A few hours ago I had a conversation with a leading Resolution 12 requisitioner.
I think it is fair to say that he is one of the main movers behind this issue.
Today he raised the issue from the floor of the AGM.
Although he had a prepared script of questions for the top table it was when he spoke from the heart that the room responded.
He told me that Peter Lawwell had stated that the requisitioners were “happy” with what the club was doing on the issue.
The Resolution 12 chap immediately retorted “Well I’m not happy Peter!”
He told me that this got a supportive response from the room, if not from the top table.
My guy reminded me today that two years ago UEFA opened the door for Celtic FC to bring this issue directly to them.
The Resolution 12 folk have correspondence from Nyon to prove that assertion and I have seen the missive myself.
Regular readers here will know that it is my contention that the Celtic Board would rather not address the issues contained within Resolution 12.
Moreover, it is entirely reasonable to deduce that someone in a position of authority at Celtic does not want this matter to be pursued to its conclusion.
Of course, a board of directors are meant to act, at all times, in the best interests of the shareholders.
For the avoidance of doubt, Celtic suffered a substantial opportunity cost in season 2011-2012 by being denied a crack at the UEFA Champions League.
It is now five years since Resolution 12 was brought to the AGM.
Five years…
Well, well. Stevie G making it clear that there will be no significant spend, if any, in the winter break.
Quelle surprise, no doubt the Level 5 take on it will be that the war chest will be released in the summer.
Not so clear on player movement out.
There are issues piling up all over the place any one of which could be nuclear.
The merchandising shambles, TOP/COS, being the biggies.
If King fails again to meet his promises of funding who will step up to the plate this time?
The other soft loanees have had their fingers burnt already, with a huge chunk of money still owed to them, mitigated by a debt for equity swop in a company that has lost north of £40m in it’s short history.
Best of luck with that one Dave.
As an average, easy going Celtic fan. I have zero interest in hearing about this every 12 months as a stick to try and beat the board. Take the discussions to the board directly if you really feel it’s an issue that must be resolved.
I see a couple of articles this morning making mischief around Lawwell’s announcement that Celtic might not take any tickets for the 29th December Ibrox clash.
There are some breathtaking lies and mistruths in all of these articles which, when stripped down, are just an attack on Celtic.
We have one guy saying that there is more disorder at a pop concert for middle aged women than at the Glasgow derby.
Another refers to nothing but a few scuffles and vocal obscenities being traded by the fans.
I doubt if their views are shared by hospital casualty departments throughout the land.
The fact that visiting European fans to Ibrox have had their allocation cut because Police Scotland cannot guarantee the safety of fans has been totally ignored following stabbings and running battles in Glasgow City Centre.
I would suggest that the writers of these pieces are given tickets amongst the Celtic support for the game and equipped with Celtic scarves.
Let’s see if they still profess the same views as they run the gauntlet to and from Ibrox on the day.
I suspect that unfortunately they will have previous engagements and will have to decline the offer.
What a shame.
I suspect that they would decline the offer of ticket and scarf because they already have a ticket and scarf – but for the other ‘end’ !
Hi Phil,
Is there a reason as to why my first post has not been cleared yet?
I feel it provides balance and is valid and should be shared as an alternative view?
Thanks
Calum
It appears that posts sometimes take a little while to appear.
Have you considered the board might think that by doing nothing in pursuit of this issue, it is actually best for the long term health of Celtic? Sure, we got fucked over by a corrupt entity, we potentially lost revenues, but what happens if there is no club playing out of Ibrox at all? Suddenly any appeal Scottish football might have to the TV companies will plummet (if it’s even possible given it is hardly top drawer in the desirablity stakes in the first place). We lost the battle, but are winning the war. A club of any description playing out of Snake Mountain is best for the long term, or at least the medium term cos once the orcs realise they’re no more than just another provincial club they’ll give up too.
Find a way out of Scotland is what’s required, but continue to make the best of what’s available until then. Friends and enemies, etc.
I agree with your view on ‘interested parties’ feeling that an iBrokes club being in existence is better for the Scottish game… I’m sure they do ..
whether true or not – it is putting profit and personal gain before honesty and principles..
My opinion is that the game is and will be rotten as long as there does exist a club playing out of iBrokes.
The 5 year respite from them as they went on their ’ journey’ breathed clean fresh air into the lungs of the top flight .. but would have been better if they didn’t exist at all.
Arguing that the game is better with them there and therefore not pursuing justice is as good (or bad) as those who commited and condoned the wrongdoing in the first place.
‘A good man standing by and watching evil …’ expression comes to mind.
As for Celtic escaping to a northern or west European league (I don’t see England happening) …..
I’d love to see it and rid ourself of the corrupt setup in Scotland….
If ‘they’ think that the league would suffer without sevco – can you imagine the genuine impact that losing Celtic would cause? (See note on today’s report on football in Scottish economy)
The trouble is…. and just one reason for NEVER using the term ‘Old F!£m’… that too many of those in power see the iBrokes lot as some sort of package that has to go along with Celtic and I fear that it would be difficult to escape without ‘them’ tagging along.
All the more important also that they continue to finish 3rd or below each season so that they have no obvious right to claim a place in any ‘invitation league’’
(Today’s report on the economic benefit of Celtic to the Scottish economy is very interesting (strath uni /bbc) eg more income for the nation generated by Celtic last season than was brought in by the commonwealth games in 2014.)
Remember..
THERE IS NO OLD FIRM !!!
