New Zealand Rugby (NZR) initiated legal steps against Ineo’s legal steps after the co -owners of Manchester United missed a payment period.
Ineos, headed by Sir Jim Ratcliffe, agreed a six-year sponsoring contract with NZR, but was accused by the All Blacks to miss their first payment of 2025 and tried to withdraw from the agreement before the schedule.
“After we learned from Ineos’ decision to go out three years earlier, we pulled ourselves to protect the interests of New Zealand Rugby and the broader game,” said NZR in a statement. “We had no choice but to start a legal procedure to protect our commercial position.”
Ineos could not initially be reached for a comment on the allegations, but later published an explanation in which they blamed their missed payment for the need to reduce the costs of combating the “de -industrialization of Europe”.
“Our Sponsoring of New Zealand Rugby has greatly appreciated that in the past few years he has contributed over 30 million US dollars to the teams,” the explanation says.
“However, the trade conditions for our European companies were strongly influenced by high energy costs and extreme carbon taxes as well as a large part of the chemical industry in Europe, which have to fight or have closed.
“As a result, we had to carry out cost -saving measures throughout the business. We tried to achieve a reasonable agreement with the all Blacks in order to adapt our sponsorship in view of these challenges.
“Unfortunately, New Zealand rugby has worked on a managed solution, but has decided to pursue legal steps against its sponsor. We remain in ongoing discussions with New Zealand Rugby.”
The “cost -saving measures”, of which Ineos speak, have attracted a lot of criticism in relation to United. Around 250 non-game employees were released, payments to club ambassadors were reduced, the support of a charity organization for former players was reduced and the ticket prices were increased.
In an explanation to an affected group United Supporters, United admitted that they have the risk of violating the profit and sustainability rules of the Premier League if they do not raise sufficient funds.