Great to see accounting FC getting a win.
Sir Alex Ferguson's ambassadorial contract has been axed
- Thread starter Tom Van Persie
- Start date
He earned that paycheck... when he was managing. The amount of money is less important than the focus and discipline it signals, IMO. Strong signal that we're not fcuking around if SAF gets it in the neck too.
Last edited:
So…Roy’s the next manager then. 
fair enough. He had a good run earning £20m+ for doing basically nothing.
When this news broke out I thought that it made sense. The club is losing money, we fired a huge chunk of our workforce and giving 2m+ to an 82 year old seemed crazy. Then I went for a walk and it dawned on me. SAF is gone. I am horrible in terms of sentimentalism so I tried to rationalize it. Once I did that the dread only grew bigger and quite frankly I came to the cusp of a panic attack.
We love to say that no one is bigger then the club but SAF is almost as big as Manchester United. To quote George RR Martin regarding Barristan Selmy 'He lent honor to any man he served'. On top of that the guy knows his worth, he was the only person who could restrain the pundits from going too tough on us, he knows were the bodies are buried and had been at the club for long enough to avoid the pitfalls of signing an NDA. That's quite terrifying from an INEOS POV. If SAF starts criticizing the club then they'll be in trouble. If he sells his story to Netflix or Disney then they're in trouble, if Qatar comes knocking at the Glazers doors to buy the club then he'll be the first person to hire as their front man. In that case INEOS are in trouble.
I stick to what I said to my first paragraph. Manchester United might not be in the financial position to retain SAF. However INEOS with their profit of roughly 1.44B can. The man could have been the front man of everything INEOS football related, the person SJR could call when he needs an informal football advice. Surely SAF understand football more then the bicycle man he insist in giving senior football roles to despite the latter many failings.
We love to say that no one is bigger then the club but SAF is almost as big as Manchester United. To quote George RR Martin regarding Barristan Selmy 'He lent honor to any man he served'. On top of that the guy knows his worth, he was the only person who could restrain the pundits from going too tough on us, he knows were the bodies are buried and had been at the club for long enough to avoid the pitfalls of signing an NDA. That's quite terrifying from an INEOS POV. If SAF starts criticizing the club then they'll be in trouble. If he sells his story to Netflix or Disney then they're in trouble, if Qatar comes knocking at the Glazers doors to buy the club then he'll be the first person to hire as their front man. In that case INEOS are in trouble.
I stick to what I said to my first paragraph. Manchester United might not be in the financial position to retain SAF. However INEOS with their profit of roughly 1.44B can. The man could have been the front man of everything INEOS football related, the person SJR could call when he needs an informal football advice. Surely SAF understand football more then the bicycle man he insist in giving senior football roles to despite the latter many failings.
Still need to improve the scoring difference
They sacked SAF before they sacked ETH fecking hell 
Have anyone said they sacked SAF before ETH? Pretty sure the first one here.
I don't think it's about United not being able to afford SAF. I think INEOS want to pay money to people who are going to improve the performance of the club. If SAF isn't, then there is no role for him. It's a business decision and United can't afford to be sentimental about it. No passengers.
No issues from me. He did a fantastic job with us, and that job has now finished. When he was hired, I imagine the idea was for him to be successful at his job, that was what the agreed salary was for.
Maybe they sacked SAF to be able to afford to sack ETH.They sacked SAF before they sacked ETH fecking hell
Sorry, the brain haemorrhage and the loss of his wife got in the way of taking Antony for a tour around the museum.
It kind of ironic considering that football wise INEOS has won less trophies in their lifetime then SAF did in a quiet afternoon. Lausanne did get relegated more then SAF won CL titles though
I think SAF has had a good run, all things considered.
I'm not really getting the drama around this.
It could also be to move old thinking on as well. Fergie was a miracle worker as a manager domestically and had some success in Europe as well. Football has moved on loads since then.
.Hes now about 84 and must have as much money as a third world country. Let him enjoy the last couple of years of his life without the worry of Utd.
