Assessing the Ratcliffe revolution at United

Since acquiring a 27.7 per cent stake in United, which essentially led to him claiming management control of the club’s football and business operations, Ratcliffe has pursued revolution, rather than evolution, at Old Trafford.

Almost the entirety of the club’s senior management team has been turfed out or voluntarily departed, with turnovers of chief executives, the sponsorship team, legal operations, finance and, most notably, the football executive, where a new sporting director, technical director and recruitment lead arrived in the summer months. Much of this change was gleefully received by a United fanbase exasperated by the club’s decade of waste and underperformance following the retirement of Sir Alex Ferguson in 2013. Things could hardly get worse, appeared to be the consensus.

 Besides, Ratcliffe provided some sincere cause for optimism. Any gesture, however symbolic, would contrast positively with how the Glazer family had run the club. During their tenure, interest payments to service the debt imposed by their own leveraged takeover and dividends paid out to the Glazer siblings collectively exceeded $1billion (£789million). Ratcliffe could almost be perceived as a Father Christmas figure when he announced an initial $200m investment for infrastructure purposes, although he did enhance his shareholding in the club from 25 per cent to 27.7 per cent in doing so.

On top of that, Ratcliffe ran counter to the Glazers in other ways; he appeared in media interviews, he spoke of ambitious plans for the club’s stadium, he attended games, he addressed staff at the club’s stadium and training ground. INEOS talked of a football-first strategy, the inference being that the club’s priorities may have been elsewhere previously. An energy all of a sudden coursed through a club that had previously been decaying inside and out.

From the start, Ratcliffe has not been shy about his thoughts on the direction the club had been heading in before his arrival. He told the previous management team what he thought of their decisions in the transfer market when he first met them at Old Trafford. It baffled INEOS that United could drive so much in revenue yet still contrive to be a loss-making enterprise. For the year ending June 30, the club made £661.8m but lost £113.2m.

And so came the cuts. No more company credit cards. No Christmas party for staff. No free bus travel for staff attending the FA Cup final. A redundancy drive that aimed to cut 250 jobs. Ending Ferguson’s £2m-per-year ambassadorial role. Consideration was given to halving the club’s £40,000 annual contribution to their Disabled Supporters’ Association.

This week, news emerged that the club is now introducing a mid-season change to ticket pricing for matches at Old Trafford. United informed members of their fans forum that all remaining tickets for home matches this season will be priced at £66 each, meaning no concessions will be applied for pensioners or children. The club told the supporters it would help improve “operational efficiencies” and “stabilise revenues”. The club also stated that all tickets returned by season-ticket holders for individual games will be sold at the adult price and that the 25 per cent discount for Europa League knockout fixtures would also be removed.

The Manchester United Supporters’ Trust (MUST) said: “This means that for an adult member to take their kid to a game in the remainder of this season will cost £132. Well over double the minimum price they could pay to do it today. And this change is happening overnight, immediately.

“The club has provided zero consultation on the matter, neither with the Forum nor the Fan Advisory Board nor MUST.”

Supporter groups are unlikely to let this matter drop, largely because of fears that if they do so, tweaks to concessions made mid-season may become permanent arrangements moving forward. United are not making any commitments currently to keeping season-ticket prices unchanged for next season.

Everyone may ask how, exactly, it is putting the “Manchester” back into Manchester United to slash jobs from Mancunians and hike ticket prices for local kids, or how INEOS are a “beacon” of a “fan-centred” approach when this latest decision was taken without consultation. 

INEOS may be scrimping around the edges, saving here, cutting there, the ultimate limiting factor for United’s ability to make money in recent years has not been Linda in sponsorship, or a discounted ticket for 10-year-old Charlie, but rather the club’s defining inability to successfully trade players effectively, too often recruiting and selling first-team players at a far less impressive rate than their rivals. 

His defenders would say Ratcliffe is doing what is needed to turn a failing club around and it is going to take time and require patience from fans.