The Manchester United Club Thread **Sponsored by Comedy Central**

The problem I have with this Ineos position is that it seemingly absolves the Glazers of more than a decade of mismanagement. All organisations require restructuring at times but the salaries of administrative staff at the club will be a drop in the ocean when compared to the money the club has wasted on wages and transfers. £80m on Antony plus presumably c£10m a year in wages would pay for 2,500 staff on £35k a year. Frankly its obscene and Ineos / Glazers should be focusing their efforts on the impact of their incompetence. Antony Martial and Mason Mount may aswell have Worked From Home for a season given their levels of productivity but we have paid them c£20m for the pleasure.

Sir Jim needs to get his priorities straight.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Calpol said:
The problem I have with this Ineos position is that it seemingly absolves the Glazers of more than a decade of mismanagement. All organisations require restructuring at times but the salaries of administrative staff at the club will be a drop in the ocean when compared to the money the club has wasted on wages and transfers. £80m on Antony plus presumably c£10m a year in wages would pay for 2,500 staff on £35k a year. Frankly its obscene and Ineos / Glazers should be focusing their efforts on the impact of their incompetence. Antony Martial and Mason Mount may aswell have Worked From Home for a season given their levels of productivity but we have paid them c£20m for the pleasure.

Sir Jim needs to get his priorities straight.
Click to expand...
Standard senior management wanting to cut costs.

The burger lady gets punished before the multi millionaires.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Calpol said:
The problem I have with this Ineos position is that it seemingly absolves the Glazers of more than a decade of mismanagement. All organisations require restructuring at times but the salaries of administrative staff at the club will be a drop in the ocean when compared to the money the club has wasted on wages and transfers. £80m on Antony plus presumably c£10m a year in wages would pay for 2,500 staff on £35k a year. Frankly its obscene and Ineos / Glazers should be focusing their efforts on the impact of their incompetence. Antony Martial and Mason Mount may aswell have Worked From Home for a season given their levels of productivity but we have paid them c£20m for the pleasure.

Sir Jim needs to get his priorities straight.
Click to expand...
There's already been reports that he's going to be cutting back on Utd's reckless spending in the transfer market too:

www.telegraph.co.uk

Sir Jim Ratcliffe demands end to reckless Man Utd spending

Extravagant backing which Erik ten Hag received will soon be a thing of the past as club intends to focus on bringing through young players
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk

None of this should come as much of a surprise given how he operates in his other businesses. I saw one person describe him as Mike Ashley but with chemicals instead of Lonsdale.
 
BaZ87 said:
There's already been reports that he's going to be cutting back on Utd's reckless spending in the transfer market too:

www.telegraph.co.uk

Sir Jim Ratcliffe demands end to reckless Man Utd spending

Extravagant backing which Erik ten Hag received will soon be a thing of the past as club intends to focus on bringing through young players
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk

None of this should come as much of a surprise given how he operates in his other businesses. I saw one person describe him as Mike Ashley but with chemicals instead of Lonsdale.
Click to expand...

I don't read it like that at all. I 100% agree with him, we need to stop throwing money at stupid short sighted signings or expensive has-beens and just wasting hundreds of millions with no clear recruitment policy. I've no doubt he'd put his hand in his pocket for the right player, but buying smart is not the same as "you've got no money to spend"
 
Last edited:
Yeah, we haven't got the squad that requires a sprinkling of magic or just a little tweaking. We need to be making sensible buys that will be a long term part of the team. We also need to be considering how we move players on when they don't work out. There is almost no upside for a team in Uniteds position to be paying over the odds for players and then paying the resulting silly wages.

Its not worked. In fact, I can't think of very many expensive players that have worked out. Perhaps 1 in 10 come vaguely close to being good value. We should be focussing on building for the future. Bringing young players through. Bringing players with the right mentality to the club as well and making sure they fit the play style.
 
Steedie said:
I don't read it like that at all. I 100% agree with him, we need to stop throwing money at stupid short sighted signings or expensive has-beens and just wasting hundreds of millions with no clear recruitment policy. I've no doubt he'd put his hand in his pocket for the right player, but buying smart is not the same as "you've got no money to spend"
Click to expand...
Sorry, you didn't read what like what? I didn't say you've got no money to spend :confused: I stated that it's being reported that he wants to cut back on reckless spending and linked the article which claims your transfer budget is likely to be far smaller than what's been spent in previous years.

Cost cutting is Ratcliffe's trademark. It's no surprise that he wants to cut costs off the field and it won't be a massive surprise if Utd spend less on transfers etc moving forwards too. Obviously he's going to want to get more bang for his buck from what you do spend but then again any and every owner wants that too, whether he can do that remains to be seen.
 
BaZ87 said:
Sorry, you didn't read what like what? I didn't say you've got no money to spend :confused: I stated that it's being reported that he wants to cut back on reckless spending and linked the article which claims your transfer budget is likely to be far smaller than what's been spent in previous years.

Cost cutting is Ratcliffe's trademark. It's no surprise that he wants to cut costs off the field and it won't be a massive surprise if Utd spend less on transfers etc moving forwards too. Obviously he's going to want to get more bang for his buck from what you do spend but then again any and every owner wants that too, whether he can do that remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

Your post implied that he's not going to spend any money akin to Mike Ashley. If it wasn't implying that then I don't really get why you posted it, as it's fairly obvious he was going to cut costs and be more sensible than the **** show that it's been under the Glazers.
 
Steedie said:
Your post implied that he's not going to spend any money akin to Mike Ashley. If it wasn't implying that then I don't really get why you posted it, as it's fairly obvious he was going to cut costs and be more sensible than the **** show that it's been under the Glazers.
Click to expand...
Firstly, contrary to what many Newcastle fans might tell you, Newcastle did spend money under Ashley but that wasn't the point I was making. It was a general point around Ratcliffe's business practices not specific to how they run football clubs, hence the point about chemicals and Lonsdale, being very similar to Mike Ashley's.
 
Robbo said:
I know Evans has done OK considering his age, but we really need to be looking toward younger players... I suppose it might make sense if he's fairly cheap.

www.bbc.co.uk

Manchester United: Jonny Evans and Omari Forson in talks over new deals

Jonny Evans, 36, is in talks over signing a new deal at Manchester United.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

Agreed, but given his fitness record and availability and performance i don't have an issue with it given he's already there. As you say, assuming it's not at an excessive wage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom