudent way to try and make money. Owning a club is a billionaires boy club thing, its either for status and/or a front to sports wash (or use it for some other nefarious means).

Whether SJR actually is a United fan or not, hes bought it for possibly a challange and/or the status it brings. Id say the cost cutting is simply about making the club more sustainable. Hes not even taking any dividends and he stopped the American goblins from taking them aswell.

That is probably true. But i wish he's prioritizing on making the team great again, then cost cutting on a figure like SAF. There's a more pressing issue that needs them to prove to the fans that they're here to not just making money.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

That is probably true. But i wish he's prioritizing on making the team great again, then cost cutting on a figure like SAF. There's a more pressing issue that needs them to prove to the fans that they're here to not just making money.

He can do more than one thing at once. Everything he has been doing has been to improve the club, the only problem is the manager is what needs to be improved next, before any improvements actually start to show.

 

[golden_blunder]

fair enough. He had a good run earning £20m+ for doing basically nothing.

Stealing a living and all that

 

[acnumber9]

At his age SJR didnt buy United to make money, buying an EPL club these days is not a prudent way to try and make money. Owning a club is a billionaires boy club thing, its either for status and/or a front to sports wash (or use it for some other nefarious means).

Whether SJR actually is a United fan or not, hes bought it for possibly a challange and/or the status it brings. Id say the cost cutting is simply about making the club more sustainable. Hes not even taking any dividends and he stopped the American goblins from taking them aswell.

Ratcliffe didn’t buy United. INEOS invested. Why would their shareholders care about his play thing? It’s an asset that is unlikely to depreciate in value, the opposite will be true. They have lost nothing and it has cost them nothing on paper.

 

[gregor]

Next they will probably sell the statue of United Trinity to raise some money.

 

[gajender]

Ratcliffe didn’t buy United. INEOS invested. Why would their shareholders care about his play thing? It’s an asset that is unlikely to depreciate in value, the opposite will be true. They have lost nothing and it has cost them nothing on paper.

Please Check the actual details of the deal you might find It's actually Ratcliffe who has invested in United not Ineos .

 

[Big Ben Foster]

I'm sure this has been brought up already, but I wonder if the Glazers were happy to pay him over the years because they saw it as a way to buy his silence and ensure he never criticized their ownership

 

[acnumber9]

Please Check the actual details of the deal you might find It's actually Ratcliffe who has invested in United not Ineos .

Somebody needs to tell the club.

Executive Co-Chairmen and Directors, Avram Glazer and Joel Glazer said: “We are delighted to have agreed this deal with Sir Jim Ratcliffe and INEOS. As part of the strategic review we announced in November 2022, we committed to look at a variety of alternatives to help enhance Manchester United, with a focus on delivering success for our men’s, women’s and Academy teams.

“Sir Jim and INEOS bring a wealth of commercial experience as well as significant financial commitment into the Club. And, through INEOS Sport, Manchester United will have access to seasoned high-performance professionals, experienced in creating and leading elite teams from both inside and outside the game. Manchester United has talented people right across the Club and our desire is to always improve at every level to help bring our great fans more success in the future.”

From the club website.

 

[Strachan8]

Fair play to Ineos for showing that there no scared cows. Daglish is ten years younger than Fergie and is a non-exec. I would be surprised if FSG/Liverpool are paying Daglish anywhere close to £2m plus a year.

Much as I dislike Liverpool, Daglish’s personal involvement post the Hillsborough tragedy makes him an enduring club legend beyond his great achievements as a player and more modest ones as a manager.

 

[golden_blunder]

Finally

You been waiting a while to break out the white sheet and paint?

 

[golden_blunder]

Was just thinking that the club will probably still make a lot of money off merchandising and so on with Fergies image. I hope that he’s got a contract for that

 

[The_Midfielder]

Fair play to Ineos for showing that there no scared cows. Daglish is ten years younger than Fergie and is a non-exec. I would be surprised if FSG/Liverpool are paying Daglish anywhere close to £2m plus a year.

