What are Manchester United's "values"?

[Will Absolute]

We also have ambassadors like Park Ji Sung. A decent, if rather forgettable player for us, who just so happens to appeal to a huge commercial market for the club.

In fairness, an ambassador's role is to represent the club. To do that he needs to be recognized and respected by fans, not necessarily have had an outstanding playing career.

In Asia, Park fits the part perfectly. And I assume he's more or less our Asian ambassador.

 

[Skills]

Success playing attacking football. Basically the biggest cock and balls in England.

 

[Brwned]

The fact that Liverpool have a bigger fanbase in any continent really just proves my point, considering their relative levels of success over the last decade.

Where are you getting your stats from anyway? The only data I can find on google is an interactive map of twitter followers. Which supports my point about Liverpool shitting all over City in terms of global fanbase.

I agree, history and heritage matters. I'd contest the idea that they've been that much less successful than City over the last decade though.

Champions League performance counts for a lot and Liverpool won 1 final and lost the other in the last 10 years while City have been a mild embarrassment. 1 FA Cup and 1 League Cup too. City have won the same number of cups, have finished 2nd in the PL the same number of times and I wouldn't say their two PL titles put them above Liverpool's CL performances.

It's only really in the last 5 years that they've been more successful than them and that's a very small timeframe, really. It takes a while for success to filter through to interest and following. If you look at Chelsea for example, they have a bigger following than Liverpool in most major football countries.

Personally I don't think the social media stats really tell you much at all. The demographics of social media users - or at least those who actively engage with brands/clubs/etc. - is too limited to use it as a guide of overall following.

 

[Theonas]

It's about who you ask. To modern fans, Manchester United is set apart because of Sir Alex Ferguson and powerful commercial clout. Barcelona are known for their Cruyff/Dutch inspired style and Catalonia identity. Real Madrid for them being the home of the newest shiniest super stars. Chelsea are the first of the nouveau rich, ultra competitiveness and Abramovic. Arsenal for their sexy football and Arsene Wenger and Bayern for being THE German club. Those are the identities those different clubs have but they change with the time. That is why Bayern fans are not happy with the internationalisation of their club as it contradicts with what they represent. In our case, we are in an identity crisis since ours according to the rest of the modern world and a lot of our own fans was strictly linked to one man. That is not a big problem however as every big club goes through that at some point. The modern Barcelona as we know it was non-existent before the early 1990s and the same can be said about Arsenal pre Wenger so it is exciting in a sense that we get to forge a new identity.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I agree, history and heritage matters. I'd contest the idea that they've been that much less successful than City over the last decade though.

Champions League performance counts for a lot and Liverpool won 1 final and lost the other in the last 10 years while City have been a mild embarrassment. 1 FA Cup and 1 League Cup too. City have won the same number of cups, have finished 2nd in the PL the same number of times and I wouldn't say their two PL titles put them above Liverpool's CL performances.

It's only really in the last 5 years that they've been more successful than them and that's a very small timeframe, really. It takes a while for success to filter through to interest and following. If you look at Chelsea for example, they have a bigger following than Liverpool in most major football countries.

Personally I don't think the social media stats really tell you much at all. The demographics of social media users - or at least those who actively engage with brands/clubs/etc. - is too limited to use it as a guide of overall following.

What stats were you using in your previous post?

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Determination. Despite the commercialization of the club, there's still a working class vein running through its fabric. That leads to the never give up attitude, the team effort that produced drab title winning teams during Fergie's later years.

Used to think we are classy in our behaviour but it was marred somewhat during the last few years. But generally we do conduct ourselves well in our business.

History.

 

[Spoony]

Must have gained prominence in the late 70s though, just failed to build on that.

My overall point had to do with history not accounting for much in the present. Aren't Liverpool always knocked for always talking about history?

Nah, as I said they were small club that punched above its weight, they just didn't have the special little something that's possibly needed to gain a wider following. As for Liverpool, we love to knock them but they're a great club. Chelsea and City can only dream of being as special as them.

 

[Spoony]

The fact that Liverpool have a bigger fanbase in any continent really just proves my point, considering their relative levels of success over the last decade.

