Standing in the Manchester Suite at Old Trafford at the start of December, nearly 12 months on from Sir Jim Ratcliffe getting the keys to the place, chief executive Omar Berrada addressed 600 or so club staff and gave a stark warning.
“I know it was a difficult year,” Berrada said. “And I can’t promise next year won’t be difficult too.”
The British billionaire Ratcliffe, founder of petrochemicals firm INEOS, acquired a minority stake in Manchester United on Christmas Eve 2023 and the past year has been a whirlwind of triumph, trauma and turmoil.
The good news is United won the FA Cup, defeating their neighbours Manchester City, but there have been many teething problems: extending the contract of head coach Erik ten Hag in July, only to sack him in October; hiring and firing a sporting director, Dan Ashworth, in an episode that has cost the club over £5million ($6.3m) and taking the unpopular step of raising ticket prices and attracting protests from supporters. Not to mention ending a £2m-per-year ambassadorial role for the club’s iconic manager, Sir Alex Ferguson.
To mark INEOS’ first anniversary of operating United, The Athletic has spoken to numerous sources within the club’s ecosystem, all of whom spoke confidentially to protect their jobs, to detail what measures have been taken at the club and with the men’s first team. On Monday, Charlotte Harpur reported what it has meant for Manchester United’s women players.
Among much more, we can reveal:
- A fear of further job cuts
- Approvals to sign off anything costing £25,000 or more go above Berrada
- Ratcliffe proposed X owner Elon Musk or Amazon’s executive chairman Jeff Bezos help pay for new stadium
- Club looking at significant ticket price rises
- Further ambassador cuts and high-profile exits, including former chief executive David Gill’s £1million-per-year retainer
- More INEOS executives getting involved at United on a day-to-day basis
- Ruben Amorim’s morale-boosting address to staff
- Bruno Fernandes’ FA Cup final offer
If nothing else, 12 months under Ratcliffe’s rule has shown he is a man eager to provoke progress.
Chocolate bars, ‘Project 150′ and INEOS’ cost-cutting measures
Ratcliffe rapidly identified priorities at Manchester United. He wanted to restore the club’s former glories on the field, speaking of ambitions to be competitive at the top of the Premier League and in the Champions League, while also revealing hopes of refurbishing the club’s decaying stadium or, ideally, constructing a new 100,000-seater home entirely.
But the day-to-day grind has been focused on another INEOS concern — cost control. Ratcliffe resented the fact United are a loss-making enterprise, in the red for £113.2m to the year end June 30. While the initial deal agreed Ratcliffe would assume sporting control of United, it quickly became clear he needed to get a grip of the business to address matters on the pitch. His scope therefore expanded.
United are one of the most profitable clubs in the world before player trading and interest payments on debt come into the equation — a legacy of Glazer ownership — but a key objective for Ratcliffe has been headcount reduction, down from around 1,000 to 750. Those large-scale redundancies have left morale, in the words of several employees, “on the floor”. Others at the club would counteract that view, insisting that people understand what Ratcliffe is trying to do and why. But Berrada’s speech gave the impression to many of those in the audience that even more people could lose their jobs in the second year of INEOS governance.
Ratcliffe at OId Trafford in November (Plumb Images/Leicester City FC via Getty Images)
Ashworth’s removal as sporting director, five months after a similar period of United waiting for him to finish gardening leave from Newcastle United, sent shockwaves around the club because people felt it showed nobody is safe.
In that light, some staff at United are making contingency plans and looking at opportunities elsewhere. For instance, the commercial director at a different north-west football club is sitting on around a dozen applications from current United employees.
People who have worked with Ratcliffe consider staffing levels an obsession, with the 72-year-old applying to United the business strategies that have helped him become one of Britain’s richest men. Stripping back companies to increase efficiencies has been his blueprint but former colleagues feel the same approach might not work at United because they think football is different; the emphasis is on humans rather than machines.
