I really want to know your honest opinion of Jim Ratcliffe's ownership of Manchester United so far and what you genuinely feel the best way forward is? How do you draw the line at what cuts are needed?
U were preaching this Ratcliff from the buying rumours..u didn't want Qatar..u wanted this man...now u got it.. enjoy the cost cutting n mediocre mentality..
It's been an absolutely disastrous first year on and off the pitch, the only thing that could make it any worse is relegation. We'll never know but I don't think the Qataris would be this bad.
i think unfortunately they’re doing what they have to do to fix what the glazers have caused, but i don’t think they are the group to take United back but the are to start us getting on the right path back
Ratcliffe is sh1t, mate. Makes all these cuts but spends 40M for Zirkzee and another 45 for De Ligt. Our transfers this season have been horrendous. Seriously, he is 1 year in charge, yeah? Name me a player that the Ineos football gurus bought and proved value for money.
No player's going to accept a non-guaranteed contract these days. The best you can do is try to shift as much to performance based bonuses as you can. It's why recruitment and *reasonable extensions* is so vital, bad contracts are like chains around the club's neck.
That's not going to happen at base level because they'd have to sign a new contract, but there's already a club policy 25% wage cut the following season after failure to qualify for the UCL for players who were contracted for that season. If these cuts are serious then there will be a hard cap on the initial contract at maybe £200k p/w for new players, while they're going to have to figure out how they get rid of anyone above that, who would willingly accept their wage demands because it's either that or just let them run their contract down or convince them to release themselves from it if they can afford to, because even if they could sack them, that money is still going to be paid to them as a severance fee, not to mention the player could potentially take the club to court if there's no mutual agreement depending on the reason they were sacked as they can't prove the wrongdoing on an individual level.
there is a little thing called contracts. and i would bet everything i own that you had no idea united had a charity contribution before you read it in the media last week.
And how would “morale” be if this catastrophe continues under the Glazers and the club goes bankrupt and everyone loses their job…? It’s a business not a charity
@@jhpfdijtuiweruotyou’re right, it’s not a charity. This catastrophe could end with making cuts elsewhere. Think about the MILLIONS wasted on recent contracts with Ten Hag and Ashworth. Cuts from staff bonuses and community support will never make up for that in a million years…
Cancelling the staff Xmas party & the 40 000 quid to charity is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.What about players earning 30,000 quid per day & not performing??? cut there 1st!
I agree with the sentiments but it is hard to renegotiate contracts with players which means cuts have to come from somewhere else. The club needs to keep selling players though and making sure that they don't repeat the same process of overpaying players.
The club was paying £250,000 per year for the Xmas party - that's way more than most major banks and energy companies fork out for theirs. We are losing money not making record profits.
No it’s not. It’s standard practice for any failing business. And we have release more than THREE DOZEN senior pros from the first team squad and off the wages since Ten Hag started. It was the first thing that cuts were made from not the last. Rashford is one of the last ones out the door not the first. Do you know anything about the club you claim to support?
@@jhpfdijtuiweruotyou can not terminate a contract without mutual consent. As with all employment contracts if you need to terminate it can be done immediately due to gross misconduct with no or minimal payment however for footballers, underperforming does not constitute as gross misconduct. As their salaries are so high to agree a mutual termination fee it will be based on their salary and how long they have left, if they do not want to leave you will have to pay them salary owed as per their contract… so they get the same amount of money regardless but without offering a service. So getting rid of players by terminating their contract is far more costly than staff as they are paid considerably less. The best business decision is to attempt to sell the player you will lose less. Termination is pure loss, a sale mitigates those costs especially if it’s an academy player. This is basic business. Player contracts cannot just be ended it will be disastrous for ffp.
Penny pinching. The real savings are in player wages but they’ve done nothing there so far. Matter of fact they gave our so called captain a bumper new contract. Making him one of the best paid players at the club when we just had one of our worst seasons.
Man U have just over a thousand employees. £30 per head for a Xmas party is £30k. How can you justify cancelling a staff Xmas party when it's a tenth of Rashford's weekly salary?
You don’t save money by getting rid of cleaners, dinner ladies and receptionists whilst cutting a 40k payment towards support for ex players or whatever that payment is for. You do save money by getting rid of overpaid and underperforming so called “stars”. Also, Uncle Jim is cutting like this because he knows there will be no European football next season therefore no revenue. He is balancing the books before the storm hits.
The problem is we as fans do not need to feel sorry for INEOS! They did not need to buy into the club if they could not afford to. There was a bidder willing to get rid off all the debt and invest more money into the club. In the direction we are going Sir Jim will destroy our club image and perception to the world. Sir Jim bought into United for selfish reasons and stopped us from being a debt free, successful club.
This has not been confirmed yet, but there is a very real possibility that the funding cuts at the MU Foundation completely wipes out some of our lower age group women's academy teams as they are run by the Foundation. Some of this stuff is completely cartoon villain level scumbaggery and is just not worth it. If he actually cared about the common Manc (he doesn't), he would just help fund some of the Charity work specifically through his personal finance, would be a drop in the ocean for him. For me some of the things they are doing is just robbing the heart and identity of our club and I would literally rather get relegated than lose what made so many of us fall in love with United in the first place.
@@stacksflat7482 Once a red, always a red only applies when you're a man I guess. Some of you lot being ok with literal children, Mancs at that, losing a place to pursue their dreams and play football for their childhood club, is actually terrifying. Give your head a wobble.
There’s a reason the team principal of Mercedes in F1 only allowed Ratcliffe to be a regular title sponsor providing money and technologies despite owning 60% of the team. Toto’s experience as a businessman allowed him to judge how Ratcliffe would’ve handled Mercedes if they’re struggling like today, and I believe he knew Ratcliffe’s very cold business model wouldn’t work in a sports business model like F1, and it would’ve negatively affect the team as a whole by trying to cause instability within the organization. What Man Utd is facing right now is basically what Toto predicted all the way back in 2019 when he’s negotiating with Ineos
I completely disagree Sam - INEOS are exactly like the Glazers and I never wanted Ratcliffe anywhere near the club. He is first and foremost a 'businessman' meaning he is not interested in anything but money. He is well known for asset stripping and cost cutting -usually from the bottom up. The Glazers must be laughing their socks off having completely deflected all the criticism yet still bleeding the club dry. I firmly believe that if he hadn't stuck his nose in the Qatar bid would have gone through and that the Glazers and the debt would be gone.
But he has put is own money in and put dividends on hold. They want utd to be successful but are making big mistakes. If he wanted more money - why buy a football team
@piranhobbs9527 where's the evidence that's he's put his own money in? The rules make it very hard to do that now, else Newcastle would be blowing everyone away. All I've seen is the debt go up. The exposure ineos have got from being shown alongside manchester united would be what he would want. Suddenly this largely industrial company has become a well known brand
@@neilg6675 pretty sure they have put in the amount that owners owners are allowed too . Do chemical companies even want to be a household name? They don't sell to the public, and would probably rather avoid people knowing them and the shady stuff they do. All the biggest chem and pharmaceutical companies avoid the public eye.
I feel ineos have slowly but steadily set about erasing the goodwill theyve accumulated. As you said most of these would be forgotten quickly if the team was doing better but I am honestly concerned by the way theyve gone about things lately.
Pretending to be Man Utd fans???? I am sorry but its the so called "Online Fans" because of whom Utd are considered a "Global Brand." Because people all.over the world spend money to watch Utd, buy merchandise etc. Just because they weren't born and live in the same country as the club doesn't make them any less of a fan@jhpfdijtuiweruot
@@jhpfdijtuiweruot They own a minority stake, the money they invested is supposed to benefit the club and team. Cut the Glazers and INEOS dividends, not staff and community schemes. You sound more like an INEOS employee than a Utd fan, Jim won't fix it obviously hasn't layed the likes of you off.
@@rightiswrongrightiswrong806 Nope I am a season ticket holder for many, many decades. I pay tens of thousands of pounds for the Glazers and Ineos to buy and train world class footballers. Utterly bizarre that you think it is a donation to charity to support the poor community
Well the cuts are necessary,,,you see Poor old Jim had his insurance quote for his car,,which happens to be THE WORLDS most expensive at £142 million quid...
With all due respect Ineos knew who they were getting in bed with and had done their due diligence and knew the debt and what would need to be done😊. If the same was being done by non English passport holder and not a “life long Manchester United fan” the media would be all over this.
At least in the Championship we will see who the Real Deal United supporters are rather than the Fair-Wheather supporters that abound on line and at the games.
@ Definitely, I’m from the USA and I’m Man United forever, but I still do not think we go down because there are several worse clubs than us at the moment.
We called for and over haul and open heart surgery, but many are complaining about the methods implemented. Our fans are so spoiled and lack patience, yes the cuts, price hikes and whatever is part of the reconstruction. Are we expecting Ineos to invest there hard earned money money into a club they don't fully own. We may not like it but it's what all of us was asking for for years - trust the process, lessons will be learnt the hard way but keep believing
The club could have been fully owned, with the debt cleared. If INEOS are sacking staff on 40K a year tell me, please tell me, how tf will they clear 700 mil worth of debt?
@@SentientTeapot2444Newcastle United alone is already the most solid proof of this TBH. The Saudi PIF net worth is more than the rest of the entire English football pyramid combined and yet they're not making any blockbuster moves right now.
@United4EternityThere's not really a lot else that can be done unless they can convince players to reduce their wages or leave the club, but unless their contracts get run down, who willingly buys these players and accepts their wage demands if they're widely considered not good enough for a big club? Even Saudi clubs have already scrapped their plans of buying finished players from European clubs because their viewer count only got worse after doing so.
Is that all there was to it? You seem to know a lot about what happened. Maybe they made Sir Alex assurances. He later wanted Lewandowski, the Glazers said no, so they bought Van Persie, who was cheaper.