Where are you getting your stats from anyway? The only data I can find on google is an interactive map of twitter followers. Which supports my point about Liverpool shitting all over City in terms of global fanbase.

Liverpool's sponsorship with Standard Charter and Warrior dwarfs anything City or Chelsea could muster up. Global fanbase is why.

 

[Roman Bellic]

Liverpool's history clearly counts for a lot in the present. Hence they remain popular despite years (decades?) of under-achievement.

Not necessarily their history, more of the fact that they were comfortably the "best of the rest" in the PL for a decade, with 9 top 4 finishes and 9 major trophies since the start of the millennium ( incl. a CL victory) - They were very much relevant in the 00s, they just couldn't hack it in the league, just like AC Milan.

I doubt the new age Liverpool fans support them primarily because of their history. They've also had 2 cult figures in the game and a couple of great players.

 

[Roman Bellic]

Nah, as I said they were small club that punched above its weight, they just didn't have the special little something that's possibly needed to gain a wider following. As for Liverpool, we love to knock them but they're a great club. Chelsea and City can only dream of being as special as them.

Not doubting their greatness. What do you mean by 'special'?

 

[Spoony]

Not necessarily their history, more of the fact that they were comfortably the "best of the rest" in the PL for a decade, with 9 top 4 finishes and 9 major trophies since the start of the millennium ( incl. a CL victory) - They were very much relevant in the 00s, they just couldn't hack it in the league, just like AC Milan.

I doubt the new age Liverpool fans support them primarily because of their history. They've also had 2 cult figures in the game and a couple of great players.

Arsenal don't have their fanbase. It's not just about recent success (Liverpool and recent success?!?)

 

[Spoony]

Not doubting their greatness. What do you mean by 'special'?

Past successes, great players, Anfield, Shankly, Paisley...the club is steeped in history and tradition which most would regard as special and no doubt alluring. They've had a huge following, throughout their history, second only to Manchester United.

 

[Invictus]

Liverpool's sponsorship with Standard Charter and Warrior dwarfs anything City or Chelsea could muster up. Global fanbase is why.

Wut? No.

Shirt Sponsor:

Chelsea Football Club announced one of the biggest shirt sponsorship deals in the history of the sport on Thursday. The five-year pact with Japanese tire manufacturer, Yokohama Rubber YORUY +%, is worth almost £40 million annually (or $60 million), according to the Daily Telegraph.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad...illion-sponsorship-deal-with-yokohama-rubber/

Liverpool have agreed a new £30 million shirt deal with partners Standard Chartered in one of the most lucrative contracts in the Premier League.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...s-Standard-Chartered-sign-30m-shirt-deal.html

Kit Sponsor:

Chelsea have signed the biggest shirt deal in the history of the Barclays Premier League after agreeing a 10-year contract worth £300million with adidas.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...d-300m-kit-deal-sportswear-giants-adidas.html

In 2012 Liverpool signed a six-year deal worth £25 million a season with Warrior Sports, whose parent company is New Balance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...verpool-seal-record-300-million-kit-deal.html

The £25 million can increase a bit, but they will not play in the Champions League or win titles to meet the escalators. Hardly dwarfing Chelsea's apparel revenues.

 

[Spoony]

Wut? No.

Shirt Sponsor:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad...illion-sponsorship-deal-with-yokohama-rubber/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...s-Standard-Chartered-sign-30m-shirt-deal.html

Kit Sponsor:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...d-300m-kit-deal-sportswear-giants-adidas.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...verpool-seal-record-300-million-kit-deal.html

The £25 million can increase a bit, but they will not play in the Champions League or win titles to meet the escalators. Hardly dwarfing Chelsea's apparel revenues.

Yeah, I forgot that Chelsea have recently had a cash injection from Yokohama. Still considering Chelsea's recent success and Liverpool's lack of... It's remarkable that LFC are as appealing to sponsors.

 

[Invictus]

Yeah, I forgot that Chelsea have recently got a cash injection from Yokohama. Still considering Chelsea's recent success and Liverpool's lack of... It's remarkable that LFC are as appealing to sponsors.

