Man United have just terminated Sir Alex Ferguson's global brand ambassadorship. This is a contract Fergie signed in 2013 after his final season with the club. Since then, in addition to being an image ambassador, he has also been a director in name.
However, since INEOS, headed by Sir Jim Ratcliffe, has implemented a policy of "belt tightening", this event is perhaps not too surprising. Shortly after taking office, Sir Jim and his team drastically reformed the cumbersome apparatus of Manchester United. At least 250 club employees lost their jobs. Along with that, many expenses were restricted, even completely eliminated.
Sir Alex's salary with the ambassadorial contract is around £2.16 million/year. The Athletic revealed that both sides felt good about this decision, no one mentioned the money issue. The legendary coach of the club is still welcomed to Old Trafford in every home match of Man United with the most solemn spirit.
The question now for INEOS is whether cutting Sir Alex's salary by more than £2m is worth it. The legendary Scot has built a mighty Man United empire over nearly three decades and anything affecting him could leave a negative impression in the eyes of the fans.
There are many Manchester United fans who still follow the team after 2013 because Sir Alex is still a regular at Old Trafford and many other stadiums whenever the team plays. Attending Fergie's matches reminds many fans of the legendary symbolism of the "Red Devils". The team can be strong or weak at any time, but a successful monument is still there, Man United still has a certain position in terms of position.
Not only that, Sir Alex Ferguson has long become a cultural feature for those who love Manchester United, not only within the UK, but also internationally.
INEOS and Sir Alex both happily agreed to this. The fact that the club still kept Fergie as a director shows that they do not want to separate this great man from Old Trafford. However, this is still an action that is very difficult to accept for a large part of The Red Devils fans.
There will be those who ask, why didn’t the club sack Erik ten Hag but did it to Alex Ferguson? INEOS understands the impact this decision will have on the media and they are willing to take the risk. However, the price to pay seems to be immeasurable. They can spend tens of millions of pounds on harmless contracts but want to cut more than £2 million a year from one of the club’s greatest symbols.
If they hadn't spent money on Joshua Zirkzee, who has only scored one goal this season, the amount paid to Sir Alex for his brand ambassador contract could have lasted for more than 20 years. £2.16 million is equivalent to only 0.3% of the club's total revenue of £662 million last year (about £40,000/week). This figure is quite high compared to the average income in England but in the world of football in the foggy country, it is only more than half of the average salary of a player in the Premier League (£75,000/week).
It would be absurd to compare the cost of Sir Alex with the amount the team spent to buy Antony, which is only 2.4%. Although we know that Antony was not brought in by the INEOS team, citing this evidence shows that the current management seems to have saved in the "wrong" way.
In fact, even in retirement, Fergie’s off-field impact is still huge, drawing the love and support of millions of fans around the world. There are no figures to measure this, but his salary of over £2 million a year may be too low.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe is a businessman and the head of INEOS has his reasons for tightening costs down to the smallest things. However, what will Man United spend this time on, and will it be enough to solve the big stories of the club? The answer is probably not.
