Club ownership | Senior management team talk

[Yakuza_devils]

I don't think the fans can do anything. There have been many protests in the past. But the Glazers couldn't care less living more than 3000 miles away having the time of their life with the club dividends and profits while putting "nothing" into the club.

They have no interest in football, sorry, soccer. They don't understand the fans, the culture, the history of the club. To them is all money and squeezing us dry. It's all business.

Then, came Ineos, at least they are better than Glazers with the football structure and stadium. The team is also starting to perform. Long may it continues. But we are not sure if this is the right strategy for long term. We are now being outbids by Spurs. We are not shopping at the top tier market anymore. Finger crossed this may somehow work out well. Perhaps, we are following PSG's strategy and will turn out good?

 

[sp_cgb]

We've spent circa 500m on transfers since INEOS took over the running of football operations in the summer of 2024 and still have a month left of this window to spend more. All this while trying to get out of DEEP financial trouble caused in large part by spending insane transfer fees on average players and putting them on absurd wages. For a decade. Some of the posts on this thread would be hilarious if they weren't so deeply divorced from reality. A large section of our fanbase seems to live in an alternate universe where the last decade never happened and money is just a concept that can be ignore when you want to. It's deeply embarrassing tbh.

And who's fault is that? We all know who's responsible and Jim went ahead and hopped into bed with them still. Nice joint venture he's got going there with the culprits of all our financial woes. Well done sir.

And also; why can't he now convince these Floridian dipsh*ts to at least finally pump some of their own money into the club to make sure we can get Champions League football and some actual success for the foreseeable future and properly stabilize as a top club again? Put those 1.25b you got as an investment into the club and make sure that the new stadium, which would skyrocket the club's value even more, doesn't just stay a vague fantasy. But nope. Still nothing. Only more debt, greed and silence from overseas, while Jimmy dreams of winning the title on austerity measures and flights of fancy.

 

[ron86]

And who's fault is that? We all know who's responsible and Jim went ahead and hopped into bed with them still. Nice joint venture he's got going there with the culprits of all our financial woes. Well done sir.

And also; why can't he now convince these Floridian dipsh*ts to at least finally pump some of their own money into the club to make sure we can get Champions League football and some actual success for the foreseeable future and properly stabilize as a top club again? Put those 1.25b you got as an investment into the club and make sure that the new stadium, which would skyrocket the club's value even more, doesn't just stay a vague fantasy. But nope. Still nothing. Only more debt, greed and silence from overseas, while Jimmy dreams of winning the title on austerity measures and flights of fancy.

The Glazers have ruined us over nearly quarter of a century, people are now talking like Ineos are knights in shining armour rather than the leeches business partners, who come with a crap sporting track record

 

[KStandBarmyArmy1993]

Saying this again.

Just because people aren't saying "death to Ratcliffe" or having a meltdown because we didn't sign Fernandes or Tonali, doesn't mean they're happy with the running of the club.

I don't think the fans can do anything. There have been many protests in the past. But the Glazers couldn't care less living more than 3000 miles away having the time of their life with the club dividends and profits while putting "nothing" into the club.

They have no interest in football, sorry, soccer. They don't understand the fans, the culture, the history of the club. To them is all money and squeezing us dry. It's all business.

Then, came Ineos, at least they are better than Glazers with the football structure and stadium. The team is also starting to perform. Long may it continues. But we are not sure if this is the right strategy for long term. We are now being outbids by Spurs. We are not shopping at the top tier market anymore. Finger crossed this may somehow work out well. Perhaps, we are following PSG's strategy and will turn out good?

Fans have plenty of power. It's just people can't be arsed.

People also can't generally see beyond what's happening on the pitch and in the transfer market. 90% of the fans on here that are currently angry would be completely placated by a random big signing regardless of whether they suited the style of play etc.

