The Celtic Trust has updated members on a meeting held with the club on Wednedsday which appears to be an exercise in box ticking and deflection.
Despite the attendance of Peter Lawwell and Company Secretary Michael Nicholson it seems that all suggestions from The Trust will have to go back to the Board of Directors for further discussion.
There doesn’t appear to be any sign from those inside the club that there are major problems despite no areas functioning close to full capacity which was true even before Lockdown.
During his address to supporters earlier this week chairman Ian Bankier hinted towards some vague changes to European football while claiming that Celtic were regarded as a modern and progressive club across Europe.
While the fans do provide a unique atmosphere inside the stadium it is quite clear that in terms of results, player development, scouting, youth development the club isn’t at the races.
The modern and progressive club has managed to lose £100m plus in Champions League money due to defeats against unseeded clubs such as Ferencvaros, Cluj, AEK Athens, Malmo and Maribor, in their most recent European campaign Sparta Prague made bold punters using their bet365 bonus code uk very happy as they handed out 4-1 defeats home and away.
At youth level before the age of 18 players are leaving to further their development at Bayern Munich, Liverpool and Manchester City. In June Karamoko Dembele, Armstrong Oko-Flex and Conor Hazard are about to run out of contract. Over the last decade only Callum McGregor and Kieran Tierney have come through the ranks to start more than 30 matches.
As posted by one fan on the Kerrydale Street website:
Members’ Update – Trust meeting with Celtic PLC
The Chair and I met with Celtic on Wednesday. Here is a summary of the meeting.
Report back to members of the meeting with Celtic PLC on Wednesday 17 February 2021.
In attendance: David Low, Jeanette Findlay (Celtic Trust); Peter Lawwell, Michael Nicholson, Chris McKay, John Paul Taylor (Celtic PLC)
1. The Trust reps presented the two resolutions which had been passed by the Celtic Trust members on 26 January 2021. It was noted by us that, since that meeting, the retirement of Peter Lawwell had been announced and there had been a Statement from the Chairman which did not provide any outcomes of the review which the Club had said they were carrying out.
In response to the first resolution which called for a root & branch review the Club said the following:
There are opportunities for the club to have a look at how we operate post-Peter Lawwell; consideration has been given to this for the last few years; they have taken into account what has happened over the last few months and noted, in particular that when things are not going well there is heightened scrutiny in terms of recruitment.
They indicated that they have some ideas and recommendations on how the club goes forward but as a club they are optimistic about the fundamentals of our club and, in their view, Celtic are a modern, progressive football club regarded as such by football in Scotland and Europe.
When asked for a timeline for the outcome of these deliberations they indicated that they were working towards expected changes to European competition focussing on making sure Celtic is relevant and has access and participates in whatever comes along. These changes are expected to happen in 2024 – they said they are limited in the information they can share but it does involve radical change and that this will become obvious in the next week or two – UEFA will be doing presentations around Europe.
They said that they cannot give us a timeline in relation to the internal review of operations which is currently being carried out but, when asked about the scope of the matters under consideration they indicated that it was football operations and how the club operates in terms of the executives. Trust reps pressed the Celtic reps on the question of whether the manager was likely to be in place next season. We were told that they would not answer that. We were told it will be a Board decision regarding any changes in personnel
They are not currently looking at the role of the NEDS (as requested by our members) but they agreed to take our serious concerns on board re the NEDs back to the Board and respond to us at our next meeting.
The Trust reps then raised the content of the second resolution which related to the shares held personally by Peter Lawwell. The reps indicated that we believe that executive salaries at Celtic PLC are excessive for the business they are in and that this call was for Peter Lawwell to give some of that back to the fans in the form of his shares which were part of his remuneration package. We were informed that there have been no shares allocated to PL as part of his salary package and that the only shares he owns are ones that he purchased personally and that he intends to retain them within his family.
2. In this item, the Trust reps asked the Celtic reps to provide some clarity on what the position will be re season tickets for this year and next year? We were told that:
Last year is clear – people can still get their refunds.
This year it is not clear and that they are currently working out how to approach this.
They said that, in their view, there is no right for refunds for this year.
They said that they could not give any clarity on what added value will look like because, at this point, they just don’t know.
The Trust reps said that in their estimation there is a potential £15-20 million value gap (cost of average ST less the value per head of the live stream times 50,000)
The Trust reps made it clear that, in our view, there is a moral and legal obligation to offer Celtic supporters a refund. However, we recognised the impact this would have on the team going forward and proposed an innovative and clever solution in the form of offering ST holders an option of shares in lieu of cash. This is in line with the resolutions passed at our January meeting and is possible given the resolutions on pre-emption rights passed in the December 2020 PLC AGM.
The Celtic reps agreed to take this proposal back to the Board for consideration and come back to us. CT reps stressed that there is a time constraint on this given the fast-approaching renewal date (although it is likely the renewal campaign will be later this year dues to Covid19 related uncertainty).
3. CT reps, under this item, asked for comments regarding the apparent differential treatment of Celtic and other clubs in relation to Protocol breaches. There was a discussion of this but no conclusion was reached and no action point agreed or communicated to us.
4. CT reps, under this item, asked for comments regarding the club view on various controversial refereeing decisions within the Premier League. Again, a discussion was held and no firm action point was agreed or communicated to us.
5. We noted the launch on the Celtic website of the comprehensive set of FAQs for shareholders who have become disconnected from their shares. This was a Trust initiative, negotiated with the Club and we are very pleased that it is now there to help shareholders.
6. The Celtic reps initiated a discussion on matters relating to the Resolution 12 subject matter and stated that there has been and is ongoing discussion on regulatory issues and alleged shortcomings but that the rules and regulations of the relevant regulatory bodies of which Celtic is member demands a high level of member confidentiality and does not permit Celtic to relay this information in an uncontrolled manner.
ENDS
Without tackling the SFA over implementing Financial Fair Play, other UEFA regulations and the horrendous performance of referees, Dom McKay is walking into an ambush with both hands tied behind his back.