It started with Ferguson otherwise the previous owner would not have sell it to the glazers. For what Ferguson would achieve with previous owners before glazers that we will never know. Sure and certain we would not have been in big debt like now.
@Discombobulate453 this is the problem with people like yourself & other clueless "fans" This all came about because of the arrogance of SAF, if he didn't argue with jp mcmanus & magnier they would never have sold to the glazers, It's taken 20 yrs for the glazers to bleed us dry but here we are, & there's going to be much worse times to come over the next few years. If we ever become a successful team again all the glazers will do is take more dividends out of the club, they've not spent 1 dollar of they're own money & they must be laughing @ ineos being blamed for it all,
Because that’s as silly as saying my car breaking down in the road lead to traffic that caused the person way behind to be late to work, lose their job and end up an alcoholic 😂 Fergie fell out with a man- he didn’t force him to sell to the glazers and he certainly didn’t know what the glazers would do 😂
More Cuts? YES!! Get rid of the women's team, close down the academy and ground share with Bolton Wanderers at the University stadium - the OT ground can be sold to developers for housing.
Don’t agree on the Christmas party ffs. United are one of the worst payers, £100 quid bonus reduced to £50. I even got a better bonus as an apprentice years ago which was £1000 annually. Is this what we’ve become as a football club… it feels heartless and the glazers are still there. I still want them OUT!!
It pains me to say this as a life long supporter since 1977, but Sir Alex Ferguson has a small part to play in getting the vultures: Glazers into this great and amazing club: Man Utd. Sir Alex had a huge row with the Magners over a horse : I could be wrong (Rock of Gibraltar)and as then occurred the Magners sold their share to the Glazers over this. Now what happened when the Glazers took over is down to them. Fast fowards to today, Inoes have tried their best to cut out waste within the club. Has this affected the players moral I don’t know. Quite frankly if the players were upset they could have put their hands in their own pockets to help out. And why throw a fit and behave like a spoilt kid when they don’t Percy on the pitch. I could live with all that is happening if the players did their part in the pitch. Let’s all say it quietly we are in a relegation battle. Be of no doubt of that. I end there.
the only mugs left in the sport who see it as anything other than business are the fans. If United (or any premier league club) could join a world super league and dump this local nonsense they would in a heart beat. Support local small clubs. These big clubs couldn't care less, all the want if to squeeze people for money.
No, the problems didn't start with the Glazers. The seeds of this were sown when the club was floated on the stock market. Once you do that your business is on sale to the highest bidder. The Glazers took advantage and the club couldn't stop them.
Because a stock market quoted company cannot control the buying or selling of it's shares. They are transacted on the stock market. The business world is full of companies who have been the subject of hostile takeovers.
It’s hard to have faith in Ineos given their poor record in sports. They’ve wrecked Sky cycling, Nice are hardly doing well and nor are the F1 team or the All Blacks. This is starting to feel much like it did when we were relegated in 1974, only 6 years after winning the then European Cup.
Cuts like this in that environment - might just increase the risk of environmental disaster ... ... but they can pay massive wages to players who would not command such wages at any other club - perhaps if they deal with those issues, can reinstate some of the community stuff that has been cut.
You are completely right. I don't have a positive or negative impression of INEOS initially. I appreciate how they have handled the new transfer deal so far, but everything else gives me a bad impression.The Dan Ashworth saga, the poor handling of the new manager recruitment (manager scouting right before the FA Cup finals), and the rising price... I don't have the club's balance sheet. Still, even though United's structure might be bloated and need to be improved financially, there is much more they can do instead of putting their hand on United Foundation and other projects that might eventually hurt the club's reputation and the hearts of fans.
The real savings are in the men’s first team squad salaries. All this penny pinching does nothing when you have a guy in rashford, who has contributed nothing for a month but has collected almost all your one time savings in salary.
U can't blame the glazers for everything. The glazers always backed the Manger. They spend close £2 billion on player's since Sir Alex left. Ineos wants run manchester united like it's a factory.
@@angelodoubel9653 I can and do for 99%. They had people not having a clue how to negotiate when buying, and contracts were dished out on ludicrous wages so we end up with effectively deadwood we cant get rid of due to wages. Lets not forget they took money out of the club right, left and centre. At least INEOS, are trying to stem the haemorrhaging of money even if they are making something of a balls up of it on the PR side. SJR has put millions into the club, the Glazers never put a single penny in. We are here due to mismanagement.
Just a reminder to everyone man utds debt currently is $990 million that’s $650m of long term debt and $341m from revolving credit facility. I will play devils advocate and say Jim came in and has established that United was a mess so saying the glazers didn’t remove these costs doesn’t make it okay they didn’t care and didn’t put money in so the money was not coming from their pockets. I understand where people are coming from and I think it’s not a good look. But we somehow want the club to continue spending money when we also wanted a new stadium, new training ground and new players. We just can’t have both I’m sorry things will have to be bad before they get good again the glazers have left us in a mess
I am seeing a lot of noise around Qatar still wanting to buy the club. Any truth or just a big pile of smelly bull.....??? Lets face it, Man U has been so miss managed over a long period of time, so I am not surprised Ineos are making some changes. I am not convinced they are going about it in the right way....but he, JR, is a business man, he is starting to run it like a business... what did we all expect????
It's simply a case of INEOS financial audit & cost optimzation at United. They've must have identified inefficiences and unneccessary expenditures and cutting costs in non-essential areas without compromising core operations. Then come operational restructuring, aligning the workforce size with financial realities, while minimizing disruptions. In summary, INEOS needed to have immediate financial stabilization. They did what they had to. All thanks to.............
Newsflash, the Glazers are the majority owners. To call ineos 'the owners' while only being a minority owner is weird to begin with. Also, if Ineos wants to do something that the Glazers don't want, it's not happening. They have no power.
I wouldn't worry too much about the former players trust fund because that goes up and down a lot every year. For example it dropped from £100,000 to £40,000 in 2020, and went back up to £80,000 the following year, and then down to £70,000 the next year. And it's not uncommon for there to be tens of thousands left over in it, that gets carried over into the next year. I mean it could be at £55,000 at the end of 2024 so they would not need to put in as much next year.
I commented on a video you did before the takeover Sam, and i said they were not the saviour everyone thought they would be. Its been shambolic, quite frankly.
I guess you were kidding yourself that a magical Qatari takeover would have been City 2.0 from the beginning; regardless of who took over, most of these cuts would have been necessary.
Sam was calling Jim Ratcliffe Walt Disney at one point according to another video. Embarrassing. Even NICE fans were telling about Ineos ownership and how poor they are.
Glazers are never gonna sell Manchester United are a global powerhouse Despite how bad they are on the pitch, they can still profit from them so why would they sell?
@ I agree with you to an extent why would they sell a cash cow like Manchester United who will continue to generate it’s revenue and sponsorship yearly alone? But if things were to become even worse for us not only this season but the next couple of seasons the possibility of a sale shouldn’t be ruled out.
He has invested, and a new stadium isn’t something that happens in a year. This isn’t a just put money in situation, it’s about fixing the structure and culture in this team. Money won’t fix that easily
@@darrell5403you can double that, even if quasar owned us we'd still be knackered because of the new ffp rules, Newcastle richest club in the world but can't spend any money cos of ffp, When are fans going to understand ffs 🤦♂️🙈
@@MexicanNatiion the Stadium will be constructed using debt. After it us built, Man Utd will be at least £3 Billion in debt excluding interest!!!! Let that sink in.
But on the other hand all these people can’t keep enjoying the benefits while the club is poor and needs revamping. Let everyone feel the heat and when success starts coming back they can reinstall all these.
Interesting analysis as always Sam - but nothing that Sir Jim is currently doing can be classified as 'marginal gains'. [why is there SO much ignorance around the concept, by so called 'experts' in the media?!?] Please allow me to explain! The 'Aggregation of Marginal Gains' [to give it its correct title] is to change something for the better no matter how big or small. Some refer to it as 'the one percent margin for improvement in everything you do'. For example, if Amorim were to increase/decrease the duration of training sessions by 15 minutes because he found that it would benefit the performance of the players - THAT would be a 'marginal gain'. If you were to replace Man Utd's kit with a lighter more water absorbent kit that helped keep the players drier and reduced fatigue - THAT would be a 'marginal gain'. The ultimate objective of any 'marginal gain' is to improve performance, and as a result produce better results. In all honesty, how the hell will increasing match-day ticket prices help Man Utd play better or win more games?!? To repeat - NOTHING that Sir Jim has done recently constitutes an outcome related to the performance of Man Utd football team. Indeed, you could strongly argue that it will have the completely opposite effect! What Sir Jim is actually doing is cost-cutting. Man Utd as a business has been [generally speaking] operating at a massive loss for many years. This has been accepted whilst Man Utd were successful on the pitch. However, times have changed and Sir Jim has decided to introduce measures to reduce the outlay and save money. Like you Sam, I personally feel that not only is this 'initiative' misguided, but it is also totally misplaced! Saving £40,000 per anum on charity work is peanuts compared to getting the likes of Antony, Rashford and Casemiro off the books - which would save the club the best part of £1 million PER WEEK! I have no idea what Sir Jim's rationale is behind these decisions - but I do know one thing. NONE of these decisions have anything at all to do with 'marginal gains'!! I truly wish that misinformed commenters/pundits like yourself would desist from wrongly labelling everything that Sir Jim/Man Utd do as being a 'marginal gain'. And for your information Sam - there is clear empirical and quantitative evidence that 'marginal gains' do work - and not only in sport. [marginal gains were first applied in industry and business by the Japanese where it is known as 'Kaizen' - and long before Sir Dave Brailsford wrongly claimed that he came up with the concept!]