 

[Bobby_2024]

We all know Glazers are greedy and never cared about improving club (trophies or stadium) but Jim is a local lad who has 15B.
So why cant he donate 2B to stadium, for that he will be remembered fondly for generations to come by all UTD fans. isn't it

I know people say billionaires don't think that way, but his family is also UTD fans and some kind of magical feeling he can get by doing it at the tail end of his life is worth a shot?

 

[ron86]

We all know Glazers are greedy and never cared about improving club (trophies or stadium) but Jim is a local lad who has 15B.
So why cant he donate 2B to stadium, for that he will be remembered fondly for generations to come by all UTD fans. isn't it

I know people say billionaires don't think that way, but his family also UTD fans and some kind of magical feeling he can get by doing it at the tail end of his life is worth a shot?

If he wanted to do that he would've done that, it's not going to happen. Ineos are also apparently having financial issues, Jim's 15b isn't just sat in the bank

 

[sp_cgb]

We all know Glazers are greedy and never cared about improving club (trophies or stadium) but Jim is a local lad who has 15B.
So why cant he donate 2B to stadium, for that he will be remembered fondly for generations to come by all UTD fans. isn't it

I know people say billionaires don't think that way, but his family is also UTD fans and some kind of magical feeling he can get by doing it at the tail end of his life is worth a shot?

Does Jim seem like the type to do that? He's a billionaire exactly because he doesn't and not by being some philanthropist do-gooder. The guy wanted to buy Chelsea, before his whole involvement with United. This farcical nonsense about him being a United supporter shouldn't fool anyone.

 

[pcaming]

We all know Glazers are greedy and never cared about improving club (trophies or stadium) but Jim is a local lad who has 15B.
So why cant he donate 2B to stadium, for that he will be remembered fondly for generations to come by all UTD fans. isn't it

I know people say billionaires don't think that way, but his family is also UTD fans and some kind of magical feeling he can get by doing it at the tail end of his life is worth a shot?

You expect a brexiteer that immediately moved to Monaco to be generous and care?

 

[Bobby_2024]

If he wanted to do that he would've done that, it's not going to happen. Ineos are also apparently having financial issues, Jim's 15b isn't just sat in the bank

Ah, just googled it and you are right.

Losing 1.2B on automotive business on top of 18B debt, plus slow down of global chemical business is not helping either.

I feel he still has money in various forms of assets as all billionaires manage companies with debt to avoid taxes or losing their own money.

so if he really wants, he can give us money for stadium but considering other replies and how he managed things over the years I dont think he even thought of doing it for free.

 

[ron86]

Ah, just googled it and you are right.

Losing 1.2B on automotive business on top of 18B debt, plus slow down of global chemical business is not helping either.

I feel he still has money in various forms of assets as all billionaires manage companies with debt to avoid taxes or losing their own money.

so if he really wants, he can give us money for stadium but considering other replies and how he managed things over the years I dont think he even thought of doing it for free.

He won't go hungry let's be fair. I think people tried to convince themselves he was doing this as a fan and out of the goodness of his heart.

 

[Red in STL]

Ah, just googled it and you are right.

Losing 1.2B on automotive business on top of 18B debt, plus slow down of global chemical business is not helping either.

I feel he still has money in various forms of assets as all billionaires manage companies with debt to avoid taxes or losing their own money.

so if he really wants, he can give us money for stadium but considering other replies and how he managed things over the years I dont think he even thought of doing it for free.

Most of Ratcliffe's assets will be his INEOS shares, like many billionaires his worth is mainly "paper" money, to give money away he would have to sell stuff, that makes him liable to more tax and a drop in value of his assets, he ain't doing that just like other billionaires wouldn't

 

[croadyman]

Saying this again.

Just because people aren't saying "death to Ratcliffe" or having a meltdown because we didn't sign Fernandes or Tonali, doesn't mean they're happy with the running of the club.


Fans have plenty of power. It's just people can't be arsed.

People also can't generally see beyond what's happening on the pitch and in the transfer market. 90% of the fans on here that are currently angry would be completely placated by a random big signing regardless of whether they suited the style of play etc.

