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 economy performed better than expected in February, growing by 0.5% according to official figures released on Friday, but comes ahead of an expected hit from the global trade war.
The standard measure of an economy’s value, gross domestic product (GDP), rose in part thanks to a suprisingly strong performance from the manufacturing sector, data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) suggested.
Following the publication of the figures, the British pound rose against the dollar, jumping 0.4% against the greenback to $1.3019 within an hour.
Analysts had been forecasting just a 0.1% GDP hike in the lead-up to the announcement, according to data from LSEG.
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves described the results as “encouraging”, but struck a cautious tone when alluding to US President Donald Trump’s tariffs, and the economic volatility of the past week.
“The world has changed, and we have witnessed that change in recent weeks,” she said.
“I know this is an anxious time for families who are worried about the cost of living and British businesses who are worried about what this change means for them,” Ms Reeves added. “This government will remain pragmatic and cool-headed as we seek to secure the best deal with the United States that is in our national interest.”
More on Uk Economy
Related Topics:
But back in February, when Mr Trump was just beginning his second term in office, the UK’s economy looked to be on firmer ground.
Service sectors like computer programming, telecoms and car dealerships all had strong a month, while manufacturing industries such as electronics and pharmaceuticals also helped to drive GDP growth in February.
Car manufacturing also picked up after its recent poor performance.
“The economy grew strongly in February with widespread growth across both services and manufacturing industries,” said Liz McKeown, ONS Director of Economic Statistics.
While motor vehicle manufacturing and retail both grew in February 2025, they remain below February 2024 levels by 10.1% and 1.1% respectively
This aligns with industry data showing year-on-year declines in registrations and manufacturing.
“The UK economy expanded by 0.5% in February, surprising but welcome positive news,” said Hailey Low, Associate Economist at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
“However, heightened global uncertainty and escalating trade tensions mean the outlook remains uncertain, with a likely reduced growth rate this year due to President Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcements.”
Ms Low said that this could create a dilemma for Ms Reeves, who would face difficult decisions later in the year when the chancellor presents her next budget.
The latest data also shows a jump from January, when the economy was flat. And compared to the same month a year ago, GDP was 1.4% higher in February 2025.
Global financial markets have been on a rollercoaster ride over the past few days, but now, with President Donald Trump having paused his “retaliatory” tariffs, the situation should stabilise.
Here, we outline how the pound in your pocket has been affected.
Stock markets, bonds and currencies moved sharply after Mr Trump put a 90-day pause on tariffs other than the base 10% tax slapped on almost all imports to the US. China still faces a levy of 125% on the goods it exports to the US.
But there have still been some impactful changes since his so-called “liberation day” tariff announcement last week.
So, what’s happened?
Well, last week two more interest rate cuts were expected by the end of this year, but now traders are pricing in three cuts by the Bank of England.
Borrowing will become cheaper as the interest rate is now anticipated to be brought down more than previously thought, to 3.75% by the end of 2025 from the current 4.5%.
It’s not exactly for a good reason, though. The trade war means the UK economy is forecast to grow less.
This lower growth is what’s making observers think the Bank will cut rates sooner – making borrowing cheaper can lead to more spending. Increased spending can stimulate economic growth.
What does this all mean for you?
Some debts, like credit card bills, will become a bit cheaper.
Mortgages
Crucially for anyone soon to re-fix their rate, this means mortgage costs are falling.
Already, the typical two and five-year fixed rate deals are coming down, according to data from financial information company Moneyfacts.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:42
Trump’s tariffs: What you need to know
After weeks where the average rate would fall only once or twice, there have been larger and daily falls, the data shows.
As of Thursday, the typical rate for a five-year deal is 5.14%, and 5.29% for the average two-year fixed mortgage.
If the interest rate expectations remain, by the end of the year, the average two-year fixed mortgage rate will fall to 4.3% if a person is borrowing 75% of the property’s value, according to analysts at Pantheon Macroeconomics.
Filling up your car
Another positive that’s motivated by a negative is the reduced fuel cost to the motorist of filling up their vehicle.
The oil price fell due to rising fears of a recession in the world’s biggest economy. Now that those concerns have somewhat subsided, the oil price has remained comparatively low at $63.75 for a barrel of the benchmark Brent crude.
It’s far below the average price of $80 from last year.
This lower cost is likely to filter down to cheaper prices at the pump within days as the sharp oil price drops hit at the end of last week.
Lower oil costs could help bring down costs overall, lowering inflation, as oil is still used in many parts of the supply chain.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, 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 Spreaker 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 Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Lower interest rates mean falling savings rates, so savers can expect to get less of a return in the coming months.
Anyone with a stocks and shares ISA (Individual Savings Account) is likely to get a shock when they see the decline in their returns.