Much as I dislike Liverpool, Daglish’s personal involvement post the Hillsborough tragedy makes him an enduring club legend beyond his great achievements as a player and more modest ones as a manager.

Well there is no comparison..
UNITED would be in the path of Everton, Forest if not for Fergie

 

[Tom Cato]

What’s more disgraceful is that actual staff have been laid off, but we’re supposed to keep throwing cash at a former manager out of some misplaced loyalty?

Low paid staff that's been around for decades getting axed as opposed to board members willingly cancelling their annual milking of the clubs finances is the real story.

The "former manager" is the singular reason why we even have a club of the size we have. There is no Manchester United like we know today without Sir Alex Ferguson. Every childhood memory of watching football greats take to the pitch at the Theatre of Dreams is forever connected to a singular man. Manchester United were relegated to the 2nd tier of English football in 1973. In 1993 Manchester United won the inaugural Premier League title. And another 12 PL titles after that. The club won the Champions League twice under Sir Alex. Want to know why the treble was such a big deal? Why the CL final in 1999 is such a colossal part of United folklore? The club last won the CL in.. 1968.

Between the previous time the club lifted the league trophy and Sir Alex's first time lifting it, 26 years went by. Two full generations of footballer careers came and went between the times the club sat at top of the table.

There is not a soul on this green earth the club, the fans or any player owes more to than Sir Alex Ferguson when it comes to Manchester United and its legacy. He is not a "former manager" that collects money, the salary offered to him after his retirement is absolutely nothing in comparison to the enormous value he has brought to the club.

I get that he is a very wealthy man, he is old and doesn't need the money. It saddens me that the respect on the mans legacy and name is eroding, when what you have without the man is Aston Villa.

 

[YankeeShakes]

Yeah I know he remains in that role, but I still think this was something we shouldn't have touched. I'm not just referring to this news about him being axed but also the news about him not being allowed around the team. I don't care about the rest of the board members but, this is Sir Alex we're talking about.

And also, it's £2m to the guy who made us what we are. That's a drop in the ocean compared to what the Glazers take, what some of these shite players take, and so on. As a supporter, there's nobody I would rather give that money to than him. We're paying ETH that amount every two months. If anything his neck should be on the line.

You do realise that in an Ambassadorial role, he's likely meeting, for examples, sponsors etc so that they can shake his hand and have a photo with "Sir Alex Ferguson" to hang in their offices. His mere presence at various functions organised by sponsors, fans forums, etc, and the general PR that goes with it, will likely generate (indirectly or directly) far more than the £2Million he was paid.

 

[LawmanMan]

fecking Sky isn't credible for one. If the club was to jump on every speculation like idiot fans seem to like to consume, they'd do nothing else.

Wum? Too old and wise to waste my time with that childish behaviour.

Anyone thinks that Sir Jim is sacking his personal and life long friend for 2m amongst all the shitshow that's happening, need their head looking at.

Even if it was true, they fecking wouldn't do it now.....

He was a good friend with John Magnier as well….

 

[romufc]

Was just thinking that the club will probably still make a lot of money off merchandising and so on with Fergies image. I hope that he’s got a contract for that

I would assume he will still get that, a bit like image rights? Just the salary has been removed but I suspect he will be involved and get paid for the things he does do.

 

[golden_blunder]

I would assume he will still get that, a bit like image rights? Just the salary has been removed but I suspect he will be involved and get paid for the things he does do.

I was actually thinking that after he has passed on, I’m sure that the club will still be profiting off his image rights. Hopefully it’s then passed onto his kids or grandkids

 

[Moriarty]

Maybe the Glazers could make it up out of the money they've drained from the club. If it wasn't for Fergie, those leeches wouldn't have made a penny out of United.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Low paid staff that's been around for decades getting axed as opposed to board members willingly cancelling their annual milking of the clubs finances is the real story.

The "former manager" is the singular reason why we even have a club of the size we have. There is no Manchester United like we know today without Sir Alex Ferguson. Every childhood memory of watching football greats take to the pitch at the Theatre of Dreams is forever connected to a singular man. Manchester United were relegated to the 2nd tier of English football in 1973. In 1993 Manchester United won the inaugural Premier League title. And another 12 PL titles after that. The club won the Champions League twice under Sir Alex. Want to know why the treble was such a big deal? Why the CL final in 1999 is such a colossal part of United folklore? The club last won the CL in.. 1968.