Oh no I wouldn't be placated whatsoever and would happily stop giving club any money, it's just the only two options out of this situation are unrealistic. The first is becoming a state nations plaything like City and PSG. The second is a consortium of ex players foreign contacts. Some might suggest there is a third option of a private investor, however these yankee leeches priced all of those potentially interested parties right out.

 

[Bobby_2024]

For any one truly keep club's interest and soul at their heart feel chills, if they introspect how we have been managed since Glazers took over us.

Our club was built on generations of putting its supporters and community first. Today, it feels as though those values have been replaced by commercial interests, with owners extracting from the club rather than investing in its soul.

For decades, this club thrived and over came so many adversaries because its heartbeat was the community and its supporters, I wish we go back to that time and start again. When I read about us and see some old documentaries I feel so proud to be an UTD supporter and I always cherish that no matter what happens, but hope we have a good management in place who understand these things and make us more respected again.

 

[croadyman]

For any one truly keep club's interest and soul at their heart feel chills, if they introspect how we have been managed since Glazers took over us.

Our club was built on generations of putting its supporters and community first. Today, it feels as though those values have been replaced by commercial interests, with owners extracting from the club rather than investing in its soul.

For decades, this club thrived and over came so many adversaries because its heartbeat was the community and its supporters, I wish we go back to that time and start again. When I read about us and see some old documentaries I feel so proud to be an UTD supporter and I always cherish that no matter what happens, but hope we have a good management in place who understand these things and make us more respected again.

Well maybe absolutely hammer these yankee leeches for completely pricing out any full sale opportunities. Perhaps we would have actually benefited from these private investment firms after all. INEOS aren't exactly cash rich so we are forced to make sacrifices when it comes to transfers again which is bloody annoying.

 

[quadrant]

For any one truly keep club's interest and soul at their heart feel chills, if they introspect how we have been managed since Glazers took over us.

Our club was built on generations of putting its supporters and community first. Today, it feels as though those values have been replaced by commercial interests, with owners extracting from the club rather than investing in its soul.

For decades, this club thrived and over came so many adversaries because its heartbeat was the community and its supporters, I wish we go back to that time and start again. When I read about us and see some old documentaries I feel so proud to be an UTD supporter and I always cherish that no matter what happens, but hope we have a good management in place who understand these things and make us more respected again.

The club vibe is certainly different now to when I was young (80s) and no doubt different again to the eras before that. However one thing hasn't changed, no-one likes the owners. When I was younger, Martin Edwards name was pretty much dirt, and his father before him had an even worse reputation.

 

[Flying high]

The club vibe is certainly different now to when I was young (80s) and no doubt different again to the eras before that. However one thing hasn't changed, no-one likes the owners. When I was younger, Martin Edwards name was pretty much dirt, and his father before him had an even worse reputation.

That's fair. But with hindsight I think we'd all take them back over being sucked dry by the Glazers, and not in a good way

 

[Redjazz]

I wouldn't expect even a good owner to foot all the stadium build. It wouldn't be necessary for a start; the new stadium has to pay for itself, otherwise there is no point in going ahead with it. In that context, financing is essentially being used to bridge the gap between the heavy onset construction costs and the increased revenues that come later.
Stadium financing is pretty sophisticated these days, but at the same time the mechanisms\approaches taken have become routine.
The stadium will be funded privately by a combination of loans, equity injections, and various types of commercial monetization.
The monetization angle will look at heavily frontloaded long term commercial contracts with "founding sponsors", ditto with naming rights, same with hospitality boxes\seats. The idea is to bring in as much cash as possible early on.
Loans would come in the form of construction debt during the build phase with long term bonds following upon completion. The construction debt might not be interest bearing. Instead the principal amount owed increases (sorta like the PIK loan we had previously). Loans will be backed by future stadium revenue and could be housed and ring fenced within a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV). Its purpose is to manage the projects finances.
Since debt will be backed by future stadium revenue only, the fact that the club has preexisting interest bearing debt (about 600m plus the credit card balance) shouldn't impact the stadium rate.
For the club, getting the right balance between loans, equity, and upfront commercial backing is essential. For the club, ideally you would have the majority of the funding coming from equity and upfront commercial. How equity might work in the club's case is muddled by the current setup. The Glazers are unlikely to invest but Ineos might in consideration for greater control. The club, as is, could issue new equity and both the principal parties would have their shareholding diluted but not their control positions. The issue of A shares would be expensive (for the owners). Alternatively, the club could invite in another equity partner.
At any rate, the more equity the better, unless you would like the club saddled with massive stadium debt. The current ownership would have to change if the goal was to minimize the debt load of the stadium project.

