It’s a truism that the billionaires can’t stand red tape – and Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who detests regulation as much at Manchester United as he does in his chemicals business, is no exception.
There is a free market dogma that pervades Premier League boardrooms just as it does the HQs of Fortune 500 companies, where executives like to operate away from prying eyes.
It’s why Edward Glazer donated to Donald Trump’s campaign for the White House last year, though Avram Glazer admittedly backed Kamala Harris heavily.
Photo by Cliff Welch/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
Photo by Cliff Welch/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
Man United’s owners were far from unique in this position. Most of the biggest shareholders in Premier League clubs backed one horse or another, or both, financially in the presidential election.
Closer to home, United are twisted up in British politics too. Uber ambitious plans for a 100,000-seater stadium adjacent to Old Trafford will need government support, and Sir Jim Ratcliffe knows this.
That support will probably be political as opposed to financial – United will have to look elsewhere for that, with the blueprints for the stadium expected to surpass the £2bn mark.
Where new Old Trafford ranks among most expensive stadiums
Stadium Cost (adjusted for inflation) Location Opened
SoFi Stadium $5.5 billion California, USA 2020
New Old Trafford $2.5 billion Manchester –
MetLife Stadium $1.99 billion New Jersey, USA 2010
Allegiant Stadium $1.90 billion Nevada, USA 2020
Wembley Stadium $1.85 billion London, UK 2007
Yankee Stadium $1.79 billion New York, USA 2009
AT&T Stadium $1.79 billion Texas, USA 2009
Mercedes-Benz Stadium $1.56 billion Atlanta, USA 2017
Singapore National Stadium $1.41 billion Kallang, Singapore 2014
Tottenham Hotspur Stadium $1.33 billion London, England 2019
Optus Stadium $1.17 billion Perth, Australia 2017
SOURCE: Structural Repairs
There will likely be some public money for infrastructure around the ground, though not the ground itself. Where Keir Starmer’s influence will be useful is with compulsory purchase orders and bureaucracies.
That’s why Ineos cosied up to the Labour prime minister well before he won the general election last May. He recognises that you can’t own one of the UK’s most famous exports without some government sway.
More United News
However, there are some things that the prime minister and Ratcliffe – who, depending on who you ask, is either Britain’s richest or second richest man – fundamentally disagree on.
Regulation in football is one of those. Starmer, alongside the vast majority of fans, thinks football in the Premier League and beyond has been the wild west for far too long.
Ratcliffe, by contrast, is happy with the status quo that, financially speaking, has served Manchester United very well over the years.
And this week, there has been a potentially seismic update on what is the biggest debate in this space for a generation.
Either late this year or in early 2026, the government will introduce an independent football regulator – think Ofcom or Ofwat but for the beautiful game.
This regulator, which was proposed after the European Super League project United were central to setting up in April 2021, will have various powers to safeguard the interest of fans the club finances.
While the final draft of the regulator is making its way though Parliament and is not yet confirmed, it is widely expected that the body will have the power to:
Implement a new financial distribution, increasing the money the Premier League gives to the EFL
Introduce a new owners’ and directors’ test, with the final sign-off on club takeovers
Block breakaway competitions, such as the European Super League or Project Big Picture
Block stadium moves, changes to club colours or badges, and other heritage issues
Impose sanctions on clubs who break the rules
Unlike every Manchester United supporter group, Gary Neville and a whole host of ex-pros for the Red Devils, all of whom have given the proposal their full-throated support, Ratcliffe is not a fan.
Speaking to Bloomberg last summer, the 72-year-old said: “If you’re not careful the Premier League is going to finish up spending more time in court than it is thinking about what’s good for the league.
“We have got the best league in the world, don’t ruin that league for heaven’s sake. If you’ve got a government regulator at the end of the day they will regulate and that won’t be good.”
With that in mind, therefore, there was what appeared to be some good news for Ratcliffe this week when the same outlet reported that Downing Street are considering watering down the regulator.
Specifically, the government was said to be looking at examining the elements of the bill that could – Premier League executives say – stifle foreign investments and takeovers.
For United, this could be a big deal. At some point, the Glazers want to cash in on their remaining equity, and who they are allowed to sell to will be determined by the regulator. It’s an existential question.
However, in exclusive conversation with UIF, Liverpool University football finance lecturer Kieran Maguire suggests the regulator will not be pared back in any meaningful way.
Maguire, significantly, was central to the consultation process when the bill was being drafted and has appeared in front of House of Commons select committees to discuss the matter.
“My senior source say that in terms of the regulator’s broader powers – backstops for financial regulation, protection of the heritage of the game, the owners’ and the directors’ test – will not be diluted,” he said.
“The latest draft of the legislation, which is going for a re-read in the House of Commons, has no evidence of a dilution.
“I think there is a sunset clause now. Basically, if football can get its house in order is there a case for saying we don’t need a regulator in, say, five years.
“There could be a state of the game review to assess whether the regulator has achieved its objectives and if the culture of ownership and protection of the game has changed.
Diagram showing the ownership and voting structure of Manchester United, broken down between Ineos and Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the Glazers, and the NYSE shareholders
Manchester United ownership diagram Credit: Adam Williams / United in Focus / GRV Media
“If United, the other clubs and the senior administrative bodies have got their act together, you don’t need a regulator.
“That said, Manchester United and their peers in the Premier League have had the last three years to put together a more comprehensive deal for the EFL and has failed to do so.
“Are they going to change without outside motivation? I’m not so sure about that.”
Man United and FC United of Manchester fans in joint protest against Glazers
Had the regulator been around in 2005, it likely would have stepped in to block the Glazers’ leveraged buyout of Manchester United that has saddled the club with hundreds of millions of bad debt.
Infographic showing Manchester United's annual debt since the Glazers bought the club via a leveraged buyout in 2005, superimposed over an image of Avram and Joel Glazer
Manchester United debt infographic prepared by United in Focus and GRV Media Photo credit: Michael Regan/Getty Images
As it happens, the Premier League has itself intervened on that particular issue, with overly-leveraged deals now outlawed.
In any case, the takeover’s legacy continues to cast a long shadow. This Saturday, United fans and supporters of the breakaway club FC United of Manchester will stage a joint protest against the owners.
The protest will take place at FC United’s match against Stockton and marks the first formal collaboration between both sets of supporters.
Photo by Robbie Jay Barratt - AMA/Getty Images
Photo by Robbie Jay Barratt – AMA/Getty Images
“Fans of FC United of Manchester have always continued in their hearts to support Manchester United but not the Glazer ownership of the club,” says Kieran Maguire.
“The hostility to the Glazers has increased due to the lack of the success on the pitch this season to date, though we could be talking about a club that’s in the Champions League in eight weeks time if they’re successful in Europe.
“Trust in the Glazers and the initial trust that was directed towards Ineos has evaporated altogether.
“Ineos’ focus does appear to be on revenue maximisation and job cuts rather than the development of United as a successful club on the pitch.
Chart depicting the number of staff employed by Manchester United over time
Manchester United employees Credit: Adam Williams / GRV Media / United in Focus
“You’ve only to look at comments from Berrada and Ratcliffe saying they want to be the number one revenue generating club in football – fans won’t be out on the streets for an open top bus parade for that.
“I think that is the feeling behind these protests, and you can’t blame fans for that. It’s a philosophical question about what their club is becoming.”