Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the petrochemicals billionaire, is contemplating buying a minority stake in Manchester United Football Club rather than seeking full control, in an effort to end a nearly 10 months-long process to resolve the club’s future ownership.
Sky News has learnt Sir Jim’s Ineos Sports vehicle has proposed to the controlling Glazer family a deal that would see it acquiring chunks of both their shares and the stock publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in equal proportion.
That offer would entail making an offer at the same price for both sets of shares, with one suggestion on Monday evening being that Sir Jim could seek a roughly 25% stake in the club as part of his latest proposal.
It would need to be pitched at a valuation that the Glazers would accept, implying that Ineos Sports could spend in the region of £1.5bn if it was to acquire a quarter of United’s shares – based on earlier reports that they were seeking a minimum valuation of £6bn.
If such a deal was to be implemented, however, the Glazers would almost certainly remain in control at Old Trafford, having taken control of the club in 2005.
Image: Sir Jim Ratcliffe could seek a 25% stake in the club as part of his latest proposal
That would anger United supporters who have been vocal in their opposition to the family’s continued ownership, and would in turn raise a series of further questions about the club’s future.
On the pitch, the men’s team has had an indifferent start to the 2023-24 campaign, being beaten at home by Crystal Palace in the Premier League last weekend, and losing their first Champions League fixture of the season.
More from UK
One uncertainty on Monday evening related to the extent to which the Glazers and their advisers at Raine Group were engaged with Sir Jim on his minority stake proposal.
The family, who paid just under £800m in 2005, has remained inscrutable throughout the process and has said nothing of substance to the NYSE since the process of engaging with prospective buyers kicked off last November.
Advertisement
Another would be whether an offer to bring Sir Jim in as a major shareholder would raise any new capital to invest in the club, which is working towards a major renovation of Old Trafford.
The structure of an offer to acquire a minority stake is also unclear, with one analyst suggesting it could be undertaken through a process known as a tender offer.
Bloomberg News reported last week that Ineos was looking to restructure its bid without specifying details of how this would be achieved.
Some holders of the publicly traded stock – called A shares – have raised concerns about Sir Jim’s previous proposals, which focused on acquiring a majority stake in the club by buying shares from the six Glazer siblings who own the class of B shares which carry disproportionate voting rights.
Another uncertainty would centre on whether a minority deal, if agreed and implemented, would give Ineos Sports an eventual path to full control of Manchester United.
Sky News revealed in May that its offer at the time included put-and-call arrangements that would become exercisable three years after a takeover to enable Sir Jim to acquire the remainder of the club’s shares.
The Monaco-based billionaire, who owns the Ligue 1 side Nice, had been focused on gaining control of Manchester United, meaning that switching his offer to a minority deal would represent a significant shift.
He is still understood to want to buy a majority stake but has pitched a restructured deal in an attempt to unblock the ongoing impasse over United’s future.
An Ineos spokesperson declined to comment on Monday, citing the terms of the non-disclosure agreement the bidders had signed as part of the process.
For months, Ineos has been pitched in a two-way battle for control of Manchester United against Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani, a Qatari businessman who chairs the Gulf state’s Qatar Islamic Bank.
Sheikh Jassim’s bid is reported to remain on the table, and the convoluted nature of the strategic review initiated by the Glazers late last year means that a revised proposal from the Middle East cannot entirely be ruled out.
The club’s executive co-chairmen, Avram and Joel Glazer, have been reported during the course of the process to be more reluctant to sell than their siblings.
In addition to the competing bids from Sir Jim and Sheikh Jassim, the Glazers received several credible offers for minority stakes or financing to fund investment in the club.
Image: Avram Glazer is the club’s co-executive chairman
These include an offer from the giant American financial investor Carlyle; Elliott Management, the American hedge fund which until recently owned AC Milan; Ares Management Corporation, a US-based alternative investment group; and Sixth Street, which recently bought a 25% stake in the long-term La Liga broadcasting rights to FC Barcelona.