 

[manutddjw]

I’ve been very vocal about my disdain for the Glazers and ineos on here and I think the biggest misnomer about anyone whose been posting anti glazer and ineos comments is that we’re just mad because of our transfer window with comments like “oh you’re just mad because you didn’t get shiny new toys” being common. It goes far beyond that and is just a small piece of what these scum bags have done to our club over the last 20 plus years.

 

[croadyman]

The brutal reality is we just won't be able to financially compete until we get a full sale. I get the feeling INEOS don't have any intention of majority ownership, so it makes me wonder why they ever decided to get involved. Although the stadium has probably changed things.

 

[croadyman]

I’ve been very vocal about my disdain for the Glazers and ineos on here and I think the biggest misnomer about anyone whose been posting anti glazer and ineos comments is that we’re just mad because of our transfer window with comments like “oh you’re just mad because you didn’t get shiny new toys” being common. It goes far beyond that and is just a small piece of what these scum bags have done to our club over the last 20 plus years.

Yeah we needed a clean break not a minority owner

 

[ron86]

The brutal reality is we just won't be able to financially compete until we get a full sale. I get the feeling INEOS don't have any intention of majority ownership, so it makes me wonder why they ever decided to get involved. Although the stadium has probably changed things.

I agree. We need ownership who will allow us to invest all revenue back in to the side with the debt cleared. Never going to happen though as they're just far to greedy to actually sell for wht the club's worth. I feel Ineos completely misjudged the situation, thought hiring a director of football and some data analysts would have us competitive again

 

[acnumber9]

I feel Ineos completely misjudged the situation

You mean they did the exact same thing they did at their other football clubs?

 

[ron86]

You mean they did the exact same thing they did at their other football clubs?

Pretty much. Wouldn't just say their football clubs, pretty much all their sporting endeavours

 

[manutddjw]

I agree. We need ownership who will allow us to invest all revenue back in to the side with the debt cleared. Never going to happen though as they're just far to greedy to actually sell for wht the club's worth. I feel Ineos completely misjudged the situation, thought hiring a director of football and some data analysts would have us competitive again

I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with the ownership if costs incurred because of their leveraged buyout were paid by them personally and not taken from the club like interest payments and costs associated with loans.

The club would then be responsible for sustaining itself. If we were told that we couldn’t improve the squad because our revenue fell short or we have a strict wage structure because of it, I’d be accepting of that. What I’m not accepting of is this happening because we have to spend a large amount of money that this club earned to pay for the Glazers to own this club.

I love this club and would be willing to spend more in ticket prices, MUTV and other subscriptions associated with watching united if I knew the money was helping the club. I’ve cancelled my MUTV subscription, won’t travel to old trafford any time soon and will buy my shirt from DH Gate. I’m not spending another dime on this club for the Glazers to own us and for Ratcliffe’s shares to become more valuable.

 

[croadyman]

Still physically sickens me this leveraged buyout was ever allowed in the first place. Completely gutless from the Monopolies Commission to green light it. They then go and twist the knife by stopping them after it has already happened to us which still really annoys me.

 

[ron86]

I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with the ownership if costs incurred because of their leveraged buyout were paid by them personally and not taken from the club like interest payments and costs associated with loans.