Yep, that's true mate. Once a club adds to their historical success and builds a large fan-base, it doesn't erode easily over time. Even the gloryhunters who draw a lot of flak stick to the club by and large. Liverpool have done well to maintain popular interest in their team despite the barren run, and the same could be said of United in the 1970s and 1980s, where we were a huge spectator and commercial draw despite waning fortunes.

 

[Roman Bellic]

Arsenal don't have their fanbase. It's not just about recent success (Liverpool and recent success?!?)

Liverpool's dominance in the 70s and 80s ensured that they accumulated a huge following- but their failure to build on that to the level of Real Madrid, Barcelona and United etc, is testament to the fact that they haven't been able to attract as much fans as they'd like in the 90s, 00s and 10s.

Although, winning 9 major trophies in 15 years (incl. a CL ) and being a part of the PL's 'big 4' marketability era which was largely popular - ensured that they remained relevant and acquired a respectable amount of new fans, not enough to compete with the top dogs, but enough to increase their brand.

Arsenal have not had a dominant era like United and Liverpool, but they have managed to amass a huge following due to their recent history, City and Chelsea also have a growing worldwide fan base.

Liverpool certainly won't be able to attract more fans than the top teams in the next decade or 2 if they continue lingering outside the top 4.

 

[Rory 7]

We'll Never Die.

 

[Roman Bellic]

Past successes, great players, Anfield, Shankly, Paisley...the club is steeped in history and tradition which most would regard as special and no doubt alluring. They've had a huge following, throughout their history, second only to Manchester United.

That doesn't make them special. They just capitalised on their successes, but have failed to significantly build on it in recent years, which is why a team with 7 league titles was able to surpass them in damn near every category and amass and even bigger following.

History doesn't make you relevant, it might sustain you for a while, but it wanes over time if you fail to build on it.

 

[Raees]

You'd have to be daft to think we're in the same tier as a Chelsea and Man City when it comes to values and tradition or even an Arsenal to be honest.

This club is truly up there with the elite clubs in that regards.. its a club that the very story of the game would have to refer to when giving a full account of what it is that makes football so great. A club that is essential to defining and bringing to life the very sport we love. Arguably the greatest club from the nation which created football,

Clubs like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern, United, Juventus, Liverpool, Milan and Ajax... definitely have histories which set them apart from the average clubs.

United's values or elements which set us apart off top of my head...

Success with stars developed at the club/strong presence of British players

Our greatest successes all came from a great display of faith shown in youth coming through the ranks, letting it mature and winning the biggest trophies... furthermore in all of these successes there was a strong presence of British and Irish talent in all of these successes - the 07/08 final.. we had 7 British players start or feature during the game out of 14 players, that is incredible, in fact it is the same number as Spanish players in Barcelona's 10/11 CL winning side.

• The Busby Babes (Pre Munich).. they went toe to toe with the original Galacticos and held their own.. potentially one of the greatest sides in history cut down in their prime
• 68 EC winning team... a team led by the 22 year old George Best, supported by the likes of Bobby Charlton (Munich survivor and Busby Babe himself).. with a forward line in the final aged 22, 19 and 20.
• 99 CL winning team... class of 92 - regardless of whether they're strictly from the 92 class, all were bred through the academy system and were a core component of the side
• 07/08 CL winning side.. the triumph was based on the flourishing of young talent such as Rooney and Ronaldo.. we grew up with them from 03-07. It was a three/four year process, developing before our very eyes. Yet again the likes of Scholes, Giggs also played their part.

We may be a truly global club but there is a strong British presence in our success. In fact it might be one of the reasons why we are so reluctant to get rid of Rooney.. and keep shoehorning him into the side. Carrick likewise... two key stalwarts who we will struggle to replace using British talent alone.

Its why we should have signed someone like Clyne in my opinion instead of Darmian, regardless of who goes on to be better. If there is any chance of signing a good british player who can play to an international standard and be reliable in european competition, we should take it because they give the club something special which can't be explained through pure statistics or sheer ability. They give the club some passion and character as cliche as it sounds.