These were designed to provide capital to overhaul United’s ageing physical infrastructure.
Part of the Glazers’ justification for attaching such a huge valuation to the club resides in the possibility of it gaining greater control in future of its lucrative broadcast rights, alongside a belief that arguably the world’s most famous sports brand can be commercially exploited more effectively.
United’s New York-listed shares have gyrated wildly in recent months as reports have suggested that either a deal is close or that the Glazers were about to formally cancel the sale process.
On Monday, they were trading at around $19.43, giving the club a market valuation of $3.25bn.
Earlier this year, Manchester United’s largest fans’ group, the Manchester United Supporters Trust, called for the conclusion of the auction “without further delay”.
The Glazers’ tenure has been dogged by controversy and protests, with the lack of a Premier League title since Sir Alex Ferguson’s retirement as manager in 2013 fuelling fans’ anger at the debt-fuelled nature of their takeover.
Image: Manchester United fans want the Glazer family to sell the club
Fury at its participation in the ill-fated European Super League crystallised supporters’ desire for new owners to replace the Glazers.
Confirming the launch of the strategic review in November, Avram and Joel Glazer said: “The strength of Manchester United rests on the passion and loyalty of our global community of 1.1bn fans and followers.
“We will evaluate all options to ensure that we best serve our fans and that Manchester United maximizes the significant growth opportunities available to the club today and in the future.”
The Glazers listed a minority stake in the company in New York in 2012 but retained overwhelming control through a dual-class share structure which means they hold almost all voting rights.
“Love United, Hate Glazers” has become a familiar refrain during their tenure, with supporters critical of a perceived lack of investment in the club, even as the owners have reaped large dividends as a result of its continued profitability.
A Manchester United spokesman declined to comment on Monday.
Sir Keir Starmer has denied he and the chancellor misled the public and the cabinet over the state of the UK’s public finances ahead of the budget.
The prime minister told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby “there was no misleading”, following claims he and Rachel Reeves deliberately said public finances were in a dire state, when they were not.
He said a productivity review by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which provides fiscal forecasts to the government, meant there would be £16bn less available so the government had to take that into account.
“To suggest that a government that is saying that’s not a good starting point is misleading is wrong, in my view,” Sir Keir said.
Cabinet ministers have said they felt misled by the chancellor and prime minister, who warned public finances were in a worse state than they thought, so they would have to raise taxes, including income tax, which they had promised not to in the manifesto.
At last Wednesday’s budget, Ms Reeves unveiled a record-breaking £26bn in tax rises.
More from Politics
The OBR published the forecasts it provided to the chancellor in the two months before the budget, which showed there was a £4.2bn headroom on 31 October – ahead of that warning about possible income tax rises on 4 November.
Image: The OBR’s timings and outcomes of the fiscal forecasts reported to the Treasury
Sir Keir added: “There was a point at which we did think we would have to breach the manifesto in order to achieve what we wanted to achieve.
“Late on, it became possible to do it without the manifesto breach. And that’s why we came to the decisions that we did.”
Sir Keir said a productivity review had not taken place in 15 years and questioned why it was not done at the end of the last government, as he blamed the Conservatives for the OBR downgrading medium-term productivity growth by 0.3 percentage points to 1% at the end of the five-year forecast.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:58
Reeves: I didn’t lie about ‘tax hikes’
The prime minister added: “I wanted to more than double the headroom, and to bear down on the cost of living, because I know that for families and communities across the country, that is the single most important issue, I wanted to achieve all those things.
“Starting that exercise with £16 billion less than we might otherwise have had. Of course, there are other figures in this, but there’s no pretending that that’s a good starting point for a government.”
On Sunday, when asked by Sky’s Trevor Phillips if she lied, Ms Reeves said: “Of course I didn’t.”
She also said the OBR’s downgrade of productivity meant the forecast for tax receipts was £16bn lower than expected, so she needed to increase taxes to create fiscal headroom.