The club would then be responsible for sustaining itself. If we were told that we couldn’t improve the squad because our revenue fell short or we have a strict wage structure because of it, I’d be accepting of that. What I’m not accepting of is this happening because we have to spend a large amount of money that this club earned to pay for the Glazers to own this club.

I love this club and would be willing to spend more in ticket prices, MUTV and other subscriptions associated with watching united if I knew the money was helping the club. I’ve cancelled my MUTV subscription, won’t travel to old trafford any time soon and will buy my shirt from DH Gate. I’m not spending another dime on this club for the Glazers to own us and for Ratcliffe’s shares to become more valuable.

Exactly this. Most people aren't asking for owners to spend their own billions on the first team, just the money we generate. It'll never happen though

 

[thisisnottaken1]

Still physically sickens me this leveraged buyout was ever allowed in the first place. Completely gutless from the Monopolies Commission to green light it. They then go and twist the knife by stopping them after it has already happened to us which still really annoys me.

The Glazers should be forced to pay back all the money they’ve stolen from the club.

 

[croadyman]

Exactly this. Most people aren't asking for owners to spend their own billions on the first team, just the money we generate. It'll never happen though

Yeah that's all we want but stopped in May 2005, shame and all because of that damn racehorse too

 

[croadyman]

The Glazers should be forced to pay back all the money they’ve stolen from the club.

Yeah that's just never gonna happen, leeching scum have absolutely milked us completely dry now. Bet they cannot wait for the new cow when the new stadium is gonna be pouring in more revenue

 

[Red in STL]

Still physically sickens me this leveraged buyout was ever allowed in the first place. Completely gutless from the Monopolies Commission to green light it. They then go and twist the knife by stopping them after it has already happened to us which still really annoys me.

What would trhe Monopolies Commission have to do with any decision, United is not a monopoly football club?

Leveraged buyouts are not illegal and are a pretty common busines practice, the PL changed their rules so it can't happen again with a PL club but it's not against the law

 

[quadrant]

I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with the ownership if costs incurred because of their leveraged buyout were paid by them personally and not taken from the club like interest payments and costs associated with loans.

The club would then be responsible for sustaining itself. If we were told that we couldn’t improve the squad because our revenue fell short or we have a strict wage structure because of it, I’d be accepting of that. What I’m not accepting of is this happening because we have to spend a large amount of money that this club earned to pay for the Glazers to own this club.

I love this club and would be willing to spend more in ticket prices, MUTV and other subscriptions associated with watching united if I knew the money was helping the club. I’ve cancelled my MUTV subscription, won’t travel to old trafford any time soon and will buy my shirt from DH Gate. I’m not spending another dime on this club for the Glazers to own us and for Ratcliffe’s shares to become more valuable.

The Glazer's leveraged debt is not the only problem unfortunately. Being so catastrophically run is the other part of the equation. Given all the advantages the club had post-Fergie, financial and otherwise, we have to be the worst run major club in Europe.

 

[croadyman]

The Glazer's leveraged debt is not the only problem unfortunately. Being so catastrophically run is the other part of the equation. Given all the advantages the club had post-Fergie, financial and otherwise, we have to be the worst run major club in Europe.

Worst run by an absolute country mile and all we can do as fans is just accept the situation which is shite

 

[croadyman]

What would trhe Monopolies Commission have to do with any decision, United is not a monopoly football club?

Leveraged buyouts are not illegal and are a pretty common busines practice, the PL changed their rules so it can't happen again with a PL club but it's not against the law

Well why didn't they change the rules before 2005

 

[Yakuza_devils]

I think there is nothing much we can do to force ownership change to kick out Glazers and SJR apart from: -

1) Protests.
2) Boycotts
3) Public campaign to garner supports to influence the owners to sell.