They either knew it was bent or not. somebody somewhere cry, “out damned spot”
As the principal shareholder, I can only assume that it is Dermot Desmond that’s putting the kybosh on this resolution. The very same DD that stated the “rangers” were a great Scottish institution (so is Carstairs State Mental Hospital!). I think it’s high-time Mr Desmond sold up, and moved on. To my knowledge, he has never attended a Celtic agm, nor is he likely to. The only difference between him and Dave King is that he has real wealth, and a set of golf clubs!! IMHO, Dermot Desmond couldn’t give a flying fuck about Celtic, even if he was given a pilot’s licence to do so!
If the powers-that-be at Celtic are not prepared to take action on this resolution, then they should step aside and let others take action!
DD doesn’t care about Celtic? Pish
Could some intelligent chap explain how this makes Des D all powerful?
http://www.celticfc.net/pages/corporate_sharecapital
I have not been back to see Celtic since this all kicked off (pardon the pun) I refuse to fund a corrupt football association namely the S.F.A and the S.P.F.L. I still watch and support Celtic through the medium of television. I believe Celtic are due a payout from the S.F.A. as they broke their own and U.E.F.A’s rules. Then let the S.F.A. recoup their losses from the cheating dead club.
The board are acting in the best interests of shareholders,business first football second at Celtic PLC.
Shareholders are not necessarily fans,I would be delighted with Celtic if was a shareholder.
David Bowiesque there Phil 🎼🎶‘It’s been five years🎶….’
The Requisitioners will have to do this under their own steam,CFC🍀 have no appetite for this contentious issue.
I wonder why? Maybe We All get to find out one day,but I’m not holding out for that.
As Sherlock Holmes often said,’the games a foot’ ball.
Thanks Phil.
I wonder who the person in the “position of authority” could be. [not a question].
Whilst I am behind resolution 12 team, today was not the day for that to be at the forefront. Recent campaigns in regards to police Scotland bullying, as well as safe standing and disabled access at the stadium, have shown that this can be achieved through dialogue and fan support, however not during the AGM. If the chap who Phil has spoken to had to (very senior member of res 12) make Peter Lawwell aware that he wasn’t happy during the AGM, the question must be asked to why Peter did not know this before hand, when it’s been on going for 5 years? Have the done enough to get the Board’s attention?
Today was a celebration amongst share holders about how well we are doing financially, as well as how well we are spending money. The main headline for me is that there will be plenty money to spend in January and they were not far off saying be prepared for some quality signings.
I’m over the moon, and I suggest the res 12 team continue the fight by arranging their own meetings with the Celtic Board. HH
What reasons would the board not want to purse it with UEFA?
1) Being seen to push the issue on a fellow (former) league club and the negative context that that brings?
2) Club has been pressured by SFA/SPFL not to pursue this?
3) Some other yet to be revealed reason that no one has thought of?
I’m genuinely puzzled by Celtic’s lack of impetus on this issue but fear there is a sound reason for not pushing it thus far.
Dermot Desmond is a man who gets things done. You don’t make the amount of money he has made in life without being ruthless and direct in that task, of bringing about the things you want done. More specifically, things you do want done don’t trundle on for five years with no obvious result.
From this we can safely conclude that Mr Desmond does not want this done. He – for whatever covert reasons of his own – does not wish to see a full investigation, one where the truth comes out. He does not wish to see fair play triumph. He does not wish to see the wrongs in our game put right. He does not wish to send the very necessary message that administrative wrongdoing in Scottish football is unacceptable, preferring instead the message that wrongdoers have carte blanche to proceed – those responsible now will not be brought to justice in the future, since those responsible in the recent past are not being pursued in the present.
In short he does not wish to see accountability and transparency in Scottish football. Why, we don’t know. His true motives remain hidden behind a mask.
But it seems increasingly clear that he has lost the respect of a significant number of Celtic shareholders and supporters, who would much rather he had the courage to come out and say why he doesn’t wish the investigation to proceed. They would respect him much more if he had the balls to stand up and make his case, clearly and openly. If he thinks it would be to the detriment of Celtic, then explain why. If he thinks it would be to his own detriment, then explain why. People might disagree, but at least they would no longer see him hiding behind a coward’s mask – saying the one thing, but doing the other.
“Sit down, you’re rockin’ the boat”
They do say curiosity killed the cat… ; )
Unfortunately, short term profit margins are the No.1 concern for this boardroom and nothing must stand in the way of that.
Until we have a major failing, loss of league title, nothing will change.
There is nothing short term in the Celtic Boards approach or thinking. The club has continued to grow on and off the park under the leadership of Desmond and Lawell. I for one am thankfull we have them. I consider both of them Celtic greats.
Unfortunately the radicals at Parkhead think they speak for us all and think they know better. Hail Hail the Celtic board!
If a board of directors does not act at all times in the best interest of the shareholders, and this can be demonstrated, what recourse to justice do shareholders have in such circumstances, and how would they pursue this?
I’m not sure as to how such a dereliction of duty, or even a perceived dereliction of duty, could be demonstrably proven other than by a shareholder vote. If shareholder feelings were strong enough only ONE man could prevent a requisitioner majority. Keep in mind we are NOT talking about the number of shareholders here, we ARE talking about shares held and the voting power those shares represent. If EVERY shareholder other than DD voted for a move on this HE could still SINGLE HANDEDLY BLOCK IT.
It cannot be demonstrated in this instance imo.
If the board believed or chose to believe that bringing this to eufa might result in a Euro ban for Scottish clubs they could argue they are acting in the best interests of shareholders could they not? Not sure it could be proven either way and it would have to be blatant to be actionable I would think, e.g. selling assets to a related party way below value etc.
What if they are acting in the interests of the major shareholders though?
Seems to me his might well be the case here.
Don’t rock the boat whilst the boat is navigating stormy seas if you like.