Poor business performance leading to losses necessitates that MU tighten its belt and cut expenses. However, does terminating the ambassadorial contract with Sir Alex Ferguson genuinely help improve their situation?
Last month, MU’s CEO, Omar Berrada, announced a strategy for “financial sustainability” following the club’s reported loss of £113.2 million. INEOS decided to undertake significant restructuring, including cutting 250 jobs to reduce costs.
Sir Dave Brailsford led a comprehensive review of MU’s operations, resulting in the termination of Sir Alex’s contract worth £2.16 million annually.
Will MU consider removing his statue outside Old Trafford? If savings are essential, cutting a few million pounds may seem reasonable, but when it means dismissing a legend who built the club’s reputation, one must question if it’s truly worthwhile.
Sir Alex helped MU win numerous titles and shaped the club’s image. He is an important symbol, reminding everyone of the history and influence of MU. If he is no longer part of the club, maintaining the club’s influence will be more challenging.
MU retains Sir Alex in a non-executive director role, but does this truly matter? Firing Sir Alex, regardless of his position, could create a negative image for the club.
Moreover, Sir Alex’s compensation only accounts for 0.3% of MU’s annual revenue. If MU genuinely needs to save money, why not cut costs in other key positions within the first team? Would these savings be worth the potential intangible losses MU might face?
Ratcliffe may argue that “little by little makes a lot,” but will these savings genuinely help MU improve? Is £2.16 million enough to compensate for distancing themselves from a club icon?