Two days ago, Manchester United’s minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe sat down with the media to tell them that the club was haemorrhaging money, and could run out by the end of the year. Yesterday, United announced plans for a new £2bn stadium next to its current Old Trafford home. It was quite the turnaround.
James Crawford is a die-hard United fan, but we won’t hold that against him on this occasion as he’s also MD of PR Agency One, where he’s responsible for measuring impact for some of the UK’s biggest brands, including in this instance Manchester United, through data, sentiment tracking, and structured analysis.
So, was United’s almost Trumpesque u-turn a PR misstep, or a masterstroke of expectation management? Crawford ran the numbers:
“The dust is settling on a busy two days for United and INEOS’s PR teams. On 10 March 2025, Sir Jim Ratcliffe sat down for a series of high-profile media interviews, addressing the financial mess he inherited at Manchester United.
His message was blunt. United was haemorrhaging money, the squad was overpaid, and drastic changes were needed.
Then, on 11 March 2025, United announced a £2bn project to build a 100,000-seat stadium next to Old Trafford. The conversation shifted from immediate crisis to long-term vision. Was the stadium announcement a strategic masterstroke or a necessary distraction?
I discussed this with my colleague Stephen Sanders, an Everton fan, who has experienced the highs and lows of a new stadium and dismissed Ratcliffe’s interviews as a “car crash”. Obviously, as a Scouser, he enjoys trolling me, but even Karly, a die-hard red, thought it was bad PR.
READ MORE: ‘Not a silver bullet’: Region’s branding experts on Boohoo’s ‘high-stakes’ new (old) name
I wasn’t so sure. The interviews alone were divisive, but with the stadium news landing a day later, the context changed completely. How did fans react? Did Ratcliffe’s brutal honesty help or hurt in the long run?
As managing director of PR Agency One, I lead a team that delivers creative campaigns with meaningful and measurable impact for some of the UK’s biggest brands.
I’m also an international board director at AMEC, where I help set global standards for PR measurement. That meant I wasn’t just interested in how the interviews felt, but in how they actually landed, through data, sentiment tracking, and structured analysis.
So, I ran a deep evaluation of the media and fan reaction, using:
5,000+ tweets from Twitter/X, tracked via sentiment analysis
600+ Reddit comments from r/reddevils & r/soccer
20+ media articles (BBC Sport, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, and The Athletic)
Fan surveys gauging reaction to the stadium announcement
The context – why reactions were mixed
United’s ownership expected a split reaction – Given the club’s state, Ratcliffe’s camp likely saw mixed feedback as a decent result. A wave of pure outrage would have been a PR disaster.
Match-going fans vs. online/global fans – The loudest reactions were on social media, but match-going fans at Old Trafford led the protests. Their views carry more weight in long-term sentiment.
The ABU factor – United are hated, adored, but never ignored. Rival fans (ABUs) amplified the controversy, making the online backlash louder than its actual impact inside United’s core fanbase.
Now, let’s break it down – what exactly did Ratcliffe say, how did fans and media react, and what PR lessons can be learned?
What did Ratcliffe actually say?
Media headlines focused on sensational soundbites, but Ratcliffe’s interviews covered much more. His core message? United are in financial trouble, and drastic changes are necessary to rebuild the club.
One of the biggest shocks was Ratcliffe’s claim that United would have run out of money by the end of 2025: “The club runs out of money at Christmas if we don’t do those things.”
Sentiment analysis showed:
74% of tweets mentioning “bust” or “bankrupt” were negative.
42% of Reddit comments criticised Ratcliffe for exaggerating, while 35% blamed the Glazers’ debt-heavy ownership model.
To stabilise finances, Ratcliffe’s team cut 39% of the club’s workforce, including support staff and club ambassadors. The removal of a £175,000-a-year “body language consultant” became a viral meme, while the end of Sir Alex Ferguson’s £2m-a-year ambassadorial role raised eyebrows.
For match-going fans, these cuts felt like an attack on United’s culture. 67% of Reddit comments from season ticket holders described the layoffs as a betrayal of the club’s heritage, arguing that low-paid staff, not overpaid players, were being punished for financial mismanagement.
On Twitter, posts mentioning “450 redundancies” were negative by a ratio of 3:1. However, some fans defended Ratcliffe’s brutal honesty, arguing the club had been mismanaged for years.
How did fans react to the stadium news?
On 11 March 2025, United announced plans for a 100,000-seat stadium, designed by Foster + Partners, as part of a £2bn regeneration project:
£7.3bn boost to the local economy
92,000 jobs created
17,000 new homes built
The timing was critical. One day, Ratcliffe was warning of financial doom, the next, United revealed a grand, historic plan for the future.
Fan sentiment reflected that shift. We know from a recent fan survey that 52% of fans support the new stadium. However, Manchester United Supporters Trust (MUST) remained sceptical: “This announcement leaves more questions than answers. How is this being funded? Will ticket prices rise?”
The stadium announcement softened some of the outrage from the interviews, but concerns over financing, ticketing, and the club’s heritage remain.
Final thoughts – one year after Ratcliffe
A year later, United fans remain divided. Some see Ratcliffe as a necessary disruptor, while others fear he is just another Glazer-style owner. The interviews were seen as brutally honest but tough to hear. The stadium news helped shift fan sentiment, giving supporters something to look forward to, but winning on the pitch will ultimately decide Ratcliffe’s success.
If United start winning again, this moment will be reframed as a turning point. If not, it will be remembered as the day trust was lost. For me, Ratcliffe played this well. The interviews were harsh, but the stadium announcement reframed the conversation.
And as always, United are: Hated. Adored. But never ignored.”