@@thesoultwins72 For someone who is trying to come across as intelligent, don't you think you're being incredibly naive? Of course the cuts can be constituted as marginal gains. Ignore the 40k headline that was run by the Mirror and actually misleading as it's a cutback on the United Foundation, not just one charity. United's problem is PSR, and every ounce they can squeeze out of revenue can potentially be put back into improving the squad. Isn't that by definition a marginal gain?
Surely you understand that all these cost-cutting measures are being enforced to ensure that Man United DO NOT operate at a loss? I.E. more money the club can utilize towards the football side of things? Better nutrition, training grounds, kits, footwear, machines, players, etc.? Plus, these measures will ensure we undo years of malpractice and show that we are a serious club that knows how to operate as a business, which could potentially lead to bigger, better sponsorship deals and investment? I don't believe you're all seeing the finish line here. Things will have to DRASTICALLY change for us to be successful again. And one last thing, of course SJR would want to ensure he can continue making money while also looking to improve the club. That's common sense. He didn't buy part of the club to NOT make money...🤦🏿♂️
And one last thing. You and several other people ALWAYS refer to focusing on the players at the club before these other measures. You seem intelligent, so I presume you understand how contracts work. What makes you think INEOS are actively not focused on these players? Did it occur to y'all that it's not that simple? Did it occur to y'all to consider the terms and conditions involved in these contracts? Did it occur to y'all that INEOS do not want to release every player you all don't like? Because that would be foolish? Now, with this understanding in mind, has it occurred to y'all that, realistically, INEOS only have 2 periods of the year to focus on the players? Summer transfer window and winter transfer windows? Whereas all of these other issues can be focused on immediately and year round? And back to the players, if we are not just going to release all of these players, how easy is it to find potential buyers? Huh? Do you think they can just wave their hands and someone will magically come get Rashford? And get him for a decent amount so that we can tackle the financial hole we're in?!? These are the things I need you and the rest of these over-reactionary folks to start considering.
@@Key-j5o .....Mmm - I absolutely do not profess to be intelligent, but unlike you - I do know the simple function of reading and comprehension! To repeat - a 'marginal gain' is an action/activity that leads to an 'improvement in performance' [and ultimately delivers better results]. It seems that like many uninitiated commenters on the topic - you do not understand this. So, I will ask you a simple question - how does meeting Utd's [obligatory!] PSR requirements have any impact of the results of the team? [PSR is not a 'voluntary' decision - Utd are required to conform to these 'rules' or they will face severe penalties]. Strengthening the team via recruitment MAY have positive benefits - but judging by what we have seen over the past 10+ years it is highly UNlikely. Your argument, therefore, is extremely tenuous [at best] and seems to be more focused on proving YOUR point rather than giving a quantitative example.
@@Mohthedude .....Of course, I understand that all these 'cost-cutting' measures are intended to make the club more efficient and apply a modicum of financial control and management. But you seem to have totally misunderstood the main points of my OP. [1: the parlous lack of understanding by the media and so-called 'expert' analysts of what exactly 'marginal gains' are.....and 2. SJR's rationale for cutting extremely small and peripheral elements which will probably have much more detrimental impacts on the Man Utd brand]. Following SJR's announcement of all these swingeing cuts - this morning, the media has come out in total condemnation against them. To the best of my knowledge, not one media outlet has focused on the cost-cutting measures as an attempt to streamline Man Utd operations, improve efficiencies or create a more financially 'sensible' business. I realise that as an American you are probably very influenced by money concerns - but there are equally important factors such as how Man Utd is viewed as an employer, its brand and reputation. None of the actions that SJR has imposed have had anything but disastrous impacts on these factors. They have incensed supporters, upset ex-Man Utd players and their families and have generally been interpreted as Dickensian in their intentions. Outliers, such as the media and supporters of other clubs have been literally astonished at this penny-pinching, miserly 'strategy' - especially as Man Utd is considered as the biggest club in the UK and Europe. As a lifelong Man Utd supporter it completely saddens me the way MY football team/club has been managed since the ruthlessly greedy Glazer family became our owners. They have bled the club dry [not investing one single cent of their own money] and plunged us into the best part of £1 billion debt*. *This is a club that was extremely well-managed [under ex-chairman, David Gill], totally debt-free, had a very strict structure for player salaries and is supported and revered across the planet. This was also during the most successful era in the club's entire history! Yet we have now reached a point where we have a number or unbelievably well-paid players who have consistently underperformed and the team is in the lowest position since its membership of the English Premier League. Whilst I totally understand your point about player contracts and salaries per se - cutting costs on the club's charity efforts, staff bonuses and travel arrangements whilst raising tickets prices for children and old-age pensioners isn't really sending the 'right' message to the fan base and external observers. I agree we could not have carried on the way we were - and yes, some 'difficult' decisions and painful changes needed to be made. But will any of the actions SJR has taken make a scrap of difference. To me, he cannot see the wood for the trees!
So we would have carried on as we were, employing 250 more people than we have jobs, and hemorrhaging cash all over the place? Thank god that didn't happen then.
@Jomo-x6n improved most likely. Don't forget, sheikh Jassim is an actual true united fan, Jim Racclif is not he just wanted to aquire a club in the premiere league... he failed with Chelsea and made it with us but unfortunately it is not going well
It's only a matter of few years I believe. The more the debt increases and the inconsistent united perform on the field resulting in poor results and not being competitive meaning less profit will surely lead to full sale.
I think this is the start of the cost cutting. Eventually, they will ask the players to take a pay cut or leave. Empathy and business don't mix when the needs of the club are so dire. We don't know whether INEOS are paying staff and charities out of pocket while they cut costs at the club. All we know is what we're reading. These decisions are for the benefit of the club's future.
I worked in the corporate world for twenty six years - for the first six months of 2023 I tried to provide insight around how SJR & INEOS will approach their strategic vision. I suspect that SJR is around four months behind where he wanted to be at this point as we decided to remain loyal to ETH. SJR's 'Glazer's out' campaign would have been planned to ramp up Feb /March 2025 - as things stand, SJR will now be on damage limitation and may be forced, against his will, to invest in the squad in January. SJR will seek to be in a position of strength before putting his foot on the neck of the Yanks.
Are you talking about how he intend to proceed with further Glazer share acquisition? By engineering a situation where they are encouraged to sell the shares instead of being stuck with dividends not worth staying in for?
Cutting things that have small impact on the major issue but big impact on the little man was a huge mistake and wake up call. Because if Sir Jim was 'just a fan who grew up near etc' he would never do these things to fans or charity. There are bigger and better choices to be made. Then getting rid of Ashcroft while he just got on was another wake up moment. Signing a new manager mid season as well. Ineos needs to prove their managing skills next summer to sell players and cut wages. Because earning 200k a week while Man Utd is at this level is unheard of and embarrassing really. Cut wages, sell expensive players and no dividend pay for the next 10 years.
Whats devilishly clever is that the Glasiers still take their money and that Ratcliffe has to do the penny pinching. He's effectively seen as a gaslighter of the fans and worse than the glasiers. It's ingenious, its only going to get worse.
Crazy, someone comes and actually tries to run the club to make it better we complain all of these cuts are more than justifiable as Manchester United has not been a profitable business, you need to be ruthless if you want change, all i see is us becoming a serious club again, stop whinning
@@c3po995 the club is in a worst state because of ineos , Ratcliffe is Glazer 2.0 u think cutting staff & canceling is gonna help allieviate the club from debt ..Ratclife shouldn't have poke is business in this bidding , the club has become a laughing stock in the world
INEOS are doing great cutting all these expenses. Why borrow money to pay people who aren't really doing anything to help the club grow? Next thing they'll do is stop these ridiculous contracts and high wages. They can't cut players' earnings because they're on contract. 40k a year to former players charity makes sense, the club paid the players and if they aren't doing well that's not the club's business. We have struggling fans and nobody gives them anything. We all need to understand that people need to use their salaries wisely, the club has been wasting funds and I agree with all the cuts. Good luck to them tho
The difference between Glazers and INEOS that no one is talking about is they have always given their employees dignity and respect. Just ask any employee and employees in the Buccaneers and United organizations. I still want both of them out.
Agree 💯 Sam. The MUFoundation and the ex legends charities being cut puts a big shadow over our club. We have always been a club full of class but Ineos are ripping the soul out of our club. Get ready for empty seats being very visible!
What changed? We got Omar Barrada from City. All other metrics has been a disaster. Economics, jobs, results, squad. Who thought this would be some great big fix? Look at Nice!
Even if the Sheikh came in he would of expected some sort of investment back. The owners of City have won numerous of things CL footy each season buy buying well and have got some sort of cash back on their investments. We've signed donkeys we are a mess what do you expect from the man?
What hasn’t been called out in this video is - 1) hiring and then firing a director of football within 6 months, 2) extending ETHs contract, undermining him by talking to other managers during summer, buying him 200M worth of players and then sacking him paying him multi million severance. From my POV their management has been as bad as Ed Woodward’s so far.
The matter is that with PSR clubs have to be run like a business these days. Sadly because he is now the face Sir Jim gets the bad rap while the Glazers sit back smiling at him taking the bullets they should be getting. Take the emotion out of it, if in two years PSR is not an issue as our finances are in order, high earners like Rashford have been moved on, the team is performing, and spades have been put in the ground on a new stadium will we really care about what is being done now? I doubt it. Think of this like going to the dentist to have a root canal, it's dam painful in the moment, but you feel better for it later. That is where we are as a club right now, and sadly Sir Jim is the big bad dentist
The Board is doing the right thing and regards the club as a company and not a charitable organisation. Sir Jim is a better businessman than Woodward and co. Maybe relegation is good for Sir Jim i.e. buying the Glazer's shares on cheap.
Sounds like most United fans want to have their cake and eat it. Do we want to end up like city or what? Everyone knows our club needs a complete revamp and a lot of investment but think that the money can just be plucked out of thin air. Cuts need to be made. Pain needs to be had. Stop whining and give them time.
