4
Manchester United fans received welcome news on Christmas Eve when it was announced that INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe were successful in their bid to buy 25% of the club.
It was also announced that the petro-chemicals company would take full control of the sporting side of the project and this has already been made clear with the dismantling of the previous footballing structure already well under way.
The appointment of Omar Berrada as CEO and the attempts to find an agreement with Newcastle so that Dan Ashworth can become the club’s new sporting director are just the start of the INEOS revolution.
However, the vast majority of United fans will have had little idea about the chemicals company or in fact Sir Jim Ratcliffe before the sale process began.
The Athletic have shone a light on how the company has operated in the past and used the case study of the company’s takeover of Grangemouth, which is one of Scotland’s flagship industrial sites.
The $9 billion deal tripled “the size of INEOS overnight and Ratcliffe’s plan was relatively simple: wash off the dirt to make the business profitable”.
“The facility is responsible for four per cent of the country’s GDP and approximately eight per cent of its manufacturing base. Ratcliffe, from a venture-capitalist background, wanted to streamline its processes, arguing this was the only way to make it profitable and secure its long-term future”.
“He brought cuts to both the workforce and their associated benefits — something he is immediately planning as part of the ongoing strategic review at Manchester United”.
It has already been relayed by The Peoples Person that INEOS deem United to be “over-staffed” and will look to streamline how things operate at the club.
Naturally, not everyone was happy with this decision at Grangemouth and union giant, Unite, fought INEOS tooth and nail to protect their workers.
The site was making “losses of up to £10 million each month” and Ratcliffe for his part, “wanted to stop making concessions to Unite and he wanted to make gains of his own to move the site towards profitability”.
The similarities of trying to rescue a sinking giant with Manchester United will certainly not be lost on the majority of Red Devils fans.
One thing that can be gleaned from Ratcliffe’s role in negotiations with Unite is that he will not crumble like United’s previous owners have been known to do.
“After bitter negotiations, union officials at the refinery had developed a nickname for its owner: ‘Dr No’. Back in 2013, the talks reached a new level of acrimony — ending, in an inversion of typical labour disputes, in Ratcliffe announcing his intention to shut the entire plant down if workers did not accept his ‘survival plan’”.
“Ratcliffe was playing poker — and Unite folded”, as they quickly backed down at the threat of wide-scale job losses.
“They accepted Ratcliffe’s survival plan, conceding on every point. Much of the workforce felt conflicted; they had retained a job that had been threatened, but on much worse terms than before”.
Speaking on his stance towards the UK’s negotiations with the EU on Brexit he claimed, “we must listen, we must be unwaveringly polite and retain our charm. But there is no room for weakness or crumbling at 3am when the going gets tough and most points are won or lost.”
Entering a club that is famous for crumbling like a digestive biscuit in negotiations, United fans should be excited.
Such examples of ineptitude include the eventual agreement to pay ridiculously inflated prices of £80m for Harry Maguire after haggling with Leicester and possibly the worst deal in football history, when they somehow came to the conclusion it would be prudent to spend £82m on Antony.
The Athletic also highlight how INEOS try to control the PR narrative. “Another key facet of the dispute was Ratcliffe’s use of the media — proactively seeking to shape the story. Rather than use its own internal communications, INEOS hired a PR firm, MediaZoo, to handle media relations during the crisis”.
“In the months afterwards, INEOS also produced its own 26-minute documentary — The Battle for Grangemouth — in which refinery executives were elevated to TV stars, cast as the heroes in saving Scotland’s industrial capacity”.
United’s media department is already seen as one of the most involved in the league, so this will likely only be ramped up under INEOS.
However, the success of turning around Grangemouth was short lived. It was announced that by 2025 the oil refinery business will be closed down due to “significant challenges because of global market pressures”.
Many workers, already angered by INEOS’ tough negotiation with Unite, are not happy with the timing of his announcement of taking over one of the world’s biggest football clubs.
The decision has received political criticism when Brian Leishman, Scottish Labour Party’s candidate for Grangemouth’s constituency asserted, “when you look at the money that he’s going to be spending on a leisure item, as much as I love football, there’s bigger societal impacts out there”.
The American publication finish by stating, “Ratcliffe’s record at Grangemouth brings reasons for Manchester United supporters to be encouraged. He is a genuine childhood fan, who reacts strongly to being bullied, negotiates firmly — some may say brutally, even — and knows how to control a narrative”.
He understands public opinion but he is not guided by it and will fight to defend his side of the argument. However such strong leadership has a downside.
His streamlining attempts “brought him into massive conflict with workers and ultimately, his ownership of the oil refinery ended in vitriol — and with failure”.
United fans will be praying that INEOS’ story with Manchester United ends in a drastically different way.
This website aggregates and curates news articles, blog posts, and other content from a variety of external sources. While we aim to link back to the original source, this site does not own or claim ownership of any articles, posts, or other content indexed on this site. The views, opinions, and factual statements expressed in each piece of aggregated content belong solely to its respective author and publisher. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy or completeness of aggregated content. Visitors are advised to verify facts and claims through the original source before reuse or redistribution.
