Man United has just terminated the global brand ambassador contract with Sir Alex Ferguson. 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 with Sir Jim Ratcliffe at the top of the "bellied" policy, this event is probably not too surprising. Shortly after taking office, Sir Jim and his team strongly transformed Manchester United's cumbersome apparatus. At least 250 club employees have lost their jobs. Along with that, many expenses have been limited, even completely eliminated.
Sir Alex's salary with the ambassador contract is around £2.16 million/year. The Athletic revealed that both sides felt good about this decision, no one mentioned the issue of money. The legendary coach of the club is still welcomed to Old Trafford for every home match Man United plays with the most solemn spirit.
The question now for INEOS is whether cutting more than £2 million for Sir Alex is worth it? The legendary Scots strategist built a powerful Man United empire for nearly 3 decades and anything that affected him could leave a negative impression in the eyes of fans.
There are many Manchester United fans who still follow the team after 2013 because Sir Alex still regularly appears at Old Trafford and many other stadiums every time 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 still stands 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 Manchester United fans, not only within the framework of England, it is also international.
INEOS and Sir Alex both happily agree with this. The fact that the club still keep Fergie as a director shows that they do not want to part ways with this great man at Old Trafford. However, this is still a very difficult action to accept by a large part of The Red Devils fans.
There will be opinions that why didn't the team fire Erik ten Hag but did it with Alex Ferguson? INEOS understands that this decision will affect the media and they dare to trade. However, the price to pay seems to be unpredictable. They can spend tens of millions of pounds to buy harmless contracts but want to cut more than 2 million pounds/year for one of the team's greatest symbols.
If he had not spent money to recruit Joshua Zirkzee, who had only scored 1 goal since the beginning of the season, the amount of money paid to Sir Alex for the brand ambassador contract could have lasted for more than 20 years. £2.16 million is equivalent to just 0.3% of the team's total £662 million revenue last year (about £40,000/week). This figure is quite high compared to the average income in England, but in the foggy football world, it is only more than half of the average salary of a player in the Premier League (75,000 pounds/week).
It would be boring to compare the cost for Sir Alex with the money the team spent to buy Antony, it is only 2.4%. Although it is known that Antony was not brought in by the INEOS team, the evidence of this shows that the current board of directors seems to have saved in the "west" way.
In fact, even in retirement, Fergie's off-field impact is still huge, attracting the love and support of millions of fans around the world. There are no figures to measure this, but his salary of more than £2 million/year may be too low.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe is a businessman and the head of INEOS has his reasons for tightening costs from the smallest things. However, with this cut, what will Man United use that money for, is it enough to solve the big stories of the club? The answer is probably not.