"It's flat out wrong, but both can be true" 🤯😅🤦 Remember when Rat-Cliff said we are giving the United back to the people, well the people are paying higher for a rat infested rain forest of a stadium 14th place team. Make cuts where is just wrong, yet paying players bafflingly wrong. Hey tomorrow it can't get worse, because we won't drop to 15th place no matter if we win or ....🥴 It doesn't matter whether you take away by putting it in your pocket (glazers), or if you make cuts and taketh away(Rat-Cliff), YES YOU CAN COMPARE THEM!
Sam, spot on report. Although I would add ( as I work for a petro chemical company), the board are like the players, majorly overpaid. No way do their wages and bonuses have any justification, when the staff and senior managers are on ‘normal’ pay structures, And just like what’s happening with Utd, when profits are low it’s the nickel and Dime savings on the workers rather than board member reductions. We (Utd) are a profit generating business, that’s it. Glaziers or INEOS are in it for profit on their investment, that’s it. The club is dying as soon as it was floated on the stock market. If not careful, with poor results, big increase in ST next season (it’s coming). The real fans will start leaving. I’m close as it’s a day trip when j watch a game at a lot of cost. Like many. .
I am right behind INEOS cutting anything and everything until we are back on top as a football club. The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.
If anybody had been following the Ineos involvement in F1 or cycling teams, they would never have expected them to be the saviours they were portrayed as when they bought in
If cuts are needed, they've been taken in the wrong places. Man Utd is a family, part of the community, those cuts to the foundation are a tragic mistake. Had they stated publicly that executives were going to take a hit, that shareholders were going to defer dividends, that players would be paid on a bonus structure instead of a flat salary, it would be more palatable. I'd agree that INEOS is not the same as the Glazers, however, much the same problem exists, they are looking at Utd purely as a business and not a community club. That is where the aspirations do not align. Sad times at the moment. I'm not convinced things will improve under INEOS, if anything, they are getting worse (early days though). A clean break from the Glazers could have brought in a change of fortune, however, we must not be thinking that clubs can be playthings for bored billionaires, to be dumped once the novelty wears off for them.
Ineos did not invest any money into the club, the money was paid to Glazers. Even the 300m pound investment was sold to ManU at commercial rates. Glazers only paid them self 100m over their tenure
I am from the States... I fell out of love with all of the U.S. sports... I am seeing footy become everything I hate about U.S. sports.... It's almost 2025, guess I am not supposed to like stuff anymore. Oh well... Guess Football Manager is still an option.
Remember when Hicks and Gillette handled Liverpool FC before FSG now? That's exactly how I see INEOS at the moment. Just the guys who are here for now before more richer competent owners come to take over United.
Even a normal young player earns 100k week at man utd and INEOS has problem with 40k year for helping our former players. Its nothing. But it has so much value in hearts of man utd fans. This decision will never be accpeted by true man utd fan.
What do any of these cuts have to do with footballing operations? INEOS were supposed to have responsibility for the focus on football operations but it feels more like they're the local PR operation to apply Glazer policies.
You must respect that Ratcliffe/INEOS ruthlessly operates with a business mindset. There is a process underway of removing the glut and United seems to have accumulated it everywhere. Unfortunately, charities and employees are affected in the process but, hopefully, it is part of modernizing the club. This is hoping it pays off in 1.5 seasons and we see the club on the up. I also believe once the finances are back in order, there will be an incentive to bring back some of the programs and charity work being cut. Until then, everyone working at the club should be on the edge of their seats until the club is back to winning ways.
The biggest mistake that INEOS have made in my opinion is that they are doing the corrections the wrong way around. Yes the operational sector of MU needed to be cut because it has been a haven for under-achievers and bloated for so long. And yes, the playing squad and salaries needs urgent correction. But the playing squad should have been first. Then if the finances needed to be balanced, then they could say they have tried everything but these cuts have to be made as well for the benefit of the clubs survival and growth. In short, players and football staff first, then the match-day and charitable funding can be trimmed. At the moment, they are cutting the pennies, but not saving the pounds.
Looking back, they did better relative to the glaziers. Giving ETG a new deal then sacking him. That payoff could have covered that 40k charity for the next 300 years. Let that sink in!!!
@ColmPadraig if he's such an englishman, why doesn't he pay UK Tax? Why didn't he opt to keep his manufacturing in the UK like he promised after Brexit? Globalism brought you this literal platform that you are commenting on, try to read actual news not crap from the tabloids.
Makes you look small time. Yet you throw out contracts to players who 100% do not deserve it. This mess will take 2 generations to sort out. From the stadium to the squad. Culture is toxic/ PR non existant
All these cuts are just a symptom of the FFP mindset. INEOS are just following the EPL's lead in being commercial driven and profit driven. If EPL cares about fans and charities, why would they be so strict on insisting clubs can only spend what they earn????
This is why fans wanted a full sale. Job cuts money saving etc etc, its all a result of that godforsaken debt we have on our heads because of the Glazers. AND THIS IS THE REASON why a full sale from a mega rich owner wouldhv atleast solved this issue.
I personally believe some of the charity stuff will be re-instrated at some point when alot of the worst of the wages are off the books i.e rashford and casemiro. I think this is to set up signings that ruben needs and we will benefit in the long run. For now though yes, it's 14th and cuts around the club while a complete rebuild is happening but it wont last
I think the nicest thing you can say about INEOS is they actually want united to be successful again. But they are making decisions that undermine the values of the club
I have to disagree with you on the staff cuts. However many there were, the money being spent there was an irrelevance compared to a bad signing or paying off yet another manager. United should be a reliable source of employment in the city, im a bit disappointed in your attitude to that if im honest
Someone recently referred to Sir Jim as the Rat, now the way things are going I begin to wonder just when the Rat will abandon the ship he helped to sink
I really want to know your honest opinion of Jim Ratcliffe's ownership of Manchester United so far and what you genuinely feel the best way forward is? How do you draw the line at what cuts are needed?
U were preaching this Ratcliff from the buying rumours..u didn't want Qatar..u wanted this man...now u got it.. enjoy the cost cutting n mediocre mentality..
It's been an absolutely disastrous first year on and off the pitch, the only thing that could make it any worse is relegation. We'll never know but I don't think the Qataris would be this bad.
i think unfortunately they’re doing what they have to do to fix what the glazers have caused, but i don’t think they are the group to take United back but the are to start us getting on the right path back
Top reds got what they asked for.
Ratcliffe is sh1t, mate. Makes all these cuts but spends 40M for Zirkzee and another 45 for De Ligt. Our transfers this season have been horrendous. Seriously, he is 1 year in charge, yeah? Name me a player that the Ineos football gurus bought and proved value for money.
That squad of players should all be the ones taking a pay cut, rather than the staff and charities.
Not how life works lill bro.
Youre naive to think this is anything but a job.
Jogg on mate
No player's going to accept a non-guaranteed contract these days. The best you can do is try to shift as much to performance based bonuses as you can. It's why recruitment and *reasonable extensions* is so vital, bad contracts are like chains around the club's neck.
That's not going to happen at base level because they'd have to sign a new contract, but there's already a club policy 25% wage cut the following season after failure to qualify for the UCL for players who were contracted for that season.
If these cuts are serious then there will be a hard cap on the initial contract at maybe £200k p/w for new players, while they're going to have to figure out how they get rid of anyone above that, who would willingly accept their wage demands because it's either that or just let them run their contract down or convince them to release themselves from it if they can afford to, because even if they could sack them, that money is still going to be paid to them as a severance fee, not to mention the player could potentially take the club to court if there's no mutual agreement depending on the reason they were sacked as they can't prove the wrongdoing on an individual level.
there is a little thing called contracts. and i would bet everything i own that you had no idea united had a charity contribution before you read it in the media last week.
The amount of people that liked your comment is stupidity. The contracts are legal- you can’t force them to take a pay cut
The players are responsible for a lot of these issues. They are getting paid while not performing is costing everyone.
INEOS is responsible for signing 5 at best average players for far too much money, so they have contributed to that problem.
Yesssssss! Definitely!
Stewards bonuses cut doesn’t just affect ‘morale’, but also livelihoods
Why should anybody get a bonus when we win nothing for years and years and are losing money?
And how would “morale” be if this catastrophe continues under the Glazers and the club goes bankrupt and everyone loses their job…? It’s a business not a charity
@@deco2132 How do the stewards affect winning on the pitch?
@@deco2132It’s not on the stewards that the team isn’t performing properly
@@jhpfdijtuiweruotyou’re right, it’s not a charity. This catastrophe could end with making cuts elsewhere. Think about the MILLIONS wasted on recent contracts with Ten Hag and Ashworth. Cuts from staff bonuses and community support will never make up for that in a million years…
Here’s an idea Glazers OUT !!!!
Always
Glazers were better than Ebenezer Ratcliffe is right now 😭
They are no longer involved in running the football department, so start singing a different tune.
@@gustaaf1892 The Glazers are the majority owners, little Jim has a quarter share, can't do anything without the Glazers say so.
Ineos should have walked away when they insisted on staying but ol’ arrogant know-nothing-about sports-management Jim had other ideas.
Cancelling the staff Xmas party & the 40 000 quid to charity is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.What about players earning 30,000 quid per day & not performing??? cut there 1st!
I agree with the sentiments but it is hard to renegotiate contracts with players which means cuts have to come from somewhere else. The club needs to keep selling players though and making sure that they don't repeat the same process of overpaying players.
The club was paying £250,000 per year for the Xmas party - that's way more than most major banks and energy companies fork out for theirs. We are losing money not making record profits.
No it’s not. It’s standard practice for any failing business. And we have release more than THREE DOZEN senior pros from the first team squad and off the wages since Ten Hag started. It was the first thing that cuts were made from not the last. Rashford is one of the last ones out the door not the first. Do you know anything about the club you claim to support?
