CLASS TREACHERY

Man Yoo Chief Executive David Gill is right. There’ll always be people criticising the club that makes him a millionaire. So why make it so easy for us? I mean, Ferguson’s lost it. It seems he literally doesn’t know what’s going on around him. Lambasting United’s New Year’s Day crowd for not being loud enough when his team weren’t being good enough. And lambasting the media for allowing supporters right-of-reply.

Of course, Ferguson has ‘previous’ with the media – it’s why Carlos Queiroz is famous. He hasn’t spoken to the BBC since they transmitted a 2004 documentary rightly questioning United players’ relationships with Elite Sports Agency (prop: Jason Ferguson), relationships quietly terminated in the programme’s aftermath. And SKY got banned, episode 94, from a recent press conference merely for interviewing United fans’ representatives.

There’d been none of this before Glazer. Ferguson once declared himself a “bridge between club and fans…supporting fans in their causes,” including opposition to Glazer. Now, FC United are “promoting themselves” and “thought they should have a say in the running of a football club”, an oddball criticism of a fans-run-club such as FC United. He denies fans’ role in defeating BSkyB’s 1998 takeover bid, contradicting the Monopolies and Merger Commission, which rejected the bid partly because of fans’ campaigning. And: “The independent supporters and FC United are not the conscience of the club.” He couldn’t be more wrong if he’d said: “Ken Bates – lovely fella.”

Naturally, when Glazer became owner, Ferguson became quieter – you don’t diss the man with the P45 near-at-hand, just ask Kevin Blackwell. But he could have stayed quieter. As it is, the former Clyde-shipyard union-activist has returned “class traitor” to our vocabulary. A disgrace. (There goes this web-site’s exclusive Ferguson interview)…

In mitigation, Ferguson is not alone. Gill is mutating into his other-worldly predecessor Peter “Chelsea rule the world” Kenyon in his worship of the bottom line. Changing his view of Glazer – for one and a half million reasons a year – from “no sensible person could support them” to “they’re excellent owners, true to their word” via the untrue “they’ve invested in the team.” And, apparently, they’ve “not sought credit” – which will surprise a variety of money-lenders.

United are the world’s richest club, by 12 euros, only once future Nike sponsorship is snuck…sorry…”factored” in (for that reason alone?). But the Glazers have surpassed many of their own targets. £245m turnover was a specific target…for 2010. While pre-tax earnings and matchday income targets have been exceeded by 2-5%.

Yet this, from a season only another treble could outstrip, will hardly make a dent in United’s debt. Interest payments match all but relative pennies of post-tax profits. Much-vaunted transfer outlay has been partly deferred. And headlines like: “United plan could bleed fans dry” expose where the money’s really coming from (not that Ferguson’s reading).

A repeat of, oooh…say, 2005/06 and profits wouldn’t cover three-quarters of the interest. The transfer expenditure Gill cites ad nauseum is 30% of the £70m headline figure – thanks to staged payments for Nani and Anderson and obligatory complexities surrounding Carlos Tevez. “So instead of £70m, United have spent only £20m already” said the Independent’s Nick Harris.

But the 20,000 fans who ‘went’ to the Coventry Carling Cup-tie without necessarily leaving home made a viable contribution. Hence Gill’s delight at the impact of ticket-price-rises on next year’s projected income, alongside thanking the Glazers - like a penny piece had come from their pockets.

Everything at United has taken an above-inflation price-hike. And that money is vital, whatever their projected Korean income. Ferguson can’t have his beloved crowd-noise “when everyone is boosting profits until the moment of kick-off”, Jim White noted in the Telegraph, surveying a half-full Old Trafford at 2.57. “Secondary spend” Gill romantically labels it.

“Fans as customers” isn’t cynical comment on United’s strategy. It IS their strategy. It says so, in parent company Red Football’s 2005/06 accounts, page ONE. And ‘customers’ don’t bounce down aisles chanting “Tesco, Tesco”. So the equivalent won’t happen at United. If you want your salary paid, Ferguson, live with that.

And it’ll get worse. Take the Glazers’ “word” on ticket-prices. An uncharacteristically-baseless David Conn Guardian article concentrated on their alleged price-promises to government, ignoring the 54% rise “by “2010” promised in their business plan, alongside a commitment merely to be “competitive.”

They’ll have spotted Arsenal’s 20%-higher matchday-income from 20%-lower crowds. And if Emirates seats are £94, £93 will be “competitive” as soon as supply-and-demand allows. Again, in the business plan: “Premiership teams in the North…have been viewed as having a lower-wealth fan-base (but) the gulf is not enormous (and) tickets have been undervalued.” They don’t disregard the North/South divide, as critics claim. They believe it barely exists.

Some will never see the takeover “as a good thing even if we win ten Champions Leagues-in-a-row” Gill complains, understanding nothing of the appeal of “competitive” sport. For any club to so dominate would be unhealthy, even – to use the only language Gill does understand – gate receipts. The fiercely competitive Ferguson would surely baulk at a job so uncompetitive, unless he’s gone really bad.

But even on Gill’s terms, United’s figures are barely adequate – though the ‘hard-of-thinking’ have swallowed the hype (like ‘Pat’ on the Manchester Evening News web-site, spouting such rubbish about the accounts you suspect ‘Pat’ is short for ‘Patsy’). The Glazers admitted that top-three finishes and the Champions League knock-out stages were annual essentials – confirmed, and more, by these figures. Another 2005/06 simply mustn’t happen.

The portion of debt not currently dumped on United - £138m borrowed at 14.25% - will be when market conditions allow. Another £19m to find each year, unless United can attack the main debt the way they did Newcastle.

Fan loyalty therefore remains fundamental. Talk of 333 million fans worldwide is, handily, cheap. And United “must harvest every opportunity” (Gill). But how many “harvests” can these millions gather? Unless merchandise is of too poor quality to last a season, they won’t be annual (why do I feel like I’ve just given someone an idea?) or reliable. Defeat to Lyon will destabilise this ‘fan-base’ more readily than those who actually went to the Coventry game.

They also need to be more ‘loyal’ than the billion ‘potential’ viewers worldwide of Arsenal/United coverage this season, 90% of whom found something better to do. Otherwise risky trips to Saudi Arabia mid-season for £1m will become the norm.

However, what appalls most is Ferguson and his disdain for fans who suffer institutionalised exploitation as thanks for their efforts. If anyone/anything has earned the right to act so arrogantly, it’s Ferguson and his career– from Dunfermline’s (Dunfermline’s !!) 1960s European campaigns to last year’s title. But no-one has earned that right, not even Ferguson.
‘WHICH NEEDS NO FURTHER COMMENT’: Five Live’s Mark Pougatch recently questioned Birmingham chairman David Gold on the damage the Premier League’s foreign-recruitment policy/frenzy was doing to the England team. “Not our responsibility” Gold insisted. Pougatch fired back with the League’s mission statement: “…to develop playing talent that will provide international success with the England team at all levels.” “It’s on your web-site!!” he screamed incredulously. “Not our responsibility” Gold persisted, in the face of the evidence.

Which needs no further comment.

‘MotorMurph’ is written by Mark Murphy

Entry Filed under: MotorMurph Column

© The Right Result 2008

Resources | Terms & Conditions | Contact Us