That emotional side is something Ruben Amorim tapped into during the summit led by Berrada on December 2. Amorim’s appearance was appreciated and the mood lifted when he said he knows what happens on the pitch impacts what happens off it. He also took ownership, even though he had only been in the building for one month. “We haven’t been good enough,” he said. It was the first admission of anything like that from someone on the football side — the part of the business that has primarily caused United to lose a cumulative £370m over the past five years through unsuccessful recruitment — and his message was very well received.
Amorim also took part in a Q&A, where he was asked about his pre-match ritual. He eventually played along and said he takes a swig from his water bottle and shakes the hand of his assistant Carlos Fernandes.
Berrada did some breakouts, going around the room to speak to employees about their roles. He had done this more formally in previous weeks, holding a series of group “ideas” meetings to get a firsthand sense from staff about their thoughts on the running of the club, welcoming tips. Sometimes these talks could veer off in unexpected directions, with recommendations made for United to loan more players to the Championship or give out bonuses to staff if the first team wins a trophy.
Berrada closed out by talking about “Project 150” — United’s plan to win the Premier League in 2028, on the 150th anniversary of the club being founded.
There were signs of the new, frugal era where people sat, however. Golden envelopes had been taped underneath only four seats, with the contents being prizes, which included small hampers from chocolate makers Cadbury’s and British designer Paul Smith, both United sponsors. Two staffers got an extra day’s holiday, with the instant joke among those present being whether they would be allowed to take it. Every seat also had a complimentary chocolate bar on it.
In previous years, prizes were more generous: a £500 Selfridges voucher, four match tickets with hospitality worth about £1,000 a seat, a Paul Smith luggage set equivalent to £1,000, or restaurant vouchers.
The start of December used to be the time the rank-and-file could look forward to the office Christmas party. But the hierarchy at United, led by Ratcliffe, put paid to that this time round. When Berrada confirmed the decision during a staff meeting in September, one long-serving employee loudly responded with an elongated, “Wow”, which became a topic of conversation afterwards. It was seen as a small act of rebellion, giving voice to a feeling that had been bubbling under the surface ever since Jean Claude-Blanc, chief executive of INEOS Sport (below), announced during an all-staff meeting in July that a quarter of the workforce would be made redundant.
(Ash Donelon/Manchester United via Getty Images)
Cutting the Christmas party caused widespread upset because it would have been a chance to mix with colleagues in a relaxed environment and have some fun at the end of a year when many had given up evenings and weekends to work. Staff have returned to mandatory five-days-per-week working from the office (another Ratcliffe edict) this year after becoming accustomed to more flexible working conditions following the pandemic. United also used to put on afternoons at Old Trafford where parents could bring their children to show them where they work, meet Santa Claus, and ride a bucking reindeer.
It is estimated United saved around £250,000 by cancelling the Christmas function, but those at the club say the call was made in light of so many people losing their jobs, and celebrating in those circumstances would have been wrong, rather than it being a financial calculation.
Change has certainly been swift. In December 2023, staff gathered at Old Trafford, enjoying a fully complimentary bar, live band, and street food. Richard Arnold, the chief executive whose departure had already been announced, went round the room and shook everyone’s hand, expressing his belief the future at United would be bright. Two weeks later on December 24, Patrick Stewart, interim chief executive, told staff a 25 per cent sale to Ratcliffe had been agreed by the Glazer family.
Stewart also left at the end of the season, alongside chief financial officer Cliff Baty. Blanc stepped in until Berrada officially took his role on July 13. Four chief executives in 12 months is a quirk of circumstance, but also a sign of the turbulence brought by Ratcliffe trying to shake up United.
The sudden departure of Ashworth, who had been held up as a totem of United’s projected football improvement and chaired large staff meetings at Carrington about the club’s sporting vision, is more significant and calls into question the judgement of those appointing him. But senior figures at United point out there was similar disruption at Chelsea, Liverpool, and Manchester City when each club experienced new owners before on-pitch success emerged. Certainly, indecision has stalked the club under the Glazers and even those with expectations of glory anticipate that the ride will not be smooth.