@@jhpfdijtuiweruotyou can not terminate a contract without mutual consent. As with all employment contracts if you need to terminate it can be done immediately due to gross misconduct with no or minimal payment however for footballers, underperforming does not constitute as gross misconduct. As their salaries are so high to agree a mutual termination fee it will be based on their salary and how long they have left, if they do not want to leave you will have to pay them salary owed as per their contract… so they get the same amount of money regardless but without offering a service. So getting rid of players by terminating their contract is far more costly than staff as they are paid considerably less. The best business decision is to attempt to sell the player you will lose less. Termination is pure loss, a sale mitigates those costs especially if it’s an academy player. This is basic business. Player contracts cannot just be ended it will be disastrous for ffp.
AGREED. The women's team must be closed down, and all the overpaid women sacked - I hear some are on 5,000 PER WEEK!!
1% of Rashford's salary would pay that charity donation
0.000000001% of jims. Absolute sausage.
It's less than that. It's 1 days pay of rashfords wages. 1% would pay for 3 years +.
@@DominicFranklin-w6y wow
Penny pinching. The real savings are in player wages but they’ve done nothing there so far. Matter of fact they gave our so called captain a bumper new contract. Making him one of the best paid players at the club when we just had one of our worst seasons.
@@jtmz87probably because he had THE best chance creation statistics in Europe while playing in a poor side.
That tends to matter.
Man U have just over a thousand employees. £30 per head for a Xmas party is £30k. How can you justify cancelling a staff Xmas party when it's a tenth of Rashford's weekly salary?
You don’t save money by getting rid of cleaners, dinner ladies and receptionists whilst cutting a 40k payment towards support for ex players or whatever that payment is for. You do save money by getting rid of overpaid and underperforming so called “stars”. Also, Uncle Jim is cutting like this because he knows there will be no European football next season therefore no revenue. He is balancing the books before the storm hits.
The problem is we as fans do not need to feel sorry for INEOS! They did not need to buy into the club if they could not afford to. There was a bidder willing to get rid off all the debt and invest
more money into the club. In the direction we are going Sir Jim will destroy our club image and perception to the world. Sir Jim bought into United for selfish reasons and stopped us from
being a debt free, successful club.
lol when were you last debt free ? stop talking BS
@@micky1upHow do you he has debt? 😂
This has not been confirmed yet, but there is a very real possibility that the funding cuts at the MU Foundation completely wipes out some of our lower age group women's academy teams as they are run by the Foundation. Some of this stuff is completely cartoon villain level scumbaggery and is just not worth it. If he actually cared about the common Manc (he doesn't), he would just help fund some of the Charity work specifically through his personal finance, would be a drop in the ocean for him. For me some of the things they are doing is just robbing the heart and identity of our club and I would literally rather get relegated than lose what made so many of us fall in love with United in the first place.
The identity of Man United is nothing to do with women’s football what planet are you on ?? ffs go away 😂
@@stacksflat7482exactly. 👏
@@stacksflat7482 Once a red, always a red only applies when you're a man I guess. Some of you lot being ok with literal children, Mancs at that, losing a place to pursue their dreams and play football for their childhood club, is actually terrifying. Give your head a wobble.
There’s a reason the team principal of Mercedes in F1 only allowed Ratcliffe to be a regular title sponsor providing money and technologies despite owning 60% of the team. Toto’s experience as a businessman allowed him to judge how Ratcliffe would’ve handled Mercedes if they’re struggling like today, and I believe he knew Ratcliffe’s very cold business model wouldn’t work in a sports business model like F1, and it would’ve negatively affect the team as a whole by trying to cause instability within the organization. What Man Utd is facing right now is basically what Toto predicted all the way back in 2019 when he’s negotiating with Ineos
Totally agree but taking cuts from the charities is just plain evil
Oh well, some wanted him. So they should enjoy !
I completely disagree Sam - INEOS are exactly like the Glazers and I never wanted Ratcliffe anywhere near the club. He is first and foremost a 'businessman' meaning he is not interested in anything but money. He is well known for asset stripping and cost cutting -usually from the bottom up. The Glazers must be laughing their socks off having completely deflected all the criticism yet still bleeding the club dry. I firmly believe that if he hadn't stuck his nose in the Qatar bid would have gone through and that the Glazers and the debt would be gone.
But he has put is own money in and put dividends on hold. They want utd to be successful but are making big mistakes. If he wanted more money - why buy a football team
@piranhobbs9527 where's the evidence that's he's put his own money in? The rules make it very hard to do that now, else Newcastle would be blowing everyone away. All I've seen is the debt go up. The exposure ineos have got from being shown alongside manchester united would be what he would want. Suddenly this largely industrial company has become a well known brand
The Glazers weren't selling to Qatar for the more than fair price that was offered, so get that notion out of your head.
@@neilg6675 pretty sure they have put in the amount that owners owners are allowed too . Do chemical companies even want to be a household name? They don't sell to the public, and would probably rather avoid people knowing them and the shady stuff they do. All the biggest chem and pharmaceutical companies avoid the public eye.
Well Said ☺️☺️☺️☺️☺️☺️☺️
I feel ineos have slowly but steadily set about erasing the goodwill theyve accumulated. As you said most of these would be forgotten quickly if the team was doing better but I am honestly concerned by the way theyve gone about things lately.
Well they own and run a business. They are not their to babysit the “goodwill” feelings of men on their smartphones pretending to be Utd fans
Pretending to be Man Utd fans???? I am sorry but its the so called "Online Fans" because of whom Utd are considered a "Global Brand." Because people all.over the world spend money to watch Utd, buy merchandise etc. Just because they weren't born and live in the same country as the club doesn't make them any less of a fan@jhpfdijtuiweruot
@@jhpfdijtuiweruot They own a minority stake, the money they invested is supposed to benefit the club and team.
Cut the Glazers and INEOS dividends, not staff and community schemes.
You sound more like an INEOS employee than a Utd fan, Jim won't fix it obviously hasn't layed the likes of you off.
@@rightiswrongrightiswrong806 Nope I am a season ticket holder for many, many decades. I pay tens of thousands of pounds for the Glazers and Ineos to buy and train world class footballers. Utterly bizarre that you think it is a donation to charity to support the poor community
@@rightiswrongrightiswrong806 Why don’t you worry about your own money instead of telling me how mine should be spent, internet “fan”
I don't agree with this. players wages and contracts should be reduced first. this just feels like Glazers Part 2 in disguise.
You don't get to agree or disagree. INEOS can do what they want. The really need to close the Academy - huge savings can be made there.
Well the cuts are necessary,,,you see Poor old Jim had his insurance quote for his car,,which happens to be THE WORLDS most expensive at £142 million quid...
With all due respect Ineos knew who they were getting in bed with and had done their due diligence and knew the debt and what would need to be done😊. If the same was being done by non English passport holder and not a “life long Manchester United fan” the media would be all over this.
Looks like we have our own Mike Ashley now, painful to watch this formerly great club continue to get worse instead of better.
At least in the Championship we will see who the Real Deal United supporters are rather than the Fair-Wheather supporters that abound on line and at the games.
@ Definitely, I’m from the USA and I’m Man United forever, but I still do not think we go down because there are several worse clubs than us at the moment.
I hope INEOS get majority ownership to finish what they started.
@@davidopsina3871 No, The Glazers have to selland if INEOS does not wake up, they have to go too.
We called for and over haul and open heart surgery, but many are complaining about the methods implemented. Our fans are so spoiled and lack patience, yes the cuts, price hikes and whatever is part of the reconstruction. Are we expecting Ineos to invest there hard earned money money into a club they don't fully own. We may not like it but it's what all of us was asking for for years - trust the process, lessons will be learnt the hard way but keep believing
The club could have been fully owned, with the debt cleared. If INEOS are sacking staff on 40K a year tell me, please tell me, how tf will they clear 700 mil worth of debt?
It's not about Ineos willingness to invest, you can't inject more than a certain amount of cash if you aren't going down the 115 route.
@@SentientTeapot2444Newcastle United alone is already the most solid proof of this TBH. The Saudi PIF net worth is more than the rest of the entire English football pyramid combined and yet they're not making any blockbuster moves right now.
@United4EternityThere's not really a lot else that can be done unless they can convince players to reduce their wages or leave the club, but unless their contracts get run down, who willingly buys these players and accepts their wage demands if they're widely considered not good enough for a big club? Even Saudi clubs have already scrapped their plans of buying finished players from European clubs because their viewer count only got worse after doing so.
Yes you can..you can't spend it on players but you can spend it on infrastructure @@SentientTeapot2444
But it never cost United £40k a year, as it's a charity donation they can and will have claimed the tax back.
United still have debt to pay off so that money is not even coming back to them
Exactly!! They’ve not saved any money doing that. They’re just scum for scum sake. I despise them
Why do you all omit Sir Alex's role in this mess.
It all started with the horse dispute, that led to him backing the glazers take over the club.
Is that all there was to it? You seem to know a lot about what happened. Maybe they made Sir Alex assurances. He later wanted Lewandowski, the Glazers said no, so they bought Van Persie, who was cheaper.
It started with Ferguson otherwise the previous owner would not have sell it to the glazers. For what Ferguson would achieve with previous owners before glazers that we will never know. Sure and certain we would not have been in big debt like now.
@Discombobulate453 this is the problem with people like yourself & other clueless "fans"
This all came about because of the arrogance of SAF, if he didn't argue with jp mcmanus & magnier they would never have sold to the glazers,
It's taken 20 yrs for the glazers to bleed us dry but here we are, & there's going to be much worse times to come over the next few years.