.Hes now about 84 and must have as much money as a third world country. Let him enjoy the last couple of years of his life without the worry of Utd.
Wasn’t even really aware we were paying millions for him. Don’t see what the big deal is here.
Your job now is to stand by our new ambassador
All that matters really
The last couple of years of his life? WTF type of comment is that?
It's virtually a tiny royalty payments. He made Man Utd the behemoth that it is. Without Sir Alex it would not be one of the richest clubs in the world.
Man Utd has an annual revenue of 6-700M. 2M is 0.3% in royalty fees. A "normal and modest" royalty fee is about 5%. He could have been paid 32M a year and it would still be entirely fair tbh.
Did you graduate from the same school as Woodward, by any chance?
Wow We will never forget or forgive the Man that sacked the God of Man Utd - Sir Alex Ferguson
Royalty fees! I've heard it all now. My brain is melting reading this thread.
is it correct they would prefer him not to be in the changing room after games? I wasnt bothered about cutting his payments, but that seems a bit odd!
Do people here remember how prior to his supposed first retirement in 2002 he announced that he'll be leaving the club altogether because they wouldn't offer him a decent new role? (eventually he was offered it... Not that it mattered as he stayed on as manager).
No comment.
Image rights! Royalty fees! Private pension plan! Horse breeding fees. Whatever it is, he deserves it.
(I'll be honest, I'm not being serious)
It definitely isn’t. It’s a decision made in concert with SAF. He’s 82 and will remain a non-executive director. He just won’t get a 2m stipend from the club every year, and won’t be required to perform ceremonial activities.
It’s actually an important move, because it shows how dedicated the club are to cutting costs, and it not just being people at the lower end of the pay scale being let go. It’s happening throughout the org chart. There’s no way Ratcliffe would’ve done this without agreement and support from Ferguson. You bought into a ridiculous media narrative from the gutter press, rather than reading the reports from reputable sources. 2m is a significant savings, and I am certain that day to day, this will have zero impact. Except on the bottom line.
I’d bet my bottom dollar that Fergie would still meet with potential new signings if asked, because he lives and breathes the club. The man also has generational wealth, with his net worth being estimated at 75-100m pounds. I also imagine he earned a certain amount of vested shares over the years too. We’ve paid him 23m pounds since he retired. At 82 I am certain he is happy to step back and contribute towards a more sustainable club. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was actually even his idea. With so many jobs being let go, I am sure it sat uncomfortably with him to still be pulling down 2.3m a year as an ambassador.
That’s my interpretation, that it’s either his idea or an idea created in concert with him, and that just shows the class of the man. What it definitely isn’t, is disgraceful.
Right choice for me. You can’t sack a load of people who don’t have millions in the bank to save a few quid, and then pay some guy £2m a year for about 20 days work without it looking like a PR disaster
had to laugh out loud in the underground over this
I don't see a problem with this.
What’s the significance of this?
Saving 2m a year makes sense, and makes you wonder why on earth we were paying that anyway - albeit it is to an all time legend.
But if we don't stop making absolutely calamitous signings, it's utterly pointless as a saving.
But if we don't stop making absolutely calamitous signings, it's utterly pointless as a saving.
That they can only enter the dressing room if invited, I suppose? Probably a non-story - like everything else.
Few then. I didn’t actually mean 2 literally
2 million a year to the greatest ambassador this club has had since Sir Matt Busby is too much, yet the Glazer's take tens of millions away every year for doing nothing. Fantastic eh? feck them.
It doesnt mean during a team talk. That never happened. In fact, Ferguson never allowed the coaches into his team talk. It was him, his assistant and the players. That's all. It seems Ten Hag doesnt want people in the dressing room full stop. Even though every club allows it. If Thierry Henry wants to come in and chat to one of the coaches at Arsenal, nobody would possibly care. Why would they? This sounds very desperate from someone who seemingly wants to find new ways why the team are shit.