Attacking football and the style of it (individual-centred rather than team focused)

I have always associated Real Madrid and ourselves as the teams renowned for having a brand of football which is very fast paced, ruthless and jaw-droppingly exciting. Barcelona are also reknowned for their beautiful football but theirs is more poetic and brazillian/dutch 'Joga Bonito' in nature, its very artistic and relies a lot on 'feel' not to mention they are renowned for their great possession based, team focused style of play.. think Dream Team and think the latest Xavi/Messi/Iniesta based side under Pep.

United have a different brand of football, it is very unique.. in fact I would say United at their best, typify what makes the Premier League so watchable. They're the premier league in a nutshell... and the style of Fergie's teams and United throughout their history is what made them the best supported team in the UK and in the world.

Liverpool from the 80's as great as they were, were not a patch in terms of aesthetic pleasure as United from the 60's. Even now you can go watch a 60's game on youtube and the magic of Charlton, Law and Best.. it is something special, it is super exciting football played at break neck speed. They just want to score goals every time they have the ball and do not want to fanny around with it or be methodical. That is what Manchester United is about.

'Attack..Attack..' people find the chant cringeworthy but where would you find such a chant in any top english team. I have never heard that chanted at Chelsea?

We also have a history of great invididuals... in general the best or most memorable individuals in the history of English football have played for the most part for Manchester United. That for is an undeniable fact. Best, Law, Ronaldo, Charlton, Edwards, Cantona.. compared to other english clubs, we have a greater collection of brilliant flair players... Liverpool don't come close in this regard. That is a big hallmark of our style of football and it is a value. At United, we give great individuals the space to breathe and play their brand of football.. we don't stifle them.

 

[Brightonian]

Win trophies, play attacking football, try and promote from the academy when possible, don't employ total cnuts (aim for a mix of wonderful human beings and loveable bastards.)

For me, anything else is irrelevant.

 

[Spoony]

That doesn't make them special. They just capitalised on their successes, but have failed to significantly build on it in recent years, which is why a team with 7 league titles was able to surpass them in damn near every category and amass and even bigger following.

History doesn't make you relevant, it might sustain you for a while, but it wanes over time if you fail to build on it.

It does in the eyes of most football fans. Okay, you define what 'special' means, so I can understand what you what it means to you.

 

[carvajal]

all teams in the world like the idea of attacking football , maybe at certain times the fans defend a defensive coach but does not mean they have that philosophy in the blood .
I would define United as a very British and extremely conservative team, very concerned about the class and chivalry , for this the speech of loyalty and respect of contracts/players is repeated constantly as the threads or conversations based in persuade and convince others of the reasons and motives of each to support the team, always trying to show that aura of class and tradition,something like " I'm not a glory hunter or plastic fan" this much- repeated in English football .
Despite that traditionalism the club is doomed to fall into the inevitable hypocrisy by the clash with modern football ,in the future will struggle between the conservative and traditional defense of british football with the inevitable commercialism and expansion of the tactics and football players from latin countries, fashion or needed to stay in the elite (debatable).
In the short term should forget the "if SAF were here " and try to stay in the elite, which is the most complicated of all .

 

[rcoobc]

Bobby Charlton - 1956 to 1973
Bill Foulkes - 1952 to 1970
Tony Dunne - 1960 to 1973
George Best - 1963 to 1974
Alex Stepney - 1966 to 1978
Martin Buchan - 1972 to 1983
Arthur Albiston - 1974 to 1988
Mark Hughes - 1980 to 1986 AND 1988 to 1995
Bryan Robson - 1981 to 1994
Steve Bruce - 1987 to 1996
Dennis Irwin - 1990 to 2002
Ryan Giggs - 1990 to 2014
Gary Neville - 1992 to 2011
Paul Scholes - 1993 to 2011 AND 2012 to 2013
Roy Keane - 1993 to 2005
etc

Not an exhaustive list by any means, but pick your hero whether it be Bobby Charlton or Eric Cantona or George Best, how many degrees of separation are there really.

