• Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 9:33 am**

Apparently that’s 450 staff now potted

How many non playing staff are employed at most clubs? Can’t imagine we are anywhere near 450. 450 seems a lot to go, I wonder how many they employ in total

I bet back in the Teasdale era we didn’t have more than a couple of dozen

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 9:55 am**

They'd save a lot more money instantly by axing just one or two of their underperforming "stars".

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:04 am**

Inchy wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 9:33 am
Apparently that’s 450 staff now potted

How many non playing staff are employed at most clubs? Can’t imagine we are anywhere near 450. 450 seems a lot to go, I wonder how many they employ in total

I bet back in the Teasdale era we didn’t have more than a couple of dozen

We are nearer to 250 staff
Not sure on United total staff but to give you an idea of how big they are their corporate hospitality on match day caters for 15,000 people and employs around 2,000 staff on match days. They generate revenue from hospitality which is not that different to our total revenue when we are in the Premier League (including the TV income)

All that said getting rid of 450 staff is significant. There is a lot of ill feeling around United at the moment not surprisingly. Looks like whatever they try and do as a club since SAF left goes pear shaped….which is nice to see !!

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:06 am**

United had about 1,200 staff before the redundancies starting last year.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:23 am**

They'll be calling for the Glazers returning soon.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:27 am**

All this whilst Luke Shaw is only fit enough to play a couple of games in the Euros over a 12 month period

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:08 am**

Kenyon's not a charity, and certainly didn't get where he is by chucking brass away.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:23 am**

I read somewhere that 90 scouts were being made redundant.

I assume they’re based around the world and probably in markets that we don’t have presence. If I were Pace I’d be wanting us to speak to as many as possible of them. Not necessarily to employ them but there’s possible market knowledge and relationships that could be useful in future.

For all that United seem to do badly at the moment, they always seem to have good players coming through their Academy and featuring in their squads.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:28 am**

NewClaret wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:23 am
I read somewhere that 90 scouts were being made redundant.

I assume they’re based around the world and probably in markets that we don’t have presence. If I were Pace I’d be wanting us to speak to as many as possible of them. Not necessarily to employ them but there’s possible market knowledge and relationships that could be useful in future.

For all that United seem to do badly at the moment, they always seem to have good players coming through their Academy and featuring in their squads.

I’d rather we left their scouts well alone

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:30 am**

Laying people off and taking a few small perks of the groundsmen and cleaners whilst their underperforming "stars" carry on trousering huge salaries sums up everything that is wrong with modern football.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:32 am**

jrgbfc wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:30 am
Laying people off and taking a few small perks of the groundsmen and cleaners whilst their underperforming "stars" carry on trousering huge salaries sums up everything that is wrong with modern football.

^^
This. Absolutely spot on.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:44 am**

Can’t imagine what all those ‘staff’ do on a daily basis Sounds insane to me

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:49 am**

Long may their decline continue I'm loving watching this club and their self righteous support suffer.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:02 pm**

NewClaret wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:23 am
I read somewhere that 90 scouts were being made redundant.

I assume they’re based around the world and probably in markets that we don’t have presence. If I were Pace I’d be wanting us to speak to as many as possible of them. Not necessarily to employ them but there’s possible market knowledge and relationships that could be useful in future.

For all that United seem to do badly at the moment, they always seem to have good players coming through their Academy and featuring in their squads.

I’d assume they would be the scouts that go around the grassroots scene looking at the 6-10yr olds and selling the “dream” to the parents

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:03 pm**

jrgbfc wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:30 am
Laying people off and taking a few small perks of the groundsmen and cleaners whilst their underperforming "stars" carry on trousering huge salaries sums up everything that is wrong with modern football.

Yep, and it's also the wrong approach. Meanspirited penny-pinching for those at the bottom of the rung is also bad policy because it breeds resentment and people don't go above and beyond when they feel like dirt.

The best run ships are those where the personnel feel they are all in it together. People earning millions a year for hardly putting a shift in, while those at the bottom are being made to feel like unvalued trash - it even makes me angry, and I can't stand the club.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:05 pm**

Their crass and short-sighted decision-making perfectly mirrors what has become of the city of Manchester itself.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:08 pm**

Clovius Boofus wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:03 pm
Yep, and it's also the wrong approach. Meanspirited penny-pinching for those at the bottom of the rung is also bad policy because it breeds resentment and people don't go above and beyond when they feel like dirt.

