Sir Jim Ratcliffe responded to Man Utd cost-cutting measure criticism amid latest charity axe

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has been receiving a lot of criticism for the recent cost-cutting measures happening at Manchester United.

The British billionaire took charge at Manchester United one year ago, becoming a minority owner after a bidding war with a Qatari consortium led by Sheikh Jassim.

Ratcliffe and his INEOS team immediately took charge of the footballing side of the club before it became quickly evident that they would also take the lead on the financial side of the business.

United have been in financial difficulties in recent time after years of mismanagement and overspending under the Glazer family’s ownership.

The new regime at Old Trafford have been making some extremely controversial decisions in the name of ‘cost-cutting’, such as major staff redundancies and increasing Old Trafford ticket prices.

Ratcliffe’s latest decision to cut funding for two major United-based charities – The Association of Former Manchester United Players and The Manchester United Foundation – has attracted major criticism.

Fans have highlighted financially costly mistakes from the INEOS-led regime, such as sacking Erik ten Hag just months after extending his deal, or parting ways with Dan Ashworth less than six months after paying more than £3 million for his services as Sporting Director.

Ratcliffe’s response to United cost-cutting criticism

Ratcliffe, the British billionaire, has already claimed that he will need to make ‘some difficult and unpopular decision’ and that has been more than apparent during his first year at the club.

Reports have claimed that United have lost around £370 million in the last five years, something that Ratcliffe says needs to change.

“Manchester United has become mediocre,” the United co-owner told the United We Stand fanzine earlier this month.

“It is supposed to be one of the best football clubs in the world. We have to make some difficult and unpopular decisions. If you shy away from the difficult decisions, then nothing much is going to change.

“I know we get criticism in the press, but we do need to challenge the cost of running this club because what I want to be free for us to do is buy really good footballers, not spend so much of the money on infrastructure. We can’t run a business at a loss, which is where United have been in the last couple of years.”

Ratcliffe’s cost-cutting shows two sides of the coin at United

There are two sides to the coin in this debate, with the first being whether these small cost-cutting measures will have any real impact to a company the size of Manchester United.

Not many supporters will consider themselves as financial experts, but it isn’t hard to know that spending £15 million on sacking Ten Hag is more significant than axing £40,000-per-year payments to a charity supporting former United players.

These cost-cutting techniques were going to attract criticism no matter what, but the outrage from many will be coming due to the mistakes already made under INEOS.

Read More: Fabrizio Romano: Manchester United have decided £150k p/w player “will leave” this summer

However, the other side of the coin is recognising the state of the club that Ratcliffe and his team entered into, and remembering what the Glazers have done. It is no wonder that they looked for investment.

Ratcliffe and his advisors are smart people and would have undoubtably knew the kind of backlash they would receive for such decisions, but they are making them anyway. That already tells you part of the story.

However, there also needs to be a reminder to those in charge that Manchester United is not any old business and has certain values. And if these changes don’t soon lead to major improvements on the pitch, the criticism will get even louder.

Make sure to follow UtdDistrict on X, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and TikTok to never miss out on any of our Manchester United content. Our podcast, What the Devil?, is released every Wednesday at 6 pm (BST) on the United View YouTube channel.