Virgin Media has been fined £23.8m after it disconnected vulnerable customers during a phone line migration.
Regulator, Ofcom, ruled the telecoms company had placed thousands of people “at direct risk of harm”.
The watchdog said users of Telecare – an emergency alarm and monitoring service – were disconnected if they failed to engage with a process, in late 2023, which switched old analogue lines to a digital alternative.
Ofcom said that Virgin Media had disclosed its own failures under consumer protection rules and its full cooperation was taken into account when determining the size of the penalty.
Ian Strawhorne, Ofcom’s director of enforcement, said: “It’s unacceptable that vulnerable customers were put at direct risk of harm and left without appropriate support by Virgin Media, during what should have been a safe and straightforward upgrade to their landline services.
“Today’s fine makes clear to companies that, if they fail to protect their vulnerable customers, they can expect to face similar enforcement action.”
More from Money
Ofcom found that Virgin Media failed properly to identify and record the status of telecare customers, resulting in significant gaps in the screening process.
“This meant that those affected did not receive the appropriate level of tailored support through the migration process”, it said.
It also criticised Virgin Media’s approach to disconnecting Telecare customers who did not engage in the migration process, “despite being aware of the risks posed”.
The watchdog said it had put thousands of vulnerable customers “at a direct risk of harm and prevented their devices from connecting to alarm monitoring centres while the disconnection was in place”.
The money from the fine goes to the Treasury.
A Virgin Media spokesperson said: “As traditional analogue landlines become less reliable and difficult to maintain, it’s essential we move our customers to digital services.
“While historically the majority of migrations were completed without issue, we recognise that we didn’t get everything right and have since addressed the migration issues identified by Ofcom.
“Our customers’ safety is always our top priority and, following an end-to-end review which began in 2023, we have already introduced a comprehensive package of improvements and enhanced support for vulnerable customers including improved communications, additional in-home support and extensive post-migration checks, as well as working with the industry and Government on a joint national awareness campaign.
“We’ve been working closely with Ofcom, telecare providers and local authorities to identify customers requiring additional support and are confident that the processes, policies and procedures we now have in place allow us to safely move customers to digital landlines.”
Sir Keir Starmer will deliver a speech today defending the decisions the government made in the budget, following criticisms of sweeping tax rises and accusations the chancellor lied to the country about the state of public finances.
The prime minister is expected to set out how the budget, which saw £26bn of tax rises imposed across the economy, “moves forward the government’s programme of national renewal”, and set “the right economic course” for Britain, Downing Street says.
He will also confirm that ministers will try again to reform the “broken” welfare system, after Labour MPs forced the government to U-turn on its plans to narrow the eligibility for Personal Independence Payments (PIP) earlier this year.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer will give a speech later defending last week’s budget. Pic: Reuters
“We have to confront the reality that our welfare state is trapping people, not just in poverty, but out of work – young people especially. And that is a poverty of ambition,” Sir Keir will say.
“And so while we will invest in apprenticeships and make sure every young person without a job has a guaranteed offer of training or work, we must also reform the welfare state itself – that is what renewal demands.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
8:46
Sky’s Ed Conway looks at the aftermath of the budget and explains who the winners and losers are
The prime minister will add: “This is not about propping up a broken status quo. Nor is it because we want to look somehow politically ‘tough’. The Tories played that game and the welfare bill went up by £88bn. They left children too poor to eat and young people too ill to work. A total failure.”
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
Instead, he will argue it is about “potential”, saying: “If you are ignored that early in your career, if you’re not given the support you need to overcome your mental health issues, or if you are simply written off because you’re neurodivergent or disabled, then it can trap you in a cycle of worklessness and dependency for decades, which costs the country money, is bad for our productivity, but most importantly of all – costs the country opportunity and potential.
“And any Labour Party worthy of the name cannot ignore that. That is why we have asked Alan Milburn on the whole issue of young people, inactivity and work. We need to remove the incentives which hold back the potential of our young people.”
