In partnership with
INEOS’ £2.5 billion Blind Spot: Why Women’s Sport Is Missing From The Portfolio
Over the past eight years, INEOS has quietly become one of the most aggressive investors in elite sport, deploying more than £2.5 billion across football, cycling, sailing and running. Yet for all that firepower, one part of the market remains almost entirely absent from its portfolio: women’s sport.
In Partnership With Google:
Easy setup, easy money
Making money from your content shouldn’t be complicated. With Google AdSense, it isn’t.
Automatic ad placement and optimization ensure the highest-paying, most relevant ads appear on your site. And it literally takes just seconds to set up.
That’s why WikiHow, the world’s most popular how-to site, keeps it simple with Google AdSense: “All you do is drop a little code on your website and Google AdSense immediately starts working.”
The TL;DR? You focus on creating. Google AdSense handles the rest.
Start earning the easy way with AdSense.
The Scale of The INEOS Sports Machine:
In pure spend, INEOS now sits in the top tier of global sports investors. From a minority stake in Manchester United to ownership of OGC Nice and Lausanne‑Sport, plus INEOS Grenadiers cycling and high‑profile projects in sailing and marathon running, the group has bought itself a front‑row seat across multiple men’s properties.
Reported total sports spend: over £2.5 billion in the last eight years across its men’s portfolio.
Strategic positioning: multi‑club ownership in football, a flagship WorldTour cycling team, and past involvement in blue‑riband events like the America’s Cup and the INEOS 1:59 marathon project.
On paper, it is a classic billionaire‑industrialist sports strategy: global reach, blue‑chip badges, and the ability to wrap team assets around a wider industrial brand.
A Striking Gap: Women’s Teams and Projects:
Against that backdrop, the lack of meaningful engagement with women’s sport is hard to ignore. At club level, INEOS‑linked women’s teams exist but operate on comparatively minimal budgets relative to the men’s squads they sit alongside.
Manchester United’s women’s team contributed negligible revenue in a 2023‑24 financial year that produced losses in excess of £130m for the club overall, underlining how small their line item is within the broader business.
Proposals and opportunities to launch or support women’s cycling teams around INEOS Grenadiers have not been taken up, despite the growth of the Women’s WorldTour and an increasingly competitive sponsorship market.
Culturally, the company’s sporting divisions are described as male‑dominated in staff composition and leadership, mirroring an older, predominantly male governance layer at INEOS Limited’s parent‑company level.
Missed Upside in a Fast‑Growing Market:
The timing of this underinvestment is particularly stark given how quickly women’s sport is scaling. Deloitte projects that global revenues in women’s elite sport will surpass roughly $2.3–2.4 billion in 2025, with compound growth outpacing many mature men’s properties as audiences, rights fees and sponsorships catch up.
Media and sponsorship brands are actively looking to rebalance portfolios toward women’s competitions, with premium events in football, basketball and cricket driving record attendances and broadcast deals.
Rights‑holders who invested early, from federations to private equity‑backed leagues are already seeing valuation uplift as women’s properties move from “CSR line item” to standalone commercial asset.
Industry analysts argue that by keeping female athletes and properties at the margins, INEOS risks missing a window where relatively modest cheques could buy outsized brand equity and long‑term financial upside.
Retreats, Reversals and Governance Questions:
The pattern is not just one of omission, but also of retreat. INEOS stepped away from a mooted America’s Cup women’s challenge and ended its headline association with projects such as the NN running team after Eliud Kipchoge’s historic sub‑two‑hour marathon, rather than using that platform to build a broader, more inclusive running portfolio.
At the same time, existing flagships are showing strain:
INEOS Grenadiers’ performance has declined relative to its Tour de France‑dominant peak, raising questions about return on investment and sporting direction.
Sponsorship and governance disputes with partners such as New Zealand Rugby and Tottenham Hotspur have been resolved but left a residue of scrutiny around contract risk, governance and strategic clarity.
Layered on top of this is an internal leadership structure that remains heavily male and older in profile, which critics say is out of step with both the athlete base and the consumer markets INEOS is trying to reach.
Strategic Choice or Strategic Blind Spot?
The core debate is whether the absence of women’s sport is a deliberate strategic choice or a blind spot that will look increasingly expensive in hindsight. On one side, INEOS can argue that focus on men’s blue‑chip assets is consistent with its broader industrial brand and that resources should be concentrated on stabilising underperforming teams like Grenadiers and turning around Manchester United’s financial trajectory.
On the other, the opportunity cost is growing:
Women’s football, cycling and sailing now offer credible pathways from relatively low entry cost to global visibility, particularly for an industrial brand seeking to modernise its image.
Competitors and peers in the sponsorship market are already taking positions in women’s properties, establishing first‑mover advantages in categories ranging from apparel to financial services.
For a group that has shown itself willing to spend billions to shape narratives in men’s sport, the next phase of the INEOS sports story may be defined less by the cheques it writes and more by the opportunities it continues to leave on the table in women’s sport.