If we ever become a successful team again all the glazers will do is take more dividends out of the club, they've not spent 1 dollar of they're own money & they must be laughing @ ineos being blamed for it all,
Because that’s as silly as saying my car breaking down in the road lead to traffic that caused the person way behind to be late to work, lose their job and end up an alcoholic 😂
Fergie fell out with a man- he didn’t force him to sell to the glazers and he certainly didn’t know what the glazers would do 😂
I think you're being very generous to magnier and mcmannus. Their petty fallout over the ownership of the horse they gave sir alex was just pathetic
More Cuts? YES!! Get rid of the women's team, close down the academy and ground share with Bolton Wanderers at the University stadium - the OT ground can be sold to developers for housing.
Don’t agree on the Christmas party ffs. United are one of the worst payers, £100 quid bonus reduced to £50. I even got a better bonus as an apprentice years ago which was £1000 annually. Is this what we’ve become as a football club… it feels heartless and the glazers are still there. I still want them OUT!!
The Bruno one wanting to pay for the staffs FA travels and INEOS telling him no is really baffling.
It pains me to say this as a life long supporter since 1977, but Sir Alex Ferguson has a small part to play in getting the vultures: Glazers into this great and amazing club: Man Utd. Sir Alex had a huge row with the Magners over a horse : I could be wrong (Rock of Gibraltar)and as then occurred the Magners sold their share to the Glazers over this. Now what happened when the Glazers took over is down to them. Fast fowards to today, Inoes have tried their best to cut out waste within the club. Has this affected the players moral I don’t know. Quite frankly if the players were upset they could have put their hands in their own pockets to help out. And why throw a fit and behave like a spoilt kid when they don’t Percy on the pitch. I could live with all that is happening if the players did their part in the pitch. Let’s all say it quietly we are in a relegation battle. Be of no doubt of that. I end there.
If the cost cutting saves Man United in the long run, I'm all for it. Change is never easy, but I trust that they know what they're doing.
Why? Nice fans hate them. What have they done/are doing that makes you think that they’re doing anything good for the club?
the only mugs left in the sport who see it as anything other than business are the fans. If United (or any premier league club) could join a world super league and dump this local nonsense they would in a heart beat. Support local small clubs. These big clubs couldn't care less, all the want if to squeeze people for money.
Tickets to members for Brighton and Palace at home are back to normal prices not £66 for everyone which is a positive
No, the problems didn't start with the Glazers. The seeds of this were sown when the club was floated on the stock market. Once you do that your business is on sale to the highest bidder. The Glazers took advantage and the club couldn't stop them.
But why not though? It's a company.
Because a stock market quoted company cannot control the buying or selling of it's shares. They are transacted on the stock market. The business world is full of companies who have been the subject of hostile takeovers.
The problem was made much worse by Fergie, JP & Magniers big fallout
It sure didn't help.@@pauldavies7251
It’s hard to have faith in Ineos given their poor record in sports. They’ve wrecked Sky cycling, Nice are hardly doing well and nor are the F1 team or the All Blacks. This is starting to feel much like it did when we were relegated in 1974, only 6 years after winning the then European Cup.
Cuts like this in that environment - might just increase the risk of environmental disaster ... ... but they can pay massive wages to players who would not command such wages at any other club - perhaps if they deal with those issues, can reinstate some of the community stuff that has been cut.
You are completely right. I don't have a positive or negative impression of INEOS initially.
I appreciate how they have handled the new transfer deal so far, but everything else gives me a bad impression.The Dan Ashworth saga, the poor handling of the new manager recruitment (manager scouting right before the FA Cup finals), and the rising price...
I don't have the club's balance sheet. Still, even though United's structure might be bloated and need to be improved financially, there is much more they can do instead of putting their hand on United Foundation and other projects that might eventually hurt the club's reputation and the hearts of fans.
The real savings are in the men’s first team squad salaries. All this penny pinching does nothing when you have a guy in rashford, who has contributed nothing for a month but has collected almost all your one time savings in salary.
How about cutting them player wages?
They're working on that considering the treatment of the likes of rashford and casemiro, who are likely to leave after this season
Tell me how do you cut the wages of a signed legal contract? 😂
@@civildiscourse7626 seeing how the old geezer is cutting cost left and right. Wouldn't surprise me if one way or another he actually did find a way😂
@@Dharcness So you don't know. There is no way btw, unless a player is dumb enough to accept a hefty pay cut.
and how would they do that
oh right they cant
total muppet
Ineos is going to destroy our club
The Glazers did that. We are here because of them over a decade.
Clueless keyboard warrior in the chat
U can't blame the glazers for everything. The glazers always backed the Manger. They spend close £2 billion on player's since Sir Alex left. Ineos wants run manchester united like it's a factory.
@@angelodoubel9653 I can and do for 99%. They had people not having a clue how to negotiate when buying, and contracts were dished out on ludicrous wages so we end up with effectively deadwood we cant get rid of due to wages. Lets not forget they took money out of the club right, left and centre. At least INEOS, are trying to stem the haemorrhaging of money even if they are making something of a balls up of it on the PR side. SJR has put millions into the club, the Glazers never put a single penny in. We are here due to mismanagement.
Just a reminder to everyone man utds debt currently is $990 million that’s $650m of long term debt and $341m from revolving credit facility. I will play devils advocate and say Jim came in and has established that United was a mess so saying the glazers didn’t remove these costs doesn’t make it okay they didn’t care and didn’t put money in so the money was not coming from their pockets.
I understand where people are coming from and I think it’s not a good look.
But we somehow want the club to continue spending money when we also wanted a new stadium, new training ground and new players.
We just can’t have both I’m sorry things will have to be bad before they get good again the glazers have left us in a mess
I am seeing a lot of noise around Qatar still wanting to buy the club. Any truth or just a big pile of smelly bull.....??? Lets face it, Man U has been so miss managed over a long period of time, so I am not surprised Ineos are making some changes. I am not convinced they are going about it in the right way....but he, JR, is a business man, he is starting to run it like a business... what did we all expect????
Another dreamer
@@richyclubsport5155 me ?
Technically the club goes back on sale in 6months and anyone that puts a bid in SJR must match or offer more. So we will see.
It's simply a case of INEOS financial audit & cost optimzation at United. They've must have identified inefficiences and unneccessary expenditures and cutting costs in non-essential areas without compromising core operations. Then come operational restructuring, aligning the workforce size with financial realities, while minimizing disruptions. In summary, INEOS needed to have immediate financial stabilization. They did what they had to. All thanks to.............
Newsflash, the Glazers are the majority owners. To call ineos 'the owners' while only being a minority owner is weird to begin with. Also, if Ineos wants to do something that the Glazers don't want, it's not happening. They have no power.
He's destroying United and bleeding them dry
I wouldn't worry too much about the former players trust fund because that goes up and down a lot every year.
For example it dropped from £100,000 to £40,000 in 2020, and went back up to £80,000 the following year, and then down to £70,000 the next year.
And it's not uncommon for there to be tens of thousands left over in it, that gets carried over into the next year.
I mean it could be at £55,000 at the end of 2024 so they would not need to put in as much next year.
I commented on a video you did before the takeover Sam, and i said they were not the saviour everyone thought they would be. Its been shambolic, quite frankly.
I guess you were kidding yourself that a magical Qatari takeover would have been City 2.0 from the beginning; regardless of who took over, most of these cuts would have been necessary.
Everyone?
Proof?
Sam was calling Jim Ratcliffe Walt Disney at one point according to another video. Embarrassing. Even NICE fans were telling about Ineos ownership and how poor they are.
@@Key-j5o whatever it wouldve been mate would of been any worse than what we have seen? 🤭
I bet that Qatar ownership isn't looking so bad now.
Another dreamer
Tbh Sheikh Jassim offer seems to be the best option.
Another dreamer
Repeating the same thing on every comment regarding Qatar ain’t going to do anything but you do you 🙄
Glazers are never gonna sell Manchester United are a global powerhouse Despite how bad they are on the pitch, they can still profit from them so why would they sell?
@ I agree with you to an extent why would they sell a cash cow like Manchester United who will continue to generate it’s revenue and sponsorship yearly alone? But if things were to become even worse for us not only this season but the next couple of seasons the possibility of a sale shouldn’t be ruled out.
He doesn't exist. There's no direct search result for him, it just directs to other Jassim family members.
Honestly, I don't trust Innios, Sir Ratcliff as they might as well be another Glazier. Where is the promiissed investment???
He has invested, and a new stadium isn’t something that happens in a year. This isn’t a just put money in situation, it’s about fixing the structure and culture in this team. Money won’t fix that easily
He’s invested 150m so far. Maybe look it up
@@darrell5403you can double that, even if quasar owned us we'd still be knackered because of the new ffp rules,
Newcastle richest club in the world but can't spend any money cos of ffp,
When are fans going to understand ffs 🤦♂️🙈
@@MexicanNatiion the Stadium will be constructed using debt. After it us built, Man Utd will be at least £3 Billion in debt excluding interest!!!! Let that sink in.
But on the other hand all these people can’t keep enjoying the benefits while the club is poor and needs revamping. Let everyone feel the heat and when success starts coming back they can reinstall all these.
Interesting analysis as always Sam - but nothing that Sir Jim is currently doing can be classified as 'marginal gains'. [why is there SO much ignorance around the concept, by so called 'experts' in the media?!?] Please allow me to explain!
The 'Aggregation of Marginal Gains' [to give it its correct title] is to change something for the better no matter how big or small. Some refer to it as 'the one percent margin for improvement in everything you do'.
For example, if Amorim were to increase/decrease the duration of training sessions by 15 minutes because he found that it would benefit the performance of the players - THAT would be a 'marginal gain'. If you were to replace Man Utd's kit with a lighter more water absorbent kit that helped keep the players drier and reduced fatigue - THAT would be a 'marginal gain'.
The ultimate objective of any 'marginal gain' is to improve performance, and as a result produce better results. In all honesty, how the hell will increasing match-day ticket prices help Man Utd play better or win more games?!?
To repeat - NOTHING that Sir Jim has done recently constitutes an outcome related to the performance of Man Utd football team. Indeed, you could strongly argue that it will have the completely opposite effect!
