A world-class stadium is one of the core objectives for Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s
Manchester United vision. Whether that be a redevelopment of Old Trafford or constructing a completely new, bespoke stadium remains to be seen. Still, the United minority owner, who acquired a near-28 per cent stake in the club in January , has dreams of creating a ‘Wembley of the North’. In February, Trafford Council announced proposals for major investment in the Trafford Wharfside area where Old Trafford sits, with the stadium core to the development plans for the area’s regeneration. Old Trafford has been neglected badly under the ownership of the Glazer family, the decaying stadium somewhat symbolic of the club’s direction under the owners at times. READ MORE: United could have five potential temporary home options if they have to leave Old Trafford READ MORE: Same parking spot and living at home - how Mainoo is keeping his feet on the ground Of the ‘Big Six’ teams, Arsenal,
Manchester City and
Tottenham have all moved into new stadiums over the past two decades, while
Liverpool have revamped Anfield to take its capacity to 62,000, creating a world-class stadium in the process.
Chelsea also have plans for a new home. Whether it is redevelopment or a new build, the cost will be astronomical, way beyond the kind of figures that have been seen in recent years, such as the £1.2bn it cost to build the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. Geo-political issues and the increased cost of borrowing mean that any new development or redevelopment is likely to push beyond the £2bn mark, and that is a lot of capital to find. A man of such resources as Ratcliffe, head of one of the world’s biggest petrochemical companies, INEOS, won’t have too many roadblocks in terms of identifying willing lenders. However, he has already stated it would be the preference to have a northern national stadium United could call home, something that could be taxpayer funded in part through the plans for ‘levelling up’ the country. There will be movement, and it will likely be relatively swift as Old Trafford is no longer fit for purpose for a club that wants to be the best in the world. In order to maximise the revenue-generating potential it needs to be revamped or rebuilt. There is consensus over what needs to be done. It won’t be a project that will be easy, though, not least for the fact that United will need to have to determine where they call home during the period of time where construction is ongoing . United have a considerable amount of land that is owned around Old Trafford, and there remains the possibility that a new build could be constructed side by side with Old Trafford while the club continues to play at the stadium. However, there are many hoops that may be required to jump through, not least the impact on the local area with a major construction site so close to a stadium with a footfall of 74,000 every fortnight. Other aspects such as access to the site and the impact on routes around the area would also need to be considered, as well as whether or not placing a new stadium on top of the the old one would be most beneficial in the long run in terms of space and access. When Spurs were building their new ground they had to move. The new stadium was to be built on the land where the razed White Hart Lane stood, and remaining in situ until a new home was constructed, as Everton have done, was not an option. Spurs’
London location gave them options, and while what would have been a wildly controversial ground share with North London rivals
Arsenal had been declared as the preferred option for the club by former
Premier League CEO Richard Scudamore back in 2015, the national stadium at Wembley was eventually chosen. Sign up to The Bottom Line newsletter Sign up to our new weekly newsletter, the Bottom Line , which will bring you exclusive reporting on the financial issues affecting the future of football. From the happenings at the biggest clubs, at home and abroad, interviews with the people who make the big decisions behind the scenes - Dave Powell, Chief Business of
Football Writer for Reach Plc, will be keeping newsletter subscribers informed and doing deep dives into the business of Premier League clubs, the EFL pyramid, US sports and more. The Bottom Line is currently offering 50% off annual subscriptions. So, for the latest news on the finances of Premier League clubs from Dave Powell, subscribe here . There had been some resistance, though, with the Premier League having been concerned at whether the existing events at Wembley would impact the ability of Spurs to be able to comply with the Premier League’s fixture list, rejecting the initial proposal of the club sharing with both Milton Keynes Dons at Stadium: MK, and also Wembley for the 19 home games. Speaking in 2015, Scudamore said: “Clubs have to be able to deliver 19 home games in the slots that are required. So, if they share with a rugby league club, we cannot be fettered as to when they can play. They have to work it out with Wembley or wherever they want to play, and decide if they could deliver that level of commitment to us.” Spurs paid a reported £15m to rent Wembley for the year on matchdays, eventually solving the rather troublesome question of where they would call home during the 2018/19 campaign. They benefited from a greater capacity, too, with match receipts for the 2018/19 campaign standing at £81.7m compared to £70.9m the previous year, although that figure was aided considerably by the club’s run to the