The best run ships are those where the personnel feel they are all in it together. People earning millions a year for hardly putting a shift in, while those at the bottom are being made to feel like unvalued trash - it even makes me angry, and I can't stand the club.

Yeah, building resentment with the fans as well by putting prices up. Just looks a massive train wreck at present that doesn`t look likely to improve any time soon.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:06 pm**

They have also removed the staff canteen and offered remaining staff a free piece of fruit each day.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:13 pm**

Dyched wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:28 am
I’d rather we left their scouts well alone

The way I see it, or assume it works, is that their scouts find players for their academy. Which always seems stocked with good talent. For the first team, they only really sign big name players who the managers want to sign. I assume scouts don’t identify them.

It’s the signings managers seem to have wanted over the years that are all rubbish. Or United make them rubbish, I’m not sure.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:13 pm**

NewClaret wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:23 am
I read somewhere that 90 scouts were being made redundant.

I assume they’re based around the world and probably in markets that we don’t have presence. If I were Pace I’d be wanting us to speak to as many as possible of them. Not necessarily to employ them but there’s possible market knowledge and relationships that could be useful in future.

For all that United seem to do badly at the moment, they always seem to have good players coming through their Academy and featuring in their squads.

I read that the scouts being made redundant are indeed based around the world. They are being replaced by a data driven scouting approach as used by other premier league clubs, not to mention Burnley. United’s current approach is another example of how United have fallen behind other, more successful clubs.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:16 pm**

There’s a damning article about Ineos/Jim Radcliffe’s involvement with Utd by Jim White in today’s Telegraph. I particularly liked this paragraph

“ In Formula One, yachting and rugby, the only trophies you have accumulated are lawsuits left, right and centre. In your cycling operation there is a sense of relentless decline. At Nice, the football is not exactly going places. Now at United, in your refusal to address the pile of elephant dung that is the Glazer legacy of debt, you appear simply to be presiding over another addition to your growing catalogue of failure. Because surely even you cannot think that dispensing with the Carrington canteen and making the staff trek a couple of miles to the nearest cafe for lunch, will make the slightest difference.”

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 2:20 pm**

That's quite damning from the Telegraph. They used to championed Ineos/Jim Radcliffe.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:32 pm**

Maybe Ratcliffe isn’t as business savvy as he likes the media to think

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:44 pm**

Lambo wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:32 pm
Maybe Ratcliffe isn’t as business savvy as he likes the media to think

When you walk through the door and see a workforce 3 times the size of Liverpool’s (who don’t seem to be doing to badly in recent years), maybe it’s right to have a look at trimming the fat?

I heard an interesting rumour that Ineos / Ratcliffe are doing everything they can to devalue the club, in order to go for full acquisition from the glazers.

Interesting concept if they’re planning on rebuilding from the ground up.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:48 pm**

ClaretCliff wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:16 pm
There’s a damning article about Ineos/Jim Radcliffe’s involvement with Utd by Jim White in today’s Telegraph. I particularly liked this paragraph

“ In Formula One, yachting and rugby, the only trophies you have accumulated are lawsuits left, right and centre. In your cycling operation there is a sense of relentless decline. At Nice, the football is not exactly going places. Now at United, in your refusal to address the pile of elephant dung that is the Glazer legacy of debt, you appear simply to be presiding over another addition to your growing catalogue of failure. Because surely even you cannot think that dispensing with the Carrington canteen and making the staff trek a couple of miles to the nearest cafe for lunch, will make the slightest difference.”

What's Jim White got to say about Lausanne, Jim Ratcliffe's other football club?

I thought the "free meals" news was ending free meals at Old Trafford. Carrington canteen to remain until end of season. Then, I assume, meals will remain free for playing staff - because the correct diet is important for their fitness.

Does Jim White have any sympathy for the owner of a petrochemicals company when it's tough to make money out of petrochemicals?

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 6:29 pm**

Paul Waine wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:48 pm
What's Jim White got to say about Lausanne, Jim Ratcliffe's other football club?

Nothing in the letter published in the Telegraph. He does mention Jim Ratcliffe’s other team, Nice. (Just out of curiousity I looked at Lausanne’s position in the league table. They are currently 5th but are well into the bottom half of the table on current form)

I thought the "free meals" news was ending free meals at Old Trafford. Carrington canteen to remain until end of season. Then, I assume, meals will remain free for playing staff - because the correct diet is important for their fitness.