What Sir Jim is actually doing is cost-cutting. Man Utd as a business has been [generally speaking] operating at a massive loss for many years. This has been accepted whilst Man Utd were successful on the pitch. However, times have changed and Sir Jim has decided to introduce measures to reduce the outlay and save money.
Like you Sam, I personally feel that not only is this 'initiative' misguided, but it is also totally misplaced! Saving £40,000 per anum on charity work is peanuts compared to getting the likes of Antony, Rashford and Casemiro off the books - which would save the club the best part of £1 million PER WEEK!
I have no idea what Sir Jim's rationale is behind these decisions - but I do know one thing. NONE of these decisions have anything at all to do with 'marginal gains'!! I truly wish that misinformed commenters/pundits like yourself would desist from wrongly labelling everything that Sir Jim/Man Utd do as being a 'marginal gain'.
And for your information Sam - there is clear empirical and quantitative evidence that 'marginal gains' do work - and not only in sport. [marginal gains were first applied in industry and business by the Japanese where it is known as 'Kaizen' - and long before Sir Dave Brailsford wrongly claimed that he came up with the concept!]
@@thesoultwins72 For someone who is trying to come across as intelligent, don't you think you're being incredibly naive? Of course the cuts can be constituted as marginal gains. Ignore the 40k headline that was run by the Mirror and actually misleading as it's a cutback on the United Foundation, not just one charity. United's problem is PSR, and every ounce they can squeeze out of revenue can potentially be put back into improving the squad. Isn't that by definition a marginal gain?
Surely you understand that all these cost-cutting measures are being enforced to ensure that Man United DO NOT operate at a loss? I.E. more money the club can utilize towards the football side of things? Better nutrition, training grounds, kits, footwear, machines, players, etc.? Plus, these measures will ensure we undo years of malpractice and show that we are a serious club that knows how to operate as a business, which could potentially lead to bigger, better sponsorship deals and investment? I don't believe you're all seeing the finish line here. Things will have to DRASTICALLY change for us to be successful again. And one last thing, of course SJR would want to ensure he can continue making money while also looking to improve the club. That's common sense. He didn't buy part of the club to NOT make money...🤦🏿♂️
And one last thing. You and several other people ALWAYS refer to focusing on the players at the club before these other measures. You seem intelligent, so I presume you understand how contracts work. What makes you think INEOS are actively not focused on these players? Did it occur to y'all that it's not that simple? Did it occur to y'all to consider the terms and conditions involved in these contracts? Did it occur to y'all that INEOS do not want to release every player you all don't like? Because that would be foolish? Now, with this understanding in mind, has it occurred to y'all that, realistically, INEOS only have 2 periods of the year to focus on the players? Summer transfer window and winter transfer windows? Whereas all of these other issues can be focused on immediately and year round? And back to the players, if we are not just going to release all of these players, how easy is it to find potential buyers? Huh? Do you think they can just wave their hands and someone will magically come get Rashford? And get him for a decent amount so that we can tackle the financial hole we're in?!? These are the things I need you and the rest of these over-reactionary folks to start considering.
@@Key-j5o .....Mmm - I absolutely do not profess to be intelligent, but unlike you - I do know the simple function of reading and comprehension! To repeat - a 'marginal gain' is an action/activity that leads to an 'improvement in performance' [and ultimately delivers better results].
It seems that like many uninitiated commenters on the topic - you do not understand this. So, I will ask you a simple question - how does meeting Utd's [obligatory!] PSR requirements have any impact of the results of the team? [PSR is not a 'voluntary' decision - Utd are required to conform to these 'rules' or they will face severe penalties].
Strengthening the team via recruitment MAY have positive benefits - but judging by what we have seen over the past 10+ years it is highly UNlikely. Your argument, therefore, is extremely tenuous [at best] and seems to be more focused on proving YOUR point rather than giving a quantitative example.
@@Mohthedude .....Of course, I understand that all these 'cost-cutting' measures are intended to make the club more efficient and apply a modicum of financial control and management.
But you seem to have totally misunderstood the main points of my OP. [1: the parlous lack of understanding by the media and so-called 'expert' analysts of what exactly 'marginal gains' are.....and 2. SJR's rationale for cutting extremely small and peripheral elements which will probably have much more detrimental impacts on the Man Utd brand].
Following SJR's announcement of all these swingeing cuts - this morning, the media has come out in total condemnation against them. To the best of my knowledge, not one media outlet has focused on the cost-cutting measures as an attempt to streamline Man Utd operations, improve efficiencies or create a more financially 'sensible' business.
I realise that as an American you are probably very influenced by money concerns - but there are equally important factors such as how Man Utd is viewed as an employer, its brand and reputation. None of the actions that SJR has imposed have had anything but disastrous impacts on these factors.
They have incensed supporters, upset ex-Man Utd players and their families and have generally been interpreted as Dickensian in their intentions. Outliers, such as the media and supporters of other clubs have been literally astonished at this penny-pinching, miserly 'strategy' - especially as Man Utd is considered as the biggest club in the UK and Europe.
As a lifelong Man Utd supporter it completely saddens me the way MY football team/club has been managed since the ruthlessly greedy Glazer family became our owners. They have bled the club dry [not investing one single cent of their own money] and plunged us into the best part of £1 billion debt*.
*This is a club that was extremely well-managed [under ex-chairman, David Gill], totally debt-free, had a very strict structure for player salaries and is supported and revered across the planet. This was also during the most successful era in the club's entire history!
Yet we have now reached a point where we have a number or unbelievably well-paid players who have consistently underperformed and the team is in the lowest position since its membership of the English Premier League.
Whilst I totally understand your point about player contracts and salaries per se - cutting costs on the club's charity efforts, staff bonuses and travel arrangements whilst raising tickets prices for children and old-age pensioners isn't really sending the 'right' message to the fan base and external observers.
I agree we could not have carried on the way we were - and yes, some 'difficult' decisions and painful changes needed to be made. But will any of the actions SJR has taken make a scrap of difference. To me, he cannot see the wood for the trees!
Imagine if the Qatari had bought the full club it could have been a life changing, no job cutting and no debt.
and business as usual?
So we would have carried on as we were, employing 250 more people than we have jobs, and hemorrhaging cash all over the place? Thank god that didn't happen then.
@Jomo-x6n improved most likely. Don't forget, sheikh Jassim is an actual true united fan, Jim Racclif is not he just wanted to aquire a club in the premiere league... he failed with Chelsea and made it with us but unfortunately it is not going well
Another dreamer
Manchester United = Manchester City nr. 2.
Still have a feeling, Qatar will pounce on any slightest opportunity in future
Will the glazzers sell to them??? Look up their history, being the glazzers
It's only a matter of few years I believe. The more the debt increases and the inconsistent united perform on the field resulting in poor results and not being competitive meaning less profit will surely lead to full sale.
Another dreamer
@@richiemazze5141 Religion.
never in a million years any true United fan would want State ownership and especially muslim one.
Get out of our club Jim!
One of the more sensible fan channel out there…….
I think this is the start of the cost cutting. Eventually, they will ask the players to take a pay cut or leave. Empathy and business don't mix when the needs of the club are so dire. We don't know whether INEOS are paying staff and charities out of pocket while they cut costs at the club. All we know is what we're reading. These decisions are for the benefit of the club's future.
Players won't take a pay cut and can't be forced to leave.
I thought that Ineos only had decisions over the playing side? Most of these decisions aren’t playing side?
I would prefer Qatar still ngl
Another dreamer
I worked in the corporate world for twenty six years - for the first six months of 2023 I tried to provide insight around how SJR & INEOS will approach their strategic vision.
I suspect that SJR is around four months behind where he wanted to be at this point as we decided to remain loyal to ETH. SJR's 'Glazer's out' campaign would have been planned to ramp up Feb /March 2025 - as things stand, SJR will now be on damage limitation and may be forced, against his will, to invest in the squad in January. SJR will seek to be in a position of strength before putting his foot on the neck of the Yanks.
😂 quality
Are you talking about how he intend to proceed with further Glazer share acquisition? By engineering a situation where they are encouraged to sell the shares instead of being stuck with dividends not worth staying in for?
Is Sir Jim not looking to profit form his invstment at United? Should Jim look to sell his stock to Qatar in the future.
Qatar was the better option
Another dreamer
@richyclubsport5155 dreamer my foot
Cutting things that have small impact on the major issue but big impact on the little man was a huge mistake and wake up call. Because if Sir Jim was 'just a fan who grew up near etc' he would never do these things to fans or charity. There are bigger and better choices to be made. Then getting rid of Ashcroft while he just got on was another wake up moment. Signing a new manager mid season as well. Ineos needs to prove their managing skills next summer to sell players and cut wages. Because earning 200k a week while Man Utd is at this level is unheard of and embarrassing really. Cut wages, sell expensive players and no dividend pay for the next 10 years.
Whats devilishly clever is that the Glasiers still take their money and that Ratcliffe has to do the penny pinching. He's effectively seen as a gaslighter of the fans and worse than the glasiers. It's ingenious, its only going to get worse.
The Glazers accepted not taking out any dividends for two years as part of the INEOS deal.
The dividends are paused.
Crazy, someone comes and actually tries to run the club to make it better we complain all of these cuts are more than justifiable as Manchester United has not been a profitable business, you need to be ruthless if you want change, all i see is us becoming a serious club again, stop whinning
I agree. United is not a benevolent society and people are not entitled to jobs that can't be justified.
Lol run the club into disaster smh
@@alistairgrant503 that's whay the Glazers did, how do you recon we fix this mess we are in ? By throwing Christmas parties ?
@@c3po995 the club is in a worst state because of ineos , Ratcliffe is Glazer 2.0 u think cutting staff & canceling is gonna help allieviate the club from debt ..Ratclife shouldn't have poke is business in this bidding , the club has become a laughing stock in the world
It's all a bit of a bollox innit!
