or to join or start a new Discussion

19 Comments
Article Rating     Not Rated Yet

Chemical Jim axes SAF

Adam Crafton @AdamCrafton
INEOS continue cost-cutting drive by cutting multi-million pound annual payment to Sir Alex Ferguson who will cease to be a global ambassador for the club at the end of the season. Sir Jim Ratcliffe informed Ferguson last week.

Ferguson is the most successful manager in United’s history and club insist it is amicable. Ferguson will remain a non executive director on the ceremonial “football board" but his paid ambassadorial role ceases at end of season.


https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5842096/2024/10/15/manchester-united-alex-ferguson-contract-ineos/

Chemical Jim becomes the first person to sack Sir Alex since Saint Mirren in 1978. Thoughts??

posted 2 days, 21 hours ago

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Fergie leading by example

£2m a year for just showing up now and then
----------------------------------------------------------------------

He should have been clever about it and had multiple bank accounts in various countries. 😉

posted 2 days, 20 hours ago

I get we’re trying to save money but surely for £2m having the person who best represents the club and its successful days is worth it? If he’s still gonna attend games and be photographed at them then I guess that’s kind of understandable?

posted 2 days, 20 hours ago

Everyone expected teams to cut their transfer spending when the PSR rules started to bite.

Sir Jim saw it as a chance to get rid of 250 staff and put the clubs greatest ever manager out to pasture. I suppose that why he's the success he is now, ruthless!

comment by Silver (U6112)

posted 2 days, 19 hours ago

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 2 hours, 59 minutes ago
Fergie leading by example

£2m a year for just showing up now and then
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was 190k pa - still a lot but who am I to judge?

Actually had a long conversation with his brother yesterday but we never spoke about Alex.

posted 2 days, 18 hours ago

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 2 hours, 20 minutes ago
I get we’re trying to save money but surely for £2m having the person who best represents the club and its successful days is worth it? If he’s still gonna attend games and be photographed at them then I guess that’s kind of understandable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like it's an amicable decision so a total non story. The guy is 83 in a few months time as well.

As much as I adore the man for what he gave us....I think it's the right time now to move on.

posted 2 days, 17 hours ago

The £2 million / year was a Glazer arrangement, which I wouldn't surprise was intended to keep Fergie from talking about what was wrong with their catastrophic custodianship of the club. Of course he should be revered by the club forever, always given access, always have the opportunity to talk to the people running the club, but I don't think respect and reverence equates to or depends on paying him two million a year in perpetuity. Nor should he be expected to play the role of active ambassador at his age.

posted 2 days, 17 hours ago

hush money

posted 2 days, 14 hours ago

Imagine Ferguson getting £2m a year to keep quiet about the Glazers, lol.

posted 2 days, 13 hours ago

These ineos frauds are getting on my nerves. They're doing away with important people at the club whilst still standing by the worst and most incompetent manager in the club's history

posted 2 days, 13 hours ago

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
Imagine Ferguson getting £2m a year to keep quiet about the Glazers, lol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It was something that I was going to insinuate before RR did. But, being the guy I am being sensitive to wums and cannot defend myself, I refrained from making such a comment.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 0 from 0 votes

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article Ranking159/500
Article Views581
Average Time(mins)0.5
Total Time(mins)292.83