The staff canteen at Old Trafford is expected to close by the end of the week. Staff will be offered fruit. From the start of next season only players and coaching staff will be provided with hot food. Soup and sandwiches will be available for other staff.

Does Jim White have any sympathy for the owner of a petrochemicals company when it's tough to make money out of petrochemicals?

I’ve no idea, he makes no mention of the petrochemicals industry, but perhaps that’s because the letter was published in the sports section of the newspaper. I haven’t had time to look through the Business section.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 6:33 pm**

Paul Waine wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:48 pm
What's Jim White got to say about Lausanne, Jim Ratcliffe's other football club?

I thought the "free meals" news was ending free meals at Old Trafford. Carrington canteen to remain until end of season. Then, I assume, meals will remain free for playing staff - because the correct diet is important for their fitness.

Does Jim White have any sympathy for the owner of a petrochemicals company when it's tough to make money out of petrochemicals?

According to Ben Foster, it's standard practice for footballers to have the cost of meals deducted from their salary. Whether that's the case at Utd I've no idea but it wouldn't surprise me.I remember Zlatan having a whinge about being charged a pound by the club for taking a drink from a hotel mini bar when on club duty.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 6:38 pm**

She wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:49 am
Long may their decline continue I'm loving watching this club and their self righteous support suffer.

Maybe at first that's the feeling. But when you see that 450 people have lost there jobs, well there's no satisfaction in that.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 6:54 pm**

Goliath wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 6:33 pm
According to Ben Foster, it's standard practice for footballers to have the cost of meals deducted from their salary. Whether that's the case at Utd I've no idea but it wouldn't surprise me.I remember Zlatan having a whinge about being charged a pound by the club for taking a drink from a hotel mini bar when on club duty.

If clubs deduct cost of food it will be for tax reasons. Much cheaper for players to have cost of food deducted than be assessed on the taxable benefit of their employer providing the benefit.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 7:15 pm**

Conroy92 wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 6:38 pm
Maybe at first that's the feeling. But when you see that 450 people have lost there jobs, well there's no satisfaction in that.

Grass roots staff, not multi-millionaire over-rated prima donnas. As has previously been stated,everything that is wrong with top level football today.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:06 pm**

Lambo wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 5:32 pm
Maybe Ratcliffe isn’t as business savvy as he likes the media to think

I have literally never seen anyone driving an Ineos. Not sure what that's all about. They look like a barely less expensive rip off of the old defender model. The motors on Ineos forecourt near me look like they've not moved since it was opened.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:10 pm**

ClaretCliff wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:13 pm
I read that the scouts being made redundant are indeed based around the world. They are being replaced by a data driven scouting approach as used by other premier league clubs, not to mention Burnley. United’s current approach is another example of how United have fallen behind other, more successful clubs.

Yes, I thought they would be and I’m surprised they even have such a wide network of scouts in the data world we live in. Or that they’re employed and not commission based!

My point wasn’t that we should employ them but maybe some conversations would be useful given they probably have deep knowledge of markets we may want to enter and probably track players that wouldn’t meet United’s criteria but may fit ours.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:19 pm**

BigGaz wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:06 pm
I have literally never seen anyone driving an Ineos. Not sure what that's all about. They look like a barely less expensive rip off of the old defender model. The motors on Ineos forecourt near me look like they've not moved since it was opened.

The Grenadier was conceived as exactly that, an updated version of the old Defender. Jaguar Land Rover had withdrawn the old Defender. Jim Ratcliffe liked the old car and didn't like it was no longer available. So, he thought he'd step in and see how he could get on. The name, Grenadier, came from the London pub they were in when the ideas were developed.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:20 pm**

NewClaret wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:10 pm
Yes, I thought they would be and I’m surprised they even have such a wide network of scouts in the data world we live in. Or that they’re employed and not commission based!

My point wasn’t that we should employ them but maybe some conversations would be useful given they probably have deep knowledge of markets we may want to enter and probably track players that wouldn’t meet United’s criteria but may fit ours.

Sorry NewClaret if it sounded like I was criticising you, I was simply passing on something I had read.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:55 pm**

Hi Paul, you could bring a bit of DOGE magic to the United setup?

I can see it now. You on stage with a Prawn Sandwich and a chainsaw. You swing the chainsaw cut the sandwich in half and say 'Yeeeeeaaaaaaaah baby, that's how you become efficient people. Let's save save save - except you Onana obviously".