Unfortunately, we have tried all of the above and it seems Glazers don't care at all as long as they can still milk us. They have been ruining us for more than a decade but it seems that it's all legal. We can't do anything as this is a private owned assets. The owner can do whatever they want with Man Utd and the fans have no say.

I think it's time for a football revolution?

 

[Escobar]

Still physically sickens me this leveraged buyout was ever allowed in the first place. Completely gutless from the Monopolies Commission to green light it. They then go and twist the knife by stopping them after it has already happened to us which still really annoys me.

That is the main issue, and the fact the debt still exist to that extend.
You all can moan about Ineos and Jim as you want, but a) he at least invested money into the club and b) things (also financially) have improved under him.
Most times people just hate for the sake of it but compared to the Glazers, I mich rather have Jim

 

[Andycoleno9]

That is the main issue, and the fact the debt still exist to that extend.
You all can moan about Ineos and Jim as you want, but a) he at least invested money into the club and b) things (also financially) have improved under him.
Most times people just hate for the sake of it but compared to the Glazers, I mich rather have Jim

They invested because it was a part or deal with Glazers. And that is it. They invested 300 mil because they needed to do so, not because they wanted to do it.

Our best chance was that Glazers are forced to sell whole club. Jim saved them and now we are fecked with two incompetent owners with low ambition. Without INEOS, Glazers would be forced to sell club in a year or two.

Ineos ambition is not to challenge for titles. Their ambition to catch somehow top 5 spot with minimum investment and wait new stadium which will raise value of the club.

 

[quadrant]

They invested because it was a part or deal with Glazers. And that is it. They invested 300 mil because they needed to do so, not because they wanted to do it.

So you think the Glazers wanted them to invest in the club, rather than, say, pocketing the £300M by bumping up the share price a little more? That doesn’t seem to ring true to me.

Our best chance was that Glazers are forced to sell whole club. Jim saved them and now we are fecked with two incompetent owners with low ambition. Without INEOS, Glazers would be forced to sell club in a year or two.

Why would they be forced to sell the club?

 

[Escobar]

I think there is nothing much we can do to force ownership change to kick out Glazers and SJR apart from: -

1) Protests.
2) Boycotts
3) Public campaign to garner supports to influence the owners to sell.

Unfortunately, we have tried all of the above and it seems Glazers don't care at all as long as they can still milk us. They have been ruining us for more than a decade but it seems that it's all legal. We can't do anything as this is a private owned assets. The owner can do whatever they want with Man Utd and the fans have no say.

I think it's time for a football revolution?

Lets assume you get your wish. Who should than take over?

They invested because it was a part or deal with Glazers. And that is it. They invested 300 mil because they needed to do so, not because they wanted to do it.

Our best chance was that Glazers are forced to sell whole club. Jim saved them and now we are fecked with two incompetent owners with low ambition. Without INEOS, Glazers would be forced to sell club in a year or two.

Ineos ambition is not to challenge for titles. Their ambition to catch somehow top 5 spot with minimum investment and wait new stadium which will raise value of the club.

They bought shares plus invested in the infrastructure, something the Glazers never did. They did not even buy the club out ffs.

How would they have been forced to sell the club? There was never a buyer, the valuation is too high and you need to get back to reality on that one. Or enlighten me, who should / could buy the club?
Ineos have improved the club, no doubt about it. But they also need to nacigate through the financial mess creared over the past 20 years or so

 

[Highfather_24]

Carrick saved their asses last season. If it wasnt for him, a lot of questions were being asked from Ineos, from Ten Hag's extension, to Amorim's appointment and backing etc.

I still dont see any real improvement in the transfer market either. We still absolutely suck at selling, and we have missed out on our primary targets while they are snapped up by our PL rivals.

Not impressed so far.

 

[acnumber9]

So you think the Glazers wanted them to invest in the club, rather than, say, pocketing the £300M by bumping up the share price a little more? That doesn’t seem to ring true to me.

Yes. Raising capital for infrastructure was stated as one of the reasons they were looking to sell a stake in the club in an official club statement.