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.
The former BT Group chief Philip Jansen is being lined up as the next chairman of Heathrow Airport as Britain’s biggest aviation hub prepares to deliver an expansion costing close to £50bn.
Sky News has learnt that Mr Jansen, who chairs the FTSE-100 marketing services group WPP, is in advanced talks with Heathrow’s board and shareholders about taking on the role.
If the discussions reach a successful conclusion, sources said an announcement could come within weeks.
Mr Jansen is said to have emerged as the frontrunner from a shortlist of candidates compiled by headhunters at Russell Reynolds Associates.
His experience as the boss of BT, a regulated utility, is said to have been key to his selection as the preferred candidate.
Mr Jansen has also run companies including MyTravel and Worldpay.
The appointment of a successor to Lord Deighton, who has held the post for nine years, comes at a critical time for Heathrow.
In August, the airport submitted a revised expansion plan consisting of a third runway costing £21bn, £12bn for a new terminal and stand capacity, and £15bn to modernise the current airport through the expansion of Terminal 2.
The existing Terminal 3 would ultimately be closed.
Heathrow handled a record 83.9 million passengers in 2024 and is adamant that a third runway is essential to the growth of Britain’s economy, given the volume of exports which pass through the site.
“It has never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow,” the airport’s chief executive, Thomas Woldbye, said in August.
“We are effectively operating at capacity to the detriment of trade and connectivity.
“With a green light from government and the correct policy support underpinned by a fit for purpose regulatory model, we are ready to mobilise and start investing this year in our supply chain across the country.
“We are uniquely placed to do this for the country; it is time to clear the way for take-off.”
The expansion remains opposed by many airlines alarmed by the prospective increase in charges to use the airport, as well
It has, however, been backed by the government, with Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, saying that a third runway “would unlock further growth, boost investment, increase exports, and make the UK more open and more connected as part of our Plan for Change”.
Heathrow’s next chairman will lead a board dominated by representatives of the airport’s principal shareholders.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:37
‘Serious questions’ after Heathrow fire
The airport said it would implement the recommendations of a review conducted by former transport secretary Ruth Kelly.
Heathrow’s search for a new chairman comes months after the most significant changes to its ownership structure in years.
Ardian, a French investment group, now owns 32.6% of the company following a series of transactions over the last 12 months.
Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund has also become an investor.
Heathrow has never formally announced Lord Deighton’s intention to step down, other than a disclosure in its annual report in which he wrote:
“In light of the recent changes to the HAHL [Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited] board…the nominations committee…has asked me to extend my appointment for a limited period to help ensure a smooth transition whilst new non-executive shareholder directors become familiar with the business and a new chair is appointed.
“I have therefore agreed to extend my role as chair for a limited period to ensure continuity and stability on the HAHL Board during this period of transition.”
A Heathrow spokesperson declined to comment, while Mr Jansen could not be reached for comment.
The first Post Office Capture conviction has now been formally referred to the Court of Appeal, marking a major milestone in the IT scandal.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) made the decision to refer the case of sub-postmistress Patricia Owen back in July.
Mrs Owen was convicted of theft by a jury in 1998, based on evidence from the faulty IT software Capture.
She was given a suspended prison sentence and fought to clear her name afterwards – but died in 2003.
Capture software was used in 2,500 branches between 1992 and 1999.
More on Post Office Scandal
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:45
The first Capture conviction was sent for appeal in July
It is the first time a conviction based on Capture – the predecessor to the Horizon system at the centre of the wider Post Office scandal – has reached the Court of Appeal.
It comes after Sky News revealed that a damning report into Capture, which could help overturn convictions, had been unearthed after nearly 30 years.
An investigation found the Post Office knew about the report at the time and continued to prosecute sub-postmasters based on Capture evidence.
Mrs Owen’s family submitted an application to the CCRC in January 2024 – her case has now been referred on the grounds that her prosecution was an “abuse of process”.
A ‘touchstone case’ for victims
Lawyers have said that if Mrs Owen is exonerated posthumously in the Court of Appeal, it may “speed up” the handling of others.
The CCRC is also continuing to investigate more than 30 other “pre-Horizon” convictions.
CCRC chair, Dame Vera Baird, also told Sky News in the summer it could be a “touchstone case” for other victims.
Juliet Shardlow, Mrs Owen’s daughter, has been fighting to clear her mother’s name for years.
She told Sky News the family were “so pleased” her case had finally been referred.
“This has been a very long journey for us as a family and we can now see the light at the end of the tunnel,” she said.
“It’s just sad that mum isn’t here to see it.
“The good news is that once mum’s case is heard in the High Court, it will pave the way for all the other Capture victims.”
The Post Office has previously said it is “determined that past wrongs are put right and continue to support the government’s work in this area as well as fully co-operate with the Criminal Cases Review Commission”.
Britain’s hopes of becoming a critical minerals superpower have been dealt a severe blow after one of its leading companies abandoned its plans to build a rare earths refinery near Hull.
Pensana had pledged to build a £250m refinery on the banks of the Humber, to process rare earths that would have then been used to make magnets for electric cars and wind turbines.
The plant promised to create 126 jobs and was due to receive millions of pounds of government funding.
However, Sky News has learnt that Pensana has decided to scrap the Hull plant and will instead move its refining operations to the US.
Pensana’s chairman, Paul Atherley, said the company had taken the decision after the Trump administration committed to buying rare earths from an American mine, Mountain Pass, at a guaranteed price – something no government in Europe had done.
“That’s repriced the market – and Washington is looking to do more of these deals, moving at an absolute rate of knots,” he said.
“Europe and the UK have been talking about critical minerals for ages. But when the Americans do it, they go big and hard, and make it happen. We don’t; we mostly just talk about it.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:18
Can Trump win the mineral war?
The decision comes at a crucial juncture in critical minerals and geopolitics. China produces roughly 90% of all finished rare earth metals – exotic elements essential for the manufacture of many technology, energy and military products.
Pensana had been seen as Britain’s answer to the periodic panics about the availability of rare earths. The site at Saltend Chemicals Park was chosen by the government to launch its critical minerals strategy in 2022.
Visiting for the official groundbreaking, the then business and energy secretary Kwasi Kwarteng said: “This incredible facility will be the only one of its kind in Europe and will help secure the resilience of Britain’s supplies into the future.”
He pledged a government grant to support the scheme. That grant was never received because Pensana never built its plant.
Image: Paul Atherley and Kwasi Kwarteng at a groundbreaking ceremony for the plant in July 2022. Pic: Pensana
Mr Atherley said he is optimistic about another project he’s involved with, to bring lithium refining to Teesside through another company, Tees Valley Lithium.
But, he said, rare earth processing is far more complex, energy-intensive and expensive, making it unviable in the UK, for the time being.
The decision is a further blow for Britain’s chemicals industry, which has faced a series of closures in recent months, including that of Vivergo, a biofuels refiner based in the same chemicals park where Pensana planned to locate its refinery.
Producers warn that Britain’s record energy costs – higher than most other leading economies – are stifling its economy and triggering an outflow of businesses.