Champions League final and the additional match nights held at Wembley. When Liverpool owners Fenway Sports Group (FSG) pressed on with the redevelopment of Anfield it was done by piecemeal through the season. The club remained in situ while development of the Main Stand and more recently the Anfield Road End was completed. It saw reduced capacity for periods of time, impacting the matchday revenue, but the longer term plan of achieving £100m-plus per annum for matchday revenue is well on course. There is no obvious temporary home for United, a club that raked in a Premier League high £136.4m from matchday revenue in 2022/23. The Etihad Stadium , home of rivals Man City, seems unlikely and also a logistical nightmare given that both will need to satisfy the Premier League calendar and, likely, European football requirements. Bolton Wanderers ’ Toughsheet Stadium could be an option, but with a 28,000 capacity it would involve the club swallowing a major amount of matchday revenue for at least a season, and that could be impactful when it comes to their position around financial controls in the Premier League, with new regulations in line with UEFA’s squad cost ratio set to replace the current profit and sustainability rules in the near future. Matchday revenue is a big driver for United in terms of them being able to spend on transfer fees and wages without feeling the hot breath of the Premier League’s lawmakers down their neck. There will likely be a 70% squad cost ratio in place for clubs in European competition, with a club’s spend on player and head coach wages, amortisation (how transfer fees are accounted for), severance pay, and intermediary fees matched against a club’s operating revenue and player trading profit (where the best of a three-year period can be used). A move to a smaller home would be problematic on that front. For example, Brighton & Hove Albion’s matchday revenue at the 30,666-seater AMEX Stadium stood at £20.6m for their most recent financial year. United’s 74,310-capacity home allows for 44,000 more fans each week, and while additional home matches would likely see United claim more than £30m in matchday revenue from a temporary switch to a smaller stadium like Bolton’s, the loss of revenue would be significant. They would also need to pay a rental for the privilege. The Emirates Old Trafford
Cricket ground has also been mooted as a possibility. The ground has a 26,000 capacity for international cricket matches and is in the immediate vicinity, but it is not a multi-purpose stadium; it is a cricket-specific stadium that is bound by its own cricket calendar, whether that be for Lancashire games or
England games. It would be another logistical nightmare and one where the Premier League would likely have many concerns. The revenue issue would also remain. The difficulty in finding a temporary stadium will likely play a significant role determining whether United stick or twist with Old Trafford. Redeveloping Old Trafford, given the age of the stadium and the logistics involved, could end up costing more over the longer term, but if the club are able to remain in situ throughout redevelopment in the same way that Liverpool did, then they would limit the revenue impact and avoid the headaches that come with it. The lack of appropriate venues for a club the size of United is obvious, and there will have to be some compromise made in order for Ratcliffe to realise his Old Trafford vision and for United to make the step to ensure they stay ahead of their rivals in terms of matchday revenue for the decades to come. Whether that is squeezing a new build side by side, setting up shop away from Old Trafford for a season, or a redevelopment of the existing structure while United are in residence, there is much riding on United finding the right answer. Try MUFC Pro NOW for free Subscribe to our brilliant app for the best way to enjoy the M.E.N's unrivalled Manchester United coverage. No adverts, pop-ups or distractions - just our brilliant content presented in the best way possible. Comprehensive, round-the-clock coverage of the Reds, with agenda-setting
BREAKING news and insight from Samuel Luckhurst and our authoritative team of United writers Exclusive content for subscribers New interactive elements including (coming soon) quizzes to test your United knowledge. Try MUFC Pro for a front-row seat to the action at absolutely no cost for the first month. You can get started by downloading our app here on
iPhone , or here on
Android . If you a lready have our app, click on the ''MUFC Pro',' Subscribe' or ' Remove ads' links. *Free trial auto renews at £19.99 annually unless cancelled. T&C’s apply. Ad-free indicates that you will not be shown standard display ad formats with the articles that you read, selected articles may contain commercial messages/affiliate links where contractually required.