Think of the impact Dude. You could become a media sensation..!

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 12:00 am**

clearly too many staff to merit the huge wages, not the only club to trim the fat.
If the behind the scenes still operate efficiently, then problems solved.
We shouldnt pontificate about job losses in this manic game, we all pay a lot to watch men on several thousands a week.

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 4:00 am**

ClaretCliff wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 1:16 pm
There’s a damning article about Ineos/Jim Radcliffe’s involvement with Utd by Jim White in today’s Telegraph. I particularly liked this paragraph

“ In Formula One, yachting and rugby, the only trophies you have accumulated are lawsuits left, right and centre. In your cycling operation there is a sense of relentless decline. At Nice, the football is not exactly going places. Now at United, in your refusal to address the pile of elephant dung that is the Glazer legacy of debt, you appear simply to be presiding over another addition to your growing catalogue of failure. Because surely even you cannot think that dispensing with the Carrington canteen and making the staff trek a couple of miles to the nearest cafe for lunch, will make the slightest difference.”

Very Trumpian behavior by Radcliffe........10-1 says he doesn't pay Taxes in the UK....or very little.
Flookin' Parasite!

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 10:12 am**

It seems a harsh route to take given the tens of millions they've wasted on people like Ten Hag and Ashworth. This kind of penny pinching always looks bad when you've got a top end of personnel earning mega-money, not just playing staff but directors too.

And yes, despite being big on Brexit Ratcliffe lives in Monaco.

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 10:36 am**

Ferguson finally realised it was time to get out as the biggest club by a mile hit decline with the leveraged buyout by Malcolm Glazer which loaded them with huge amounts of debt.

A similar deal around the same time at Liverpool nearly put them out of business but United have been able to at least service the debt to an extent.

Ratcliffe has hardly improved things in his attempts to reduce the debts and improve things.

And it’s left them unable to compete on the field with some clubs and long may that be the case.

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 11:05 am**

ClaretCliff wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:20 pm
Sorry NewClaret if it sounded like I was criticising you, I was simply passing on something I had read.

Hadn’t taken offence at all Cliff, and was a useful clarification because it confirmed what I thought I’d read.

Was just explaining my rationale for what otherwise may have been easy to misconstrue.

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 11:05 am**

No fan of the leveraged buyout whatsoever or of people like the Glazers who have taken £70m or £80m out of the club every season. These people have no interest in football - look at these guys backgrounds and the businesses they have ran. They have no interest in anything but money.

But unfortunately it looks like they are here to stay in this country. Since the glazers bought United look at how many more Americans have bought into the game. This is people from a country obsessed with sport where our football comes way down the list in popularity.

Not really sure there is much that can be done about it. It takes two to tango and for every American or Saudi willing to buy a club it takes someone prepared to sell it. The “fit and proper” test is never going to stop a leveraged buyout by an American if its not fit for purpose to stop a takeover by people from countries like Saudi, Russia or China with terrible human rights records.

The United fans spent many years with probably the biggest and most prelonged protesting of the Glazers that has ever been seen in the history of our game - and it achieved nothing. And one of the reasons it did not achieve anything because what the Glazers have never done is withhold or limit the amount of money spent on trying to achieve success on the pitch. United have spent more on transfer fees and wages under the Glazers than they have in the rest of their history put together. It was only a couple of years ago that they had the highest wage bill in the world.

Bit of a generalisation I know but supporters tend to be more or less vocal about their clubs ownership model dependent on how their team is performing on the pitch….and that’s irrespective of the billions of pounds their owners are chucking at their club.

Posted: **Wed Feb 26, 2025 1:25 pm**

United have invested financially as much as anyone. I tend to think the Glazer's biggest issue was to bring a corporate structure to a football club, which has diminished football expertise in the club.

I was talking to a United fan after watching them against Everton and made the point that despite Everton being 20th in the PL 5 year spend they competed well but more than that apart from Fernandes I barely recognise any of United's players. And certainly, too many of them appear to be mediocre at best.

Football clubs are still made successful by the cult of personality like Ferguson, Pep or Klopp, There seems to be little that owners can do to try to change that...! It's quite possible that United are too big for a great football manager to make a difference.

Liverpool's flirtation with US owners was a disaster until the owners changed but they only really became successful under Klopp. Other than that American ownership has not been that successful since Fergie left United. 1 PL success in ten years.

Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff

Re: Man Utd axe 200 more staff