Ashworth’s departure came as a surprise to many (Oli Scarff/AFP via Getty Images)
On January 4, Ratcliffe introduced himself to his new employees at an all-staff meeting at Old Trafford alongside Sir Dave Brailsford. The pair drew applause for talking plainly about wanting to raise standards and make football the focus for United. None of the Glazers had ever spoken in person to staff like that and their rhetoric was invigorating for many.
But as Ratcliffe’s strategy became clearer, with a doctrine to get rid of a “jobs for life” culture, some have been left in tears. He would argue that most workers in the world are not blessed with benefits, though, and wished to reset any sense of entitlement.
The starting gun on perks being removed from regular United staffers was sounded at the FA Cup final, when the club announced the traditional benefit of a free ticket, travel, food and accommodation would not be on offer for the game against Manchester City. Instead, staff had to pay £20 for a coach trip to Wembley and got nothing other than the ticket.
Bruno Fernandes was so taken aback, he went to executives and offered to pay for all the usual extras out of his own pocket. His proposal was rejected, with sources speculating it would have been a bad look for the new United regime.
There was dismay internally when United paid for players’ wives and girlfriends to have a meal at San Carlo restaurant at the end of the season, with several carrying Harvey Nichols bags as they left. United said player care, extending to families, is a priority.
In March, Ratcliffe had appointed Interpath Advisory, a corporate restructuring firm, to delve into the finances of a club that had recorded losses of £144.2m in the two campaigns prior.
One of the findings Ratcliffe felt pertinent was on the spending of the employees and directors when on trips abroad. A receipt from a Las Vegas nightclub, from United’s pre-season tour, was recorded at more than $3,000, charged to a company card. It was not the only one from that date. On other occasions, members of the commercial team were able to get chauffeurs, five-star hotels, first-class flights, and $100 dinners per night, such as at Nobu Miami, while trying to complete deals.
Staff being able to let their hair down when away, or wine and dine clients, was seen by the Glazers as a fair expense and the club’s sponsorship business was industry-leading, but Ratcliffe viewed it differently. He withdrew corporate credit cards and enforced much tighter spending, to the point where staff now have to plot train journeys using the split-ticket mechanism for lower-cost fares. One particularly embarrassing moment came during pre-season when a meal out for staff and players ran into thousands of dollars and senior executives, due to new credit card limits, found their cards blocked initially when attempting to pay. They ended up splitting across multiple cards to cover the bill.
Whether such cost-cutting has an impact on revenue lines in that area going forward, with shirt sleeve and training kit sponsors up for renewal, remains to be seen.
Counting beans: A dramatic shift from Glazer ownership to INEOS
It is not just the commercial department that has felt the squeeze, however, with INEOS’ attention to detail extending to other departments. Matchday agency staff had their lunchboxes changed and now dine next to a toilet cubicle, a steward-of-the-week bonus worth £50 was stopped and in May Ratcliffe sent an email complaining about a “high degree of untidiness” at Carrington and branding an IT office “a disgrace”, although that was in fact an MUTV studio.
Ratcliffe’s tight grip on outgoings extends to Berrada, whose sign-off only goes up to £25,000. Payments above that figure must be approved by Roger Bell, the chief financial officer who spent 24 years in the same position at INEOS before joining United, or Rob Nevin, the chairman of INEOS Sport, who is also now a director on United’s board.
There has, for instance, been some debate about funding the former United players association (AFMUP), which is about £26,000 annually. A cut to the allowance for United’s disabled supporters group (MUDSA) has also been explored, taking funding from £40,000 to £20,000 annually. As part of their fundraising, MUDSA sells tickets to dinners with the club footing the bill, and questions are being asked about the so-called “double bubble”.
Sign-off is required on canteen orders as well, such as when carrots are bought in bulk. Beans have run out in the press suite.
The shift from Glazer ownership to INEOS has been dramatic. But the working relationship between Ratcliffe and the American siblings has been described as friendly and running smoothly. Sources who know both parties suspect that is because the Glazers are happy for Ratcliffe to take the lead so long as there is the idea he will one day buy their remaining stake.
