18 Sep 2026 12:03:39
{Ed's Note - Kurtis has posted a new article entitled, United Under INEOS: Best in Class or Reactive?

1.) 18 Sep 2026
18 Sep 2026 12:43:14
INEOS is £18 billion in Debt, they also only own 28.94% of the club. The Glazer family owns 48.9% and 67.9% of the overall voting rights, Public Shareholders own 22.2% of the club.

INEOS is an investment vehicle, they invested £1.54 billion, the company will have an obligation to turn a profit on that investment. The profit will come from the regeneration project.

We as fans really really need to get into our heads that the football club which means the fans will pay for this. The club will be run like a any other company within the confines of cash flow forecasts and projections that will take into account the regeneration project from a long term financial planning prospective.

We fans keep looking at this through a lens based on INEOS wanting what we want, footballing success. INEOS want financial success, their motivation is aligned with the objectives of the Glazers.

The clubs ownership structure means its highly unlikely any parties are putting their own cash in, the idea they would put their own cash in to pay off the debt is laughable.

The reality is this, the club will be run on a tight budget, they will try to use data models, like Brighton do to increase the odds of success. The question we need to ask is what does success look like? Well, if your objective is increasing profits and revenue, success is top 5 with a wage budged substantially below the top 5 teams.

We are currently the 6th highest wage bill in the prem, if we removed Rashford in the summer we'd of been 7th. We've significantly cut the wage bill for playing staff and Man United PLC wages/Salaries with the headcount reduction. All evidence points to significant cost cutting.

2.) 18 Sep 2026
18 Sep 2026 13:22:06
Bang on there. INEOS have quickly shifted from best in class to best in budget. After last season, the question was could United push on to compete with City and Arsenal. The answer was an overwhelming no. They people running the club have calculated that the cost of competing is less profitable than being a club with the primary ambition of achieving Champions League.

3.) 18 Sep 2026
18 Sep 2026 14:41:15
The debt, and the annual cost of servicing it is a serious impediment, particularly because the stadium still needs to be renovated or replaced. There's lots of speculation as to how the £2bn currently estimated will be raised, but clearly it will involve a large element of debt.

Meanwhile it's been reported that interest costs after the debt refinancing this summer could be around £60m a year (I think it will be a bit less). Never mind the outcry about dividends, that's where the most significant cost is, the equivalent of 2x £100k player on £200k a week. Paying dividends is an option if you're making profits, financing the debt is an obligation whether you are or not and United hasn't made any in 5 years.

The only meaningful way to bring the current debt load down is for the club to issue more shares, but, depending on the amount they want to raise, it would run the risk of Avram and Joel losing voting control. We talk of the Glazers as a single entity but there are 6 siblings and some might prefer to sell out completely, especially if the business is not profitable and not paying any dividends. So ni-omina control could fall apart if there was a family split.

Against that, the Glazers are traditionally a real estate concern, and clearly have a significant long term financial stake in regeneration of the area. So talk of rifts between them may be overstated. I know or have known a number of real estate investors in my time and the most successful ones have simply bought low and held on for extremely long periods of time. Kind of like McDonalds which is primarily a real estate holding company that finances its acquisitions through its food brand franchises.

I don't see any chance of them being able or wanting to raise capital by issuing stock, which means there's essentially no way out of the current debt bind other than gradual reduction through the retention of +ve cash flow from profitable trading. So, I agree with you they're going to try and make 2+2=5, hoping that somehow or other they can create a club that cheapskates its way into Europe every year, but failing that, even without Europe the club will remain profitable.

In other words we may as well just try to chill out and accept that for the foreseeable future we've become firmly cemented as the #2 team in Manchester, the whining, not remotely noisy neighbours. A team whose past glories are drifting out of memory or were never even known by new fans around the world. Liverpool had 30 years during which they didn't win the title. I don't see us faring any better. Berrada's words about winning the title by 2028 ring very hollow after the events of this summer. Clearly financial realities are taking precedence over doing what's necessary to win titles.