As an interesting exercise, if you joined United as a fresh faced youngster now, how many of your team mates would have played with Ronaldo in 100 games or more? Or if you joined United now, how many players would you be playing alongside that had played 100 games with someone else who had played 100 games with Roy Keane?

Whatever are values, I hope this longevity continues, and the club doesn't become a plastic brand.

 

[Roman Bellic]

It does in the eyes of most football fans. Okay, you define what 'special' means, so I can understand what you what it means to you.

You're correct, their greatness can't be disputed.

But, their allure has waned significantly as they have rested on their laurels enough, and they are on course to regress even further in the next decade or 2.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

Or if you joined United now, how many players would you be playing alongside that had played 100 games with someone who had played 100 games with Roy Keane.

0. Rooney is the longest serving player and he only played about a season with Keane.

Though he played with players who had played with Keane, same with Carrick, De Gea, Smalling, Valencia, Young and Jones.

 

[VP]

We're the world's football club. I've met Norwegian season ticket holders, Indians with United tattoos, poor Kenyan farmers who follow games on radio - no other club generates such madness and love. It's no coincidence that Best, Beckham and C Ronaldo - the three biggest stars of football - all played for United. Another reflection of the club's magnitude is Redcafe itself: we have such a large amalgamation of rival supporters. How many Man Utd fans do you think post on Spanish Madrid forums?

 

[sammsky1]

Glad I sparked this thought @Brwned and I also think its a very interesting subject.

Whether we like it or not, Manchester United has been managed as a corporate brand for many years and is in fact nowadays a world class study in excellent Brand Marketing. It is the proactive projection of this brand that has enabled years of commercial growth.

I've had a 20 year career building corporate brands and advertising them. The best method I have found to distill an organisations core values are to answer the following questions:

OUTSIDE CONTEXT
1. Who are the competition?
2. Who are our target customers?
3. What is their key human insight in relation to our product or service?

OUR ORGANISATION OFFERING
4. What our our benefits: Functional and Emotional
5. What are our key values?
6. Why should people believe us?
7. What is our single most important discriminator?

PHILOSOPY
8. What is our essence? (in 5 or less words)


Im going to have a go filling this up over the next 24 hours. Others who are interested might do the same. It will help you to very quickly understand how the club is marketing our club and show you why we are unique.

 

[Getsme]

Manchester United is just like any other club from the group of the best clubs in the world.

We're no special. And it makes me laugh when I hear fans saying we're unlike others because we give youth chance (not anymore, though), we play attacking football (not anymore, too), we tend to choose local and British footballers (not anymore as well). And it makes me laugh, too, when people write about Munich and Busby. It's past. Those people often smile when Scousers bring up the past, yet they're doing the same.

We're not a special club, and the values we used to associate with the club 10-15 years ago are not the same now. The world evolves.

So much wrong in this post.

 

[Laphroaig]

Bobby Charlton - 1956 to 1973
Bill Foulkes - 1952 to 1970
Tony Dunne - 1960 to 1973
George Best - 1963 to 1974
Alex Stepney - 1966 to 1978
Martin Buchan - 1972 to 1983
Arthur Albiston - 1974 to 1988
Mark Hughes - 1980 to 1986 AND 1988 to 1995
Bryan Robson - 1981 to 1994
Steve Bruce - 1987 to 1996
Dennis Irwin - 1990 to 2002
Ryan Giggs - 1990 to 2014
Gary Neville - 1992 to 2011
Paul Scholes - 1993 to 2011 AND 2012 to 2013
Roy Keane - 1993 to 2005
etc

Not an exhaustive list by any means, but pick your hero whether it be Bobby Charlton or Eric Cantona or George Best, how many degrees of separation are there really.

It would be an interesting exercise, if you joined United now, how many players would you be playing alongside that played with Ronaldo in 100 games or more? Or if you joined United now, how many players would you be playing alongside that had played 100 games with someone who had played 100 games with Roy Keane.

Whatever are values, I hope this longevity continues, and the club doesn't become a plastic brand,

Four steps from Charlton to Lingard.

