Three months on from declaring Sir Jim Ratcliffe's interest in ending the Glazer family's occupation of Manchester United, the response on behalf of Failsworth's most famous son now the club is officially for sale was "no comment from us on United".
On October 13, Ratcliffe said at a Financial Times event: "We can’t sit around hoping that one day Manchester United will become available." That day arrived 40 days later.
Ratcliffe will take a long, hard look at United. The head of the Ineos petrochemicals empire is a driven enough billionaire to have bankrollled Eliud Kipchoge's successful effort to run a marathon inside two hours, the Team Sky cycling team have been rebranded as Ineos Grenadiers, Ben Ainslie's neverending quest to win the Americas Cup is supported by Ratcliffe and Nice have risen from mid-table Ligue 1 fodder to Champions League qualifying contenders.
Read more: Avram Glazer responds to Ronaldo saying owners don't care about United
A lifelong United fan, Ratcliffe has the sporting clout to pass whatever fit and proper test exists in the absence of an independent regulator in English football. Transforming United into champions again would surpass any of his previous accomplishments.
In an age of sportswashing ownerships that sully the names of certain English football institutions, Ratcliffe is the nearest to a throwback owner: a local boy done very good. Vitally, Ratcliffe has stressed Ineos must run any football club as a "community asset".
He has immense wealth but enough to be the standalone owner of United? Perhaps not. The Sunday Times valued Ratcliffe's worth at £6.075billion. He was listed as the 27th richest person on the planet, with Roman Abramovich a place below, and it is the sale of Chelsea that has piqued the Glazer family's interest in relinquishing the keys to United.
The militant protesters against their ownership will claim credit for this week’s development, only two Glazer siblings attended the opening game of the season against Brighton. Some will laughably attribute Tuesday night's news to Cristiano Ronaldo's egomaniacal interview with Piers Morgan in which he justifiably questioned the Glazers' motives.
Money motivates the Glazers, whose late father took his six sisters to court over their mother’s $1m will.
United are the third Premier League club to be put on the market this calendar year and before the generational nadir of Brentford away, the Glazers were always going to require added investment to boost the club’s cash flows. The Sky News story, and Joel and Avram's subsequent confirmation, were significant if unsurprising.
Chelsea's takeover was worth up to £4.25bn. United are a vastly bigger club, with a richer history, a larger following, a longer roll of honours and a stadium almost twice the size of Stamford Bridge. United are the club of Best, Law and Charlton. Chelsea were the original oligarch club. Valuing United at £5bn, even in an age of a cost of living crisis where prices are only heading north, seems modest.
Todd Boehly agreed to pay £2.5bn up front for Chelsea and £1.75bn over a 10-year spell. A similar arrangement is probable if an investor sought to become a major shareholder of United with the separate sum spread across a decade logically dedicated to the stadium.
There are ongoing discussions about whether to enhance Old Trafford or build a new stadium on the spacious site behind the Stretford End. The understanding is the cost for either project would be identical and there is a preference from the powerbrokers to renovate Old Trafford and preserve its personality and grandeur.
Yet the suggestion is a new stadium would be a quicker project than a gradual renovation that early estimates suggest could take a decade from the planning phase. The Tottenham Hotspur Stadium cost £1bn and was completed before the Covid-19 pandemic. Given soaring costs for materials, a new or revamped Old Trafford could be twice as much.
There is also the Carrington training complex to improve. Mags Mernagh, who designed Leicester City's plush training ground, has an office on-site and is overseeing a project that is due to include a state-of-the-art recovery room for the first-team and a dedicated gym for the women's team that United plan to build in front of the academy building. The overall cost will be well into eight figures.
All that and no mention of a transfer budget to make United credible competitors. That is an annual outlay of at least £100m, in the current market, and subject to spiralling if United’s trophy drought strays towards a decade.
Ratcliffe could consider acquiring an equity partner to ensure his operating budget is affordable. He would be the majority shareholder, but Ratcliffe could enlist partners and, hypothetically, offer them minority stakes to foot the considerable bill.
United fans hope that day arrives.
Read more:
