Trying to divine a strategy in Ineos’s approach to sports sponsorship/ownership is not always easy. Not least because the company does not say much on or off the record. It is left largely to Sir Jim Ratcliffe to provide his thoughts, which he does on occasion.

During the initial hoovering-up phase in the late 2010s, as Ratcliffe acquired smaller football clubs such as Lausanne and later Nice, and sponsored Ben Ainslie’s sailing team, and took over Team Sky, it appeared to be mostly about enjoyment for him.

Ineos’s co-founder had done well in life, and as a lifelong sports fan he wanted to enjoy the fruits of his labour. He wanted to ride with Geraint Thomas, and win the America’s Cup “for Britain”, and get his family involved in the running of his various properties. As he told Telegraph Sport in 2018, it was not about a return on investment at that stage. “It’s not about branding Ineos or making Ineos any more well known,” he insisted. “That is of no relevance to us really.”

The second phase saw a much clearer strategy develop around the creation of Ineos Sport, with Sir Dave Brailsford appointed director of sport and tasked with getting the various teams within the Ineos sporting portfolio speaking to each other. The word “cross-pollination” was used a lot.

In fairness, it was not just talk. Ineos Britannia made it to the America’s Cup match last autumn, something no British team had done for 60 years, working in tandem with Mercedes F1, in which Ineos owns a one-third stake. The team’s “cyclors”, the sailors who power the boat’s hydraulic systems on static bikes, trained with the Ineos Grenadiers. The nutritionists worked with the All Blacks. And so on.

That run to the final was achieved against an increasingly chaotic backdrop, however. Ineos’s gradual acquisition over the past 12 months of a 28.94 per cent stake in Manchester United for £1.25 billion – an investment which has coincided with a marked downturn in the petrochemicals industry amid the introduction of what Ineos described on Tuesday as “extreme” green carbon taxes – has clearly had a big impact on the rest of the portfolio, apparently forcing Ineos to adopt a different strategy yet again. Basically, Ineos needs to cut costs.

That vision for an all-conquering, cross-pollinating sporting dynasty is now under threat as belts are squeezed and focus is narrowed. Things have already soured completely in two of the six sports in which Ineos invested – and a third, cycling, is not in great shape, the team’s performance having gone backwards over the past six years.

In rugby, Ineos’s involvement with the All Blacks had been in jeopardy for months. Telegraph Sport heard as long ago as last October that Ineos was seeking to end its sponsorship deal, which was supposed to run until 2027. The trail went cold over the winter as the two parties negotiated. There were whisperings of a settlement having been reached. But New Zealand Rugby has now initiated legal action, accusing Ineos of breach of contract in failing to pay the first instalment of its 2025 sponsorship fee.

In sailing, the seas had been similarly choppy for weeks leading up to the acrimonious split between Ratcliffe and Ainslie late last month, as the two sides argued over the ownership and running of the team. Even before that, Ratcliffe had spoken of his desire to bring in outside sponsorship for the next Cup cycle, having fully funded the first two campaigns.

Cycling is clinging on, but Ineos Grenadiers are openly looking for a second title sponsor to help bear the load of the £50 million-per-season budget, Ineos having indicated it does not wish to pay more. It would be no surprise if Ineos sold the team outright if a buyer could be found to take on all the rider and staff contracts.

Telegraph Sport has also heard rumours that the Ineos-backed NN running team, which was behind Eliud Kipchoge’s 1:59 marathon challenge, might be cut adrift.

That leaves football and F1. Clearly United is the main focal point, but the scale of the task in turning things around at Old Trafford is enormous. Fans are already up in arms about the team’s performances on the pitch and rising costs off it. After an initial wave of 250 job losses last year, news emerged on Tuesday of plans to make a further 100 redundancies at Old Trafford.

F1 booming, along with Ineos’ share price

And what of Formula One? Could Ineos’s second-highest profile sport find itself in the crosshairs? It seems unlikely. Not only has Ineos just announced a new America’s Cup challenge using Mercedes F1 as technical partners once again, it is also one sporting entity in the Ineos portfolio which is definitely making money.

F1 is booming and Ineos’s one-third share of Mercedes F1, which it acquired in 2020 for an undisclosed sum, will undoubtedly have risen sharply in value in the past four years. Mercedes F1 were valued at $3.94 billion (£3.16 billion) in November 2024, making them the second-most valuable F1 team, behind Ferrari, who were valued at $4.78 billion.

As a shareholder, Ineos also receives a substantial dividend each year. In 2022, the dividend was £75 million, of which Ineos’s share would have been £25 million. The dividend for 2023 is not yet public, but one can safely assume it would be higher again.

Ineos’s five-year sponsorship deal with the team is another matter. A look at the latest accounts reveals that in 2023 Ineos Racing Ltd paid £50 million into Mercedes GP and a further £14 million via Athena Racing, Ainslie’s sailing team. That covered both sponsorship of the F1 team and the America’s Cup partnership. One can well imagine that Ratcliffe might wish to extricate himself from that deal at the present time. In fact, Telegraph Sport has been told Ineos tried to do exactly that last summer, only to back down when challenged.

A spokesperson for Mercedes F1 flatly denied that suggestion on Tuesday, insisting Ineos was “fully committed” both to its sponsorship deal and as a long-term shareholder in the team, although interestingly the team did admit that the Ineos branding on the car would be less prominent this year. That is apparently because the amount being put in each year buys less space on the car than it did unless the payment increases in line with market value.

Never say never. Trying to second guess Ineos’s next move is not easy, particularly in the current economic climate. But it would be a surprise if Ratcliffe walked away from F1 right now.