Non-issue for me, though of course the media wish to spin it as a scandal and seemingly some here agree. He's getting on, lost his wife, is still involved with the club, there's no need for a global ambassadorial role that involves active travel or work beyond his current board role. Short of paying him for this until he died, at which point people would be complaining over his being paid that long, there's little to suggest anything odd here. Let the man enjoy his remaining years as he wishes. But I can't wait for him being pictured in cut-off mitts, freezing in his kitchen, a poster child in the Sun for government austerity measures....
Sir Alex Ferguson's ambassadorial contract has been axed
- Thread starter Tom Van Persie
- Start date
I fail to see what benefit we were getting out of the arrangement that was worth a couple million a year.
Good call. Sir Alex is the greatest manager of all time and our biggest legend but the club comes first.
I think it’s a poor move.
Obviously sowing division among the fans and the press will spin it like he’s been ruthlessly sacked by the new regime whereas the much maligned Glazers were happy to keep the status quo, it’s not a great look.
Financially the club may save £2m a year, if he lives and wanted to keep his role for another 10 years, that would be a cost of £20m , still peanuts to club of utds size.
I wouldn’t mind betting the mere presence of Fergie still being at the club brings in £2m or more annually.
Maybe Inneos have costed it and have their sums right or they are doing this as some kind of moral thing after sacking lots of lower paid staff.
Almost certain they could have left things as they were with fergie and there wouldn’t have been any kind of outrage or questions about his worth and possible savings brought up.
Obviously sowing division among the fans and the press will spin it like he’s been ruthlessly sacked by the new regime whereas the much maligned Glazers were happy to keep the status quo, it’s not a great look.
Financially the club may save £2m a year, if he lives and wanted to keep his role for another 10 years, that would be a cost of £20m , still peanuts to club of utds size.
I wouldn’t mind betting the mere presence of Fergie still being at the club brings in £2m or more annually.
Maybe Inneos have costed it and have their sums right or they are doing this as some kind of moral thing after sacking lots of lower paid staff.
Almost certain they could have left things as they were with fergie and there wouldn’t have been any kind of outrage or questions about his worth and possible savings brought up.
Completely agree. His salary alone probably makes up between 50-75 salaries elsewhere across the company.
I don't think Fergie would have been particularly comfortable with taking that amount of money whilst layoffs are required elsewhere. It's a complete non-story.
I hear you ...
Consistent behaviour no ?
Cut ALL the useless jobs.
I'm 50/50 here. SAF is millionaire, I'm not in the business of crying for wealthy people. But on the other hand. He's the main reason UTD is a financial powerhouse. He's earned that paycheck. It's just another case of INEOS nickel and diming. We know what the big costs at UTD are: the interest payments, the dividends to Glazers, transfers & player wages. Seems they cutting costs on stuff that will have marginal impact.
It does have me concerned on how they can afford a new stadium
It does have me concerned on how they can afford a new stadium
He doesn't need to have a clue. He needs to bring in people who have a clue.
I dont get why you think its a case of Nickel and diming? It is normal what they are doing.. when a business is run badly, under new ownership, overheads will always be looked at and there will be streamlining.
If the club can operate well with 250 less staff, saving 15m a year, it makes total sense, we were just too bloated and that creates unproductivity.
Now, the points you mentioned, since INEOS took over, how much dividends has been paid to the Glazers?
Player wages - There has been a clear effort last summer to reduce the wage bill, we did not sign anyone over 250k in wages, got rid of players on big wages and will continue in the upcoming windows to do the same. Fees, we have recouped the most transfer fees in over a decade under INEOS and finally paid reasonable transfer fees.
Are you telling me saving on 40/50m a year is marginal?
United is United, we had a history before the great man was even born.
Absolutely. That was the problem with the clueless Glazers, bringing in more clueless people to run the football side of things and ruin the club since Ferguson retired as manager. It's now recovery time under INEOS as they focus fully fixing the club and out of huge debt due to Glazer and their buddies. Hard calls has to made now and Ferguson is and forever will be a legend.
Not a solid argument or opinion for that matter. The cost of paying off ETH is a hell of a lot less than the losses we will see on and off the pitch if we continue to churn our bad results. Ineos knows that and are working the problem.
The Glazer's clearly wanted a mechanism to keep Sir Alex onside and not leaking negative stories to the press. This arrangement clearly kept Sir Alex relatively quiet and not adding to the fierce debate about the Glazer ownership....Super league...general reduction in standards of the club etc.
We've always had a tradition of having various club ambassador roles....but I bet very few were as well remunerated as this one!
Reading this was so weird after reading all the comments above. You just copy and pasted them all?!
People will forget about this in a few weeks. I didn’t realise he’d be getting so much - that’s not standard regardless of his accomplishments. Those enraged about this are probably staunch monarchists n all
That took me back.
Way to go, INEOS. Penny pinching here and blowing an absolute fortune on the receipt of an America's Cup hammering.
How to win friends and influence people.
A genius, that man Ratcliffe.
How to win friends and influence people.
A genius, that man Ratcliffe.
Didn't even realize we were paying him until this was announced.
Exactly, true Scot that he is, SAF would be raising the roof if he thought someone was picking his pocket.
I would suggest it is exactly what its supposed to be, Sir Jim is cutting the 'fat' wherever and whenever he finds it and SAF knows all about 'making difficult decisions'. It might also be a message to fans and a wider audience, that the old days are gone, we look to the future.
Sir Alex Ferguson got sacked before Erik Ten Hag
That is a fact
That is a fact
Look on the bright side, in 40 years we'll be able to sign another Antony with the money saved, good forward planning by Ineos.
If Ineos believed that he'd already be gone.
Actually, when you put it like that, it's quite shocking.
2m is never insignificant, jesus. This is a business. Why should we piss 2m down the drain every year for no good reason? SAF will always be important and revered at the club, doesn't mean he should have a lifetime wage.
Did we pay Matt Busby for a decade after he retired?
The club does this while still paying millions in overpaid wages to crap players like Antony. How about you cut those expenses instead?
We can't cut those expenses. If we could we would, but we can't so we won't.
This means Keane in now.
Sir Alex has been retired for 10 years and likes his racehorses so don't think he'll be too happy with this.
Give him till the end of the season, there might not be better ambassadors out there.
I agree. It is hardly a 'disgrace' to finally terminate the extraordinary sums being paid to Sir Alex Ferguson for more than a decade. Yes, he was our greatest ever manager and yes he transformed the club into a global powerhouse - but he was well paid as the manager when delivering that success. At a time when it is evident we are only a shadow of our former selves and that we are falling further and further behind Liverpool and City, the perpetual golden handshake needs to be curtailed. As much as we all love Sir Alex, he has a reputation in the game for avarice: money was always a key driver for the great man. It is time to think of the Club, and Sir Alex should be happy that the payments lasted as long as they did. The focus now has to be finding and appointing the next Sir Alex. A hard but not impossible task for Sir Jim and the leadership.
Initially Alex was opposed to takeover I seem to recall
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.
Ferguson will always be number 1 at this club. Nothing will ever change that.
When the seagulls follow the bag of shit....
Doesn't have the same ring to it.
No one is bigger than the club, not even SAF. The club is right to clamp down on nonsensical spending like this, especially when they are making cuts to other much less well paid roles.
This is the kind of sentimentality SAF himself would never have tolerated when he was running the club.