Avram Glazer and Ratcliffe at the FA Cup semi-final (Marc Atkins/Getty Images)
Any kind of pre-agreement to buy the Glazer shares in future cannot formally exist as that would require a public disclosure, given the club is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Last week Ratcliffe invested the final third of his additional $300m above purchase price to increase his share to 28.94 per cent, as per the terms of the original deal. That money is the first to go into the club’s bank account from outside investment since the Glazers took control in 2005, which is why Ratcliffe was applauded by the crowd when he presented Fernandes with a shirt commemorating his 250th appearance before the Premier League match against Leicester City.
But Ratcliffe is on record as wanting to buy out the Glazers. The SEC filing from January, which gave a blow-by-blow account of the sale process, stated that in May 2023 Ratcliffe offered to buy 60 per cent of the Glazers’ Class B Shares initially, with the remaining 40 per cent purchasable over the next three to five years through a pre-arranged set of prices.
Perhaps the harmonious dynamic would change should the Glazers sense Ratcliffe becoming reluctant to part with more of his billions. The Glazers do have “drag-along rights”, which kick in 18 months after the February 2024 completion and would allow them to force Ratcliffe to sell up to a full bidder. (In corporate law, the majority shareholder can force minority shareholders to sell their shares to a buyer when the majority shareholder sells their own shares, thus “dragging” them along. The majority shareholder must offer the same price, terms, and conditions to the minority shareholders.)
In the meantime, the siblings, especially Joel and Avram, are said to be happy Ratcliffe’s presence protects them from the full fan glare.
A clear point of conflict comes over what happens with Old Trafford. Ratcliffe appears determined to build a new stadium, when Joel had previously shown preference — although little momentum — to redevelop. How to finance a ground from scratch, at a cost upwards of £2billion, has not been sufficiently explained in all the months of the task force being formed. The Athletic has previously reported that United have discussed ticket price rises and the sale of stadium naming rights as ways to raise revenue for the project, while the club also held multiple rounds of exploratory talks with Bank of America earlier this year with a view to borrowing money.
People close to the club cast serious doubts on whether the Glazers would allow Ratcliffe to pump his own money into the project to gain further equity, while current debt lenders have rights on whether United borrow more cash. Ratcliffe could sell part of his two-thirds INEOS stake to invest should he be satisfied at not getting an immediate benefit by way of a bigger slice of the United pie, and he has also held talks with the UK government over public money to support the infrastructure around Old Trafford.
INEOS now owning Ratcliffe’s shares rather than Trawlers, the vehicle he created to originally buy them, should mean investment, if he so wishes, is smoother. Collette Roche, United’s chief operating officer, is central to new stadium plans and has an increasingly prominent role at the club. She was pictured alongside technical director Jason Wilcox at the Bournemouth game and it was announced internally the following day that she would be taking on football operations, such as staffing, security and travel.
Roche (front row, right) and Wilcox watch United’s 3-0 defeat by Bournemouth (Robbie Jay Barratt/AMA/Getty Images)
But before Ratcliffe bought his United shares, he looked to private finance and, in one meeting, raised the prospect of Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos providing funds. Sources say Ratcliffe felt either man might be tempted by the appeal of United, with both having the resources. Musk’s estimated net worth topped $486bn in 2024, according to the recent Bloomberg Billionaires Index, with Amazon CEO Bezos estimated as having a $246bn fortune. It is unclear if those proposals gained any traction, however.
Instead, it seems inevitable supporters will be asked to foot some of the bill. Feasibility calculations are currently being explored at United, with significantly higher prices for season tickets factored in, although nothing has been decided and the club say fans will be consulted. But there would be uproar at such an increase, with supporters already angered over Ratcliffe’s decision to unilaterally hike seats not yet sold this season to a flat rate of £66, with no concessions for over-65s or under-16s.
The club say that rise impacted three per cent of tickets, but it was notable that seats for the Southampton game on January 16 have been made available with some concessions. The club say this is down to Southampton returning 590 away tickets and wishing to remain true to the pledge that only three per cent would be at the £66 level.