You should have allowed qatarians to buy the club. They would have made all the cuts
Another dreamer
INEOS are doing great cutting all these expenses. Why borrow money to pay people who aren't really doing anything to help the club grow? Next thing they'll do is stop these ridiculous contracts and high wages. They can't cut players' earnings because they're on contract. 40k a year to former players charity makes sense, the club paid the players and if they aren't doing well that's not the club's business. We have struggling fans and nobody gives them anything. We all need to understand that people need to use their salaries wisely, the club has been wasting funds and I agree with all the cuts. Good luck to them tho
Ineos are clueless clowns. If Jim is the expert he claims to be, what has he done to his rubbish club OGC Nice? Both Glazers & Ineos are shite!
The difference between Glazers and INEOS that no one is talking about is they have always given their employees dignity and respect. Just ask any employee and employees in the Buccaneers and United organizations. I still want both of them out.
Agree 💯 Sam. The MUFoundation and the ex legends charities being cut puts a big shadow over our club. We have always been a club full of class but Ineos are ripping the soul out of our club.
Get ready for empty seats being very visible!
Rather have the Rich Arabs now. At least they wouldn’t cut job for normal hardworking people.
What changed? We got Omar Barrada from City.
All other metrics has been a disaster. Economics, jobs, results, squad.
Who thought this would be some great big fix? Look at Nice!
Even if the Sheikh came in he would of expected some sort of investment back. The owners of City have won numerous of things CL footy each season buy buying well and have got some sort of cash back on their investments. We've signed donkeys we are a mess what do you expect from the man?
What hasn’t been called out in this video is - 1) hiring and then firing a director of football within 6 months, 2) extending ETHs contract, undermining him by talking to other managers during summer, buying him 200M worth of players and then sacking him paying him multi million severance.
From my POV their management has been as bad as Ed Woodward’s so far.
The matter is that with PSR clubs have to be run like a business these days. Sadly because he is now the face Sir Jim gets the bad rap while the Glazers sit back smiling at him taking the bullets they should be getting. Take the emotion out of it, if in two years PSR is not an issue as our finances are in order, high earners like Rashford have been moved on, the team is performing, and spades have been put in the ground on a new stadium will we really care about what is being done now? I doubt it. Think of this like going to the dentist to have a root canal, it's dam painful in the moment, but you feel better for it later. That is where we are as a club right now, and sadly Sir Jim is the big bad dentist
The Board is doing the right thing and regards the club as a company and not a charitable organisation. Sir Jim is a better businessman than Woodward and co. Maybe relegation is good for Sir Jim i.e. buying the Glazer's shares on cheap.
Sounds like most United fans want to have their cake and eat it. Do we want to end up like city or what?
Everyone knows our club needs a complete revamp and a lot of investment but think that the money can just be plucked out of thin air. Cuts need to be made. Pain needs to be had. Stop whining and give them time.
we need to build a new stadium
we need to be in line with ffp for any summer business to go through
"It's flat out wrong, but both can be true"
🤯😅🤦
Remember when Rat-Cliff said we are giving the United back to the people, well the people are paying higher for a rat infested rain forest of a stadium 14th place team.
Make cuts where is just wrong, yet paying players bafflingly wrong.
Hey tomorrow it can't get worse, because we won't drop to 15th place no matter if we win or ....🥴
It doesn't matter whether you take away by putting it in your pocket (glazers), or if you make cuts and taketh away(Rat-Cliff), YES YOU CAN COMPARE THEM!
Not one player is on crazy wages since INEOS came in. They can't rip up contracts that are already in place! What are you talking about???
Sam, spot on report.
Although I would add ( as I work for a petro chemical company), the board are like the players, majorly overpaid. No way do their wages and bonuses have any justification, when the staff and senior managers are on ‘normal’ pay structures,
And just like what’s happening with Utd, when profits are low it’s the nickel and
Dime savings on the workers rather than board member reductions.
We (Utd) are a profit generating business, that’s it. Glaziers or INEOS are in it for profit on their investment, that’s it. The club is dying as soon as it was floated on the stock market.
If not careful, with poor results, big increase in ST next season (it’s coming). The real fans will start leaving. I’m close as it’s a day trip when j watch a game at a lot of cost. Like many.
.
I am right behind INEOS cutting anything and everything until we are back on top as a football club. The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.
Dont forget Sir Alex recommended the Glaziers after falling out with the previous owners
2 many modern fans are clueless as to what happened 20yrs ago & fergie needs to be called out for his arrogance
He didn’t recommend the glazers… the guy he fell out with sold it due to his dispute with fergie
I said it before and I'll say it again, this co-ownership is the worse thing that could happen to Manchester United.
If anybody had been following the Ineos involvement in F1 or cycling teams, they would never have expected them to be the saviours they were portrayed as when they bought in
Totally agree. Hate a lot of the recent decisions, but it is not the same thing
If cuts are needed, they've been taken in the wrong places. Man Utd is a family, part of the community, those cuts to the foundation are a tragic mistake. Had they stated publicly that executives were going to take a hit, that shareholders were going to defer dividends, that players would be paid on a bonus structure instead of a flat salary, it would be more palatable. I'd agree that INEOS is not the same as the Glazers, however, much the same problem exists, they are looking at Utd purely as a business and not a community club. That is where the aspirations do not align. Sad times at the moment. I'm not convinced things will improve under INEOS, if anything, they are getting worse (early days though). A clean break from the Glazers could have brought in a change of fortune, however, we must not be thinking that clubs can be playthings for bored billionaires, to be dumped once the novelty wears off for them.
Ineos did not invest any money into the club, the money was paid to Glazers.
Even the 300m pound investment was sold to ManU at commercial rates.
Glazers only paid them self 100m over their tenure
Measures taken by Ineos are difficult indeed but, in my view, this is a direct consequence of our performance over the last decade.
Owner performance yeah.
I am from the States... I fell out of love with all of the U.S. sports... I am seeing footy become everything I hate about U.S. sports.... It's almost 2025, guess I am not supposed to like stuff anymore. Oh well... Guess Football Manager is still an option.
Remember when Hicks and Gillette handled Liverpool FC before FSG now? That's exactly how I see INEOS at the moment. Just the guys who are here for now before more richer competent owners come to take over United.
Even a normal young player earns 100k week at man utd and INEOS has problem with 40k year for helping our former players. Its nothing. But it has so much value in hearts of man utd fans. This decision will never be accpeted by true man utd fan.
What do any of these cuts have to do with footballing operations? INEOS were supposed to have responsibility for the focus on football operations but it feels more like they're the local PR operation to apply Glazer policies.
You must respect that Ratcliffe/INEOS ruthlessly operates with a business mindset. There is a process underway of removing the glut and United seems to have accumulated it everywhere. Unfortunately, charities and employees are affected in the process but, hopefully, it is part of modernizing the club.
This is hoping it pays off in 1.5 seasons and we see the club on the up. I also believe once the finances are back in order, there will be an incentive to bring back some of the programs and charity work being cut. Until then, everyone working at the club should be on the edge of their seats until the club is back to winning ways.
The biggest mistake that INEOS have made in my opinion is that they are doing the corrections the wrong way around. Yes the operational sector of MU needed to be cut because it has been a haven for under-achievers and bloated for so long. And yes, the playing squad and salaries needs urgent correction. But the playing squad should have been first. Then if the finances needed to be balanced, then they could say they have tried everything but these cuts have to be made as well for the benefit of the clubs survival and growth. In short, players and football staff first, then the match-day and charitable funding can be trimmed. At the moment, they are cutting the pennies, but not saving the pounds.
Looking back, they did better relative to the glaziers. Giving ETG a new deal then sacking him. That payoff could have covered that 40k charity for the next 300 years. Let that sink in!!!
You don't become a billionaire by giving charity to people who don't matter. Running a football club requires a social conscience.
It really doesn't. Cuts need to be made.
The fans that wanted an English ownership now got what they deserve.. The devil is in details. 😂
How dare Englishman want something to remain English. What has globalism brought us apart from spicier food and grape gangs?
@ColmPadraig if he's such an englishman, why doesn't he pay UK Tax? Why didn't he opt to keep his manufacturing in the UK like he promised after Brexit?
Globalism brought you this literal platform that you are commenting on, try to read actual news not crap from the tabloids.
INEOS never invested in this club for the greater interest of Manchester United, but more so for their own desires.
its necessary..nuff said
Correct
Makes you look small time. Yet you throw out contracts to players who 100% do not deserve it. This mess will take 2 generations to sort out. From the stadium to the squad. Culture is toxic/ PR non existant
All these cuts are just a symptom of the FFP mindset. INEOS are just following the EPL's lead in being commercial driven and profit driven. If EPL cares about fans and charities, why would they be so strict on insisting clubs can only spend what they earn????
This is why fans wanted a full sale. Job cuts money saving etc etc, its all a result of that godforsaken debt we have on our heads because of the Glazers. AND THIS IS THE REASON why a full sale from a mega rich owner wouldhv atleast solved this issue.
I personally believe some of the charity stuff will be re-instrated at some point when alot of the worst of the wages are off the books i.e rashford and casemiro. I think this is to set up signings that ruben needs and we will benefit in the long run. For now though yes, it's 14th and cuts around the club while a complete rebuild is happening but it wont last
I think the nicest thing you can say about INEOS is they actually want united to be successful again. But they are making decisions that undermine the values of the club
I have to disagree with you on the staff cuts. However many there were, the money being spent there was an irrelevance compared to a bad signing or paying off yet another manager. United should be a reliable source of employment in the city, im a bit disappointed in your attitude to that if im honest
Ineos is the glazers pro max
Someone recently referred to Sir Jim as the Rat, now the way things are going I begin to wonder just when the Rat will abandon the ship he helped to sink