Between the previous time the club lifted the league trophy and Sir Alex's first time lifting it, 26 years went by. Two full generations of footballer careers came and went between the times the club sat at top of the table.

There is not a soul on this green earth the club, the fans or any player owes more to than Sir Alex Ferguson when it comes to Manchester United and its legacy. He is not a "former manager" that collects money, the salary offered to him after his retirement is absolutely nothing in comparison to the enormous value he has brought to the club.

I get that he is a very wealthy man, he is old and doesn't need the money. It saddens me that the respect on the mans legacy and name is eroding, when what you have without the man is Aston Villa.

This bolded bit is worse, some of the things written in this thread must be from youngsters who support but hate United and don’t really understand the history

 

[Spoony]

Maybe the Glazers could make it up out of the money they've drained from the club. If it wasn't for Fergie, those leeches wouldn't have made a penny out of United.

Actually it's insane Fergie's earned millions but the Glazers have made billions from United. Fergie's been paid handsomely, to be fair... I'd like to think enough to live a luxury lifestyle and with that his status as the biggest United legend as well. Suppose if we're penny pinching then no one should be off limits.

 

[Herman Toothrot]

Was just thinking that the club will probably still make a lot of money off merchandising and so on with Fergies image. I hope that he’s got a contract for that

Oh God, you're right. feck. They still have pictures of Billy Meredith in the museum, but I bet he's on a retainer.

 

[TenonTen]

Great decision. Time to move on for the club.

 

[Spoony]

Great decision. Time to move on for the club.

W*nker.

 

[golden_blunder]

Oh God, you're right. feck. They still have pictures of Billy Meredith in the museum, but I bet he's on a retainer.

I know you’re being sarcastic but seriously IF Fergie is annoyed (and I don’t know if he is or isn’t) he could play it a different way

 

[Moriarty]

Actually it's insane Fergie's earned millions but the Glazers have made billions from United. Fergie's been paid handsomely, to be fair... I'd like to think enough to live a luxury lifestyle and with that his status as the biggest United legend as well. Suppose if we're penny pinching then no one should be off limits.

Yes, I doubt Fergie will be going to the food bank any time soon but cutting his ambassadorial fee - which I assume nobody at United begrudges him - to me smacks of INEOS making a point that they are in charge now and names don't matter. I wonder if the INEOS hires will be taking pay cuts if the business hits hard times.

 

[mitchmouse]

I wouldn't have cried if the whole board had been sacked had the sheikh taken over, except for Sir Bobby who was clearly very ill at the time and deserved the club's support. Paying Fergie £1m+ for basically drinking nice wine with people did seem a bit bonkers and I'll never believe it wasn't him alone who foistered Moyes on us. A legend, yes. But all good things must end

 

[Hammondo]

We've spent £600m on a midtable, misfit team, and won two minor trophies. They've spent less and have assembled a young team with a good coach, who are on the cusp of challenging for major titles. I would swap two trophies for that any day. If we were in their position now the United fan base would be bouncing. How much good feeling are those two trophies bringing us right now?

I'll ask you a question, which fanbase is happier now? More optimistic?

I highly doubt they are winning any major trophies.

 

[ArmaDino]

Low paid staff that's been around for decades getting axed as opposed to board members willingly cancelling their annual milking of the clubs finances is the real story.

The "former manager" is the singular reason why we even have a club of the size we have. There is no Manchester United like we know today without Sir Alex Ferguson. Every childhood memory of watching football greats take to the pitch at the Theatre of Dreams is forever connected to a singular man. Manchester United were relegated to the 2nd tier of English football in 1973. In 1993 Manchester United won the inaugural Premier League title. And another 12 PL titles after that. The club won the Champions League twice under Sir Alex. Want to know why the treble was such a big deal? Why the CL final in 1999 is such a colossal part of United folklore? The club last won the CL in.. 1968.