New men in charge — and growing ex-City and INEOS influence
In the background, the INEOS influence at United is visible. Brailsford and Blanc are the two obvious figures, but there is also James Morton, professor of exercise metabolism at Liverpool John Moores University, who has led the delivery of the INEOS X programme, which aims to link all the INEOS Sport departments. Morton has frequently visited Carrington, and was seen watching Amorim’s first open training session before the Bodo/Glimt game alongside Wilcox.
Standing and observing too was Josh Thompson, INEOS Sport project manager, whose role is to facilitate logistics around the club, particularly with Brailsford. Thompson often watches games from the directors’ box.
Also spotted in those seats has been Martyn Hawkins, formerly of City Football Group (CFG) for 10 years, mainly as finance director. He owns Caerulea Sports Advisory, which according to his LinkedIn provides “specialist financial advisory expertise to the sports industry”. Despite being around Old Trafford regularly, his page does not reference United and his role has not been communicated internally. Sam Erith — interim performance director — is also a CFG old boy, having worked as Manchester City’s head of sports science for 11 years.
Another INEOS executive seen around United is Gareth Anderson, the chief financial officer of INEOS Acetyls, a global producer of acetic acids. He has been involved in executing the recommendations of the Interpath findings. Meanwhile, in an all-staff email sent on Monday, it was announced Gary Hemingway, group projects director at INEOS, will be taking on stadium responsibilities at Old Trafford.
Tensions between the old and new United can also be seen in the ambassador programme. Ferguson’s removal caused reverberations at the club — he has been a much less frequent visitor since his meeting with Ratcliffe to discuss the matter — and there are further cuts on the way for former players who attend matches to enhance the experience for hospitality fans. The Glazers saw value in tapping into United’s heritage, but Ratcliffe feels such employment is largely unnecessary and an overhaul was required to better use club resources. It is part of his view that spending should be primarily aimed at events on the pitch.
Ratcliffe believes club resources are best used to try and improve things on the pitch (Matt McNulty/Getty Images)
Some former stars have expressed difficulties in gaining access to the directors’ box, although that may have something to do with Kate Nixon’s departure. Nixon, who as David Gill’s PA established a strong rapport with the former chief executive, was protocol manager at Old Trafford, a gatekeeper for access to the comfy seats. She was let go the day before redundancies were announced, while Gill’s own £1m-per-year deal has also been cut. The change has been described as very amicable, with Gill understanding of the wider cost-cutting regime.
United now no longer have a staff member travelling to European away games with the task of checking supporters’ identifications against passports when they pick up tickets. Some argue this means the system, which rewards fans for regular attendance, is being abused by people who have no intention of travelling to attend but want the credit for future bigger games. They sell their ticket on.
Part of why Ratcliffe dismissed Ashworth was because he was not quick or ruthless enough over cuts to the football department. Ashworth did usher the departure of deputy sporting director Andy O’Boyle, who had stepped in at the start of the year when INEOS first arrived, deciding he did not need a No 2. O’Boyle had been using his increased latitude to improve United’s use of data before he left, an area Ratcliffe identified as needing attention.
Ultimately, United’s recruitment is the major part of the club where savings will be possible. Signing Antony for £86m is not a deal INEOS can afford to repeat. Ten Hag wanted Antony at the end of a pressurised summer 2022 window, but the club’s scouting department also backed going for the Brazilian over the other option of Raphinha, who moved from Leeds United to Barcelona that summer for £55m.
United will have to be mindful of agent fees, which were said to run into the multiple millions on the deals for Joshua Zirkzee and Leny Yoro, facilitated by Kia Joorabchian and Jorge Mendes respectively.
Ratcliffe is non-committal on the January budget, but profit and sustainability rules limit what the club can do. There are also questions about the amount of disposable cash, with several sources expecting a very quiet winter window.
But then again, United found £10.4m to sack Ten Hag and €11m (£9.1m; $11.5m) to hire Amorim. He says he is at United for the long haul, and would suggest judgement be reserved for the end.
(Top photos: Getty Images; design: Eamonn Dalton)