The announcement will come after the Conservative opposition described the budget as one for “benefits street”, following the chancellor’s decision to lift the two-child benefit cap from April, at a cost of £3bn.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:30
Prime Minister defends the budget
‘Government must go further and faster on growth’
The prime minister is also expected to launch a staunch defence of the budget overall, saying it will bear down on the cost of living through measures like money off energy bills and frozen rail fares; increase economic stability; and protect investment in public services and infrastructure that will drive economic growth.
He will argue that “economic growth is beating the forecasts”, but that the government must go “further and faster” to encourage it.
He will also reiterate his vow to scrap regulation across the economy, which he will argue is not only pro-business, but also a way to deal with the cost of living.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:57
How will your personal finances change following the budget announced by the chancellor?
“Rooting out excessive costs in every corner of the economy is an essential step to lower the cost of living for good, as well as promoting more dynamic markets for business,” the prime minister will say.
He will confirm reforms to the building of nuclear power plants, after the government’s nuclear regulatory taskforce found that “pointless gold-plating, unnecessary red-tape and well-intentioned, but fundamentally misguided environmental regulation had made Britain the most expensive place to build nuclear power”.
“We urgently need to correct this,” the prime minister will say.
Business secretary Peter Kyle will be tasked with applying the same deregulatory approach to major infrastructure schemes and to accelerate the implementation of Labour’s industrial strategy.
In response, Tory shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride said: “It is frankly laughable to hear the prime minister say Rachel Reeves’s Benefits Street budget has put the country on the right course and that he wants to fix the welfare system.
“His chancellor has just hiked taxes by £26bn to pay for a welfare splurge, penalising people who work hard and making them pay for those who don’t work at all. And she misrepresented why she was doing it, claiming there was a fiscal black hole to fill that she knew didn’t exist.
“Labour’s leadership have repeatedly shown they lack the backbone to tackle welfare and instead are just acting to placate their left-wing backbenchers.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:58
Rachel Reeves tells Sky News she did not lie about the state of the public finances
Chancellor accused of ‘lying’
Sir Mel is referring to the chancellor’s speech on 4 November in which she laid the ground for tax rises due to the decision by the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to review and downgrade productivity over recent years, at a cost of £16bn, which led to a black hole in the public finances.
But the OBR revealed on Friday that it had told the Treasury days earlier that there was actually a budget surplus of £4.2bn, leading to outrage and claims that she misled the country about the state of the public finances.
Rachel Reeves was asked directly by Sky’s Trevor Phillips if she lied, and she replied: “Of course I didn’t.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:51
Why did Reeves make the situation sound ‘so bleak’?
She said: “I said in that speech that I wanted to achieve three things in the budget – tackling the cost of living, which is why I took £150 off of energy bills and froze prescription charges and rail fares.
“I wanted to continue to cut NHS waiting lists, which is why I protected NHS spending. And I wanted to bring the debt and the borrowing down, which is one of the reasons why I increased the headroom.
“£4bn of headroom would not have been enough, and it would not give the Bank of England space to continue to cut interest rates.”
Ms Reeves also said: “In the context of a downgrade in our productivity, which cost £16bn, I needed to increase taxes, and I was honest and frank about that in the speech that I gave at the beginning of November.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:30
Badenoch says Rachel Reeves should resign
But Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: “I think the chancellor has been doing a terrible job. She’s made a mess of the economy, and […] she has told lies. This is a woman who, in my view, should be resigning.”
Report due on OBR breach
The tumultuous run-up to the 26 November budget culminated in the OBR accidentally publishing its assessment of the chancellor’s measures 45 minutes before the speech began, in what was an unprecedented breach of budget security.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
The chair of the OBR, Richard Hughes, apologised for the “error”, and announced an investigation into how it happened.
The chancellor has said that she retains confidence in him, despite the “serious breach of protocol”, and confirmed to Trevor that the investigation report will be delivered to her on Monday, although it is not clear when it will be published.