Image: A display shows the sharp rise of the Nikkei stock index in Tokyo. Pic: AP
Holidays
It’s not the best time to be heading off on a trip to a country that uses the euro. The pound hasn’t strayed far from buying €1.16, a low last seen in August.
It means your pound doesn’t go as far, as you’re getting less euro.
Against the dollar, however, sterling has risen to $1.29.
The exchange rate had been higher in the immediate wake of Mr Trump’s tariff announcement as the dollar value sank. At that point, you could briefly have bought $1.32 for a pound.
Supermarket shopping
Helpfully, the UK’s biggest and most popular UK supermarket, Tesco, updated us that it expects tariffs will have a “relatively small impact”.
This is the term used periodically to describe investors who push back against what are perceived to be irresponsible fiscal or monetary policies by selling government bonds, in the process pushing up yields, or implied borrowing costs.
Most of the focus on markets in the wake of Donald Trump’s imposition of tariffs on the rest of the world has, in the last week, been about the calamitous stock market reaction.
This was previously something that was assumed to have been taken seriously by Mr Trump.
During his first term in the White House, the president took the strength of US equities – in particular the S&P 500 – as being a barometer of the success, or otherwise, of his administration.
Image: Donald Trump in the Oval Office today. Pic: Reuters
He had, over the last week, brushed off the sour equity market reaction to his tariffs as being akin to “medicine” that had to be taken to rectify what he perceived as harmful trade imbalances around the world.
But, as ever, it is the bond markets that have forced Mr Trump to blink – and, make no mistake, blink is what he has done.
More from Money
To begin with, following the imposition of his tariffs – which were justified by some cockamamie mathematics and a spurious equation complete with Greek characters – bond prices rose as equities sold off.
That was not unusual: big sell-offs in equities, such as those seen in 1987 and in 2008, tend to be accompanied by rallies in bonds.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
17:12
What it’s like on the New York stock exchange floor
However, this week has seen something altogether different, with equities continuing to crater and US government bonds following suit.
At the beginning of the week yields on 10-year US Treasury bonds, traditionally seen as the safest of safe haven investments, were at 4.00%.
By early yesterday, they had risen to 4.51%, a huge jump by the standards of most investors. This is important.
The 10-year yield helps determine the interest rate on a whole clutch of financial products important to ordinary Americans, including mortgages, car loans and credit card borrowing.
By pushing up the yield on such a security, the bond investors were doing their stuff. It is not over-egging things to say that this was something akin to what Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng experienced when the latter unveiled his mini-budget in October 2022.
And, as with the aftermath to that event, the violent reaction in bonds was caused by forced selling.
Now part of the selling appears to have been down to investors concluding, probably rightly, that Mr Trump’s tariffs would inject a big dose of inflation into the US economy – and inflation is the enemy of all bond investors.
Part of it appears to be due to the fact the US Treasury had on Tuesday suffered the weakest demand in nearly 18 months for $58bn worth of three-year bonds that it was trying to sell.
But in this particular case, the selling appears to have been primarily due to investors, chiefly hedge funds, unwinding what are known as ‘basis trades’ – in simple terms a strategy used to profit from the difference between a bond priced at, say, $100 and a futures contract for that same bond priced at, say, $105.
In ordinary circumstances, a hedge fund might buy the bond at $100 and sell the futures contract at $105 and make a profit when the two prices converge, in what is normally a relatively risk-free trade.
So risk-free, in fact, that hedge funds will ‘leverage’ – or borrow heavily – themselves to maximise potential returns.
The sudden and violent fall in US Treasuries this week reflected the fact that hedge funds were having to close those trades by selling Treasuries.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:20
Trump freezes tariffs at 10% – except China
Confronted by a potential hike in borrowing costs for millions of American homeowners, consumers and businesses, the White House has decided to rein back its tariffs, rightly so.
It was immediately rewarded by a spectacular rally in equity markets – the Nasdaq enjoyed its second-best-ever day, and its best since 2001, while the S&P 500 enjoyed its third-best session since World War Two – and by a rally in US Treasuries.
The influential Wall Street investment bank Goldman Sachs immediately trimmed its forecast of the probability of a US recession this year from 65% to 45%.
Of course, Mr Trump will not admit he has blinked, claiming last night some investors had got “a little bit yippy, a little bit afraid”.
And it is perfectly possible that markets face more volatile days ahead: the spectre of Mr Trump’s tariffs being reinstated 90 days from now still looms and a full-blown trade war between the US and China is now raging.
But Mr Trump has blinked. The bond vigilantes have brought him to heel. This president, who by his aggressive use of emergency executive powers had appeared to be more powerful than any of his predecessors, will never seem quite so powerful again.