 

[Maciej]

So much wrong in this post.

Tell me what I got wrong, then.

 

[rcoobc]

Or if you joined United now, how many players would you be playing alongside that had played 100 games with someone who had played 100 games with Roy Keane.

0. Rooney is the longest serving player and he only played about a season with Keane.

Though he played with players who had played with Keane, same with Carrick, De Gea, Smalling, Valencia, Young and Jones.

I deliberately put two degrees of separation in there, although I think in our current squad only Rooney and Carrick will have reached 100 games with someone like Scholes or Giggs

Maybe 100 games is far too high a benchmark though. Far too high.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

I deliberately put two degrees of separation in there, although I think in our current squad only Rooney and Carrick will have reached 100 games with someone like Scholes or Giggs

Valencia must be close, joined in 09.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

...and I also think its a very interesting subject.

Certainly is.

Values? Very airy category. Who upholds these "values"? The club? But what is the club?

I believe the "values" are tangible enough as part of a sales pitch, but then again those doing the peddling aren't "Manchester United", are they? The latter being an idea more than anything, something people - fans - revere and which is no more, or no less, than what these people want it to be. And those people aren't a homogeneous group - less so than ever these days.

I'd be very interested to learn what someone like Woody considers to be, say, our main "discriminator".

 

[Ayush_reddevil]

What I have realized at least on this forum is that these values change from person to person and even the application of some of the values seems to vary depending on the situation. People love talking about giving young players a chance but a lot of people then also are incredibly impatient with these young players. I wonder what the values are regarding supporting the manager because they seem to change rather frequently as well.

 

[Getsme]

Tell me what I got wrong, then.

The group you speak off is an elite group of maybe four teams of which you could argue we are the biggest. How is that not a special club?

We don't give youth a chance? In two seasons we have given debuts to McNair, Blackett, Pereira, Jackson, Lingard. We've also invested heavily in youth with Shaw, Memphis and Martial.

We still have a core of young and not so old British talent in our team. Smalling, Jones, Shaw, McNair, Lingard, Carrick, Young, Rooney and Wilson. In addition to that we still invest heavily in local talent.

Style. We still play attacking football, but in a different way.

The past. It's the past that forms our future, of course we should embrace it. That's one of the most ridiculous things you said.

 

[Spoony]

The group you speak off is an elite group of maybe four teams of which you could argue we are the biggest. How is that not a special club?

We don't give youth a chance? In two seasons we have given debuts to McNair, Blackett, Pereira, Jackson, Lingard. We've also invested heavily in youth with Shaw, Memphis and Martial.

We still have a core of young and not so old British talent in our team. Smalling, Jones, Shaw, McNair, Lingard, Carrick, Young, Rooney and Wilson. In addition to that we still invest heavily in local talent.

Style. We still play attacking football, but in a different way.

The past. It's the past that forms our future, of course we should embrace it. That's one of the most ridiculous things you said.

I think Maciek means we're just like any club that chases revenue streams. Let's be honest we're a global brand now. Basically we're whores.

 

[MoskvaRed]

Every club has a unique history, even those that have been unsuccessful. While I'd like to say we represent some particular values associated with Manchester or the North, in reality we stand for making as much money as possible.

 

[Getsme]

I think Maciek means we're just like any club that chases revenue streams. Let's be honest we're a global brand now. Basically we're whores.

If that's what he meant then yes, I'd agree.

 

[Americano]

The values of the club mean something to me, I don't find it a pretentious concept.

Intrepid
Redoubtable
Defiant
Invincible
Expedition
Victory

 

[pacifictheme]

Manchester United is different in that it embraced internationalism earlier and more wholeheartedly than any other British club. We're truly global, that's what sets us apart.

And its a fecking shame we are. Get a ticket in the wrong part of OT and you're surrounded by idiots who take selfies the whole match and haven't got a fecking clue what our songs are. Its the price of success, but its a pretty soul destroying one for matchday fans.

Actually the commercial side has had a more adverse impact on match going fans. The matchday experience isn't the same as it was 15 years ago. Its the same on tv though.