Between the previous time the club lifted the league trophy and Sir Alex's first time lifting it, 26 years went by. Two full generations of footballer careers came and went between the times the club sat at top of the table.

There is not a soul on this green earth the club, the fans or any player owes more to than Sir Alex Ferguson when it comes to Manchester United and its legacy. He is not a "former manager" that collects money, the salary offered to him after his retirement is absolutely nothing in comparison to the enormous value he has brought to the club.

I get that he is a very wealthy man, he is old and doesn't need the money. It saddens me that the respect on the mans legacy and name is eroding, when what you have without the man is Aston Villa.

Fully agree with this post. It's funny to see how fans complain that corporatism is destroying the very soul of football, and yet when your club becomes just another corporate entity cutting down on the culture and people that made it the way it is, everyone claps.

This to me is absolutely disrespectful to Sir Alex. Without the man, there is no Manchester United as we know it. But it's more than that, it's also the errosion of our traditions. We are not Manchester United anymore, we are Man UTD LLC, a corporate entity whose sole purpose is to generate revenue and clicks.

 

[nickm]

Let's not talk about sacking SAF as setting standards. Especially when they're doubling down on a choice to keep a falling manager, whilst we sit near the bottom of the league.

I think ETF needs to go but that is a separate issue to SAF's £2m/year retainer. They are clearly giving ETH more time than I would but then they are the experts and I am not.

 

[nickm]

Do you really believe that? This is a cost cutting measure.

It can be both. Cost cutting done right, is a redirection of resources from a low productive area to a high productive one. The whole club has been going through the exercise, and I imagine that SAF is as subject to that process as anyone else.

I always thought the best time to have made a clean break was when he retired, but the club has to move on from SAF.

 

[Tincanalley]

I'm not really getting the drama around this.

Exactly

 

[Matt Varnish]

He was a good friend with John Magnier as well….

Sssssh you shouldn't mention he was complicit in Magnier and his mate selling their shares to the Glazers

 

[Denis79]

Eric Cantona questions ‘scandalous’ decision to end Sir Alex Ferguson’s Manchester United ambassador role​

Eric Cantona has launched a stinging attack at Manchester United’s Ineos owners over their decision to terminate Sir Alex Ferguson’s £2m-a-year contract as a club ambassador.

“Such a lack of respect. It’s totally scandalous. Sir Alex Ferguson will be my boss forever! And I throw them all in a big bag of shit!”

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5845360/2024/10/15/eric-cantona-ferguson-manchester-united/

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...-erik-cantona-manchester-united-b2629730.html

The King has spoken!

 

[Oranges038]

Low paid staff that's been around for decades getting axed as opposed to board members willingly cancelling their annual milking of the clubs finances is the real story.

The "former manager" is the singular reason why we even have a club of the size we have. There is no Manchester United like we know today without Sir Alex Ferguson. Every childhood memory of watching football greats take to the pitch at the Theatre of Dreams is forever connected to a singular man. Manchester United were relegated to the 2nd tier of English football in 1973. In 1993 Manchester United won the inaugural Premier League title. And another 12 PL titles after that. The club won the Champions League twice under Sir Alex. Want to know why the treble was such a big deal? Why the CL final in 1999 is such a colossal part of United folklore? The club last won the CL in.. 1968.

Between the previous time the club lifted the league trophy and Sir Alex's first time lifting it, 26 years went by. Two full generations of footballer careers came and went between the times the club sat at top of the table.

There is not a soul on this green earth the club, the fans or any player owes more to than Sir Alex Ferguson when it comes to Manchester United and its legacy. He is not a "former manager" that collects money, the salary offered to him after his retirement is absolutely nothing in comparison to the enormous value he has brought to the club.

I get that he is a very wealthy man, he is old and doesn't need the money. It saddens me that the respect on the mans legacy and name is eroding, when what you have without the man is Aston Villa.

Should all the players who won those games on the pitch still be getting paid by the club?

We could get Steve Bruce in on £1m a year to be the club's official bacon spokesman.