The board

I just dont really see what Desmond finds worthwhile about his involvement in Celtic or anyone else on the board really. Hes a similar level of stake in Shamrock Rovers. Not enough to be a majority, but sizeable enough to give him the most influence. But hes even less arsed with them than he is with us.

If you are wealthy and you want involvement in a football club its usually to take active involvement, support and help the club achieve. He obviously isnt arsed on any level with it all.

 

Whats actually a worry for me at the moment is that when you look at Celtic's potential there are likely some really nasty vulture funds, companies or even worse types out there who could see Celtic a very juicy target to take over and fleece for their own benefit. Thats a danger we obviously all want to avoid as well.

 

Was told something the night at training, my mate is a police liason at Parkheed and deals with them daily, he had to go to lawells house the day as the weasel gave a statement about being threatened.

Some stuff I would share but it's personal and would put the blokes job at risk as it would be obvious where it came from. (was what lawell said btw) about fans and BR and his duties within Parkheed.

 

when they did the share issue back in the day that is i guess where desmond bought his shares and then added to them when fergus sold up ?

i guess there is ordinary fans with shareholdings ? if all them ordinary small fan shareholders got together added their shares and created a group shareholding they would probably have a big voice and could demand answers why we go into a huge match with a weakened playing staff ? and also articulate and gesticulate that the failures as a result of the board not strengthening have cost the club money and damaged the reputation and harmed investment opportunities

it should be possible for shareholding fans to pool there shares, you would think to create a big fan shareholding with teeth

 

The last share issue they done was in 2005 and that essentially tightened Desmond’s grip on the club because he bought more voting shares, I believe.

 

And people stick up for the board because we’re the best in Scotland. Pathetic.

 

People shouldn't be threatening Lawwell, though. When you see his largely symbolic salary, there's no way he has a major say in stuff anymore. Whether he was the issue in the past, I don't know; but he's not the issue now.

 

Difficult to truly know, but he'll definitely still have some influence, no doubt.

 

Someone posted board salaries on here recently and I was shocked at Lawwell's. There will be plenty on this forum with a larger salary than Lawwell has now. It's an appropriate salary for a man in the symbolic role he's supposed to have; but if he's still pulling strings behind the scenes, then it's an absolute embarrassment of a salary.

 

Don't think he is in it for the money.. intentions are probably good.. we just need new thinking and he and others need cleared out.

 

They really did get lucky with the mismanagement and death of the former rangers.

Time’s have changed but the current custodians of our club haven’t and they obviously won’t.

What’s the last meaningful thing they’ve done? BR’s first appointment? I think they got heavy * lucky with Postecoglou as well.

 

I don't disagree, I just think that if he still had major influence, he'd use that influence to get himself a more befitting salary. And I don't mean out of a desire for money but out of self-respect.

For an elderly gentleman in a mostly symbolic role he is doing for the good of the club (of course, I mean the good as he sees it and YMMV), his salary is entirely appropriate and respectable and I think that is what is the actual case; but if I'm wrong and he is still a major force in how the club is run, then that salary is an embarrassment. Genuinely humiliating. I honestly can't see it.

 

They absolutely should, for he is a vengeful schemer * off at Rodgers because he got Desmond to push for the firing of that nepo baby Mark Lawwell.

 

He already made his millions from us when he was CEO. Another who was getting rewarded as we failed time and time again in Europe.

 

The exact attitude today except its we have money but still want you to give us more to stockpile.

 

Code:

Celtic plc Board – Tenure, Background & Governance
Note: "Over 9 years?" refers to the UK Corporate Governance Code independence test, 
which suggests non-executive directors may lose independence if serving beyond 9 years.

Name              | Role                        | Joined   | Time    | Over 9 years? | Background / Contributions
----------------- | --------------------------- | -------- | ------- | ------------- | ----------------------------------------------------
Peter Lawwell     | Non-Exec Chairman (ex-CEO)  | 1990/03  | ~23.5y  | Yes – well over | Long-serving exec/Chairman; built financial & commercial model.
Michael Nicholson | Chief Executive Officer     | 2013     | ~12y    | Not applicable | Lawyer; led contracts, regulation, fan engagement.
Chris McKay       | CFO / Exec Director         | 2016     | ~9.5y   | Not applicable | Chartered Accountant; CFO since 2021, stabilised finances.
Tom Allison       | Senior Independent Director | 2001     | ~23.5y  | Yes – well over | Governance expert; ex-Peel Ports/Peel Holdings leader.
Sharon Brown      | Independent NED             | 2016     | ~8.5y   | No – under 9   | Retail/finance director; strong audit/governance input.
Dermot Desmond    | Independent NED             | 1995     | ~30y    | Yes – long over | Majority shareholder; major strategic influence.
Brian D. Wilson   | Independent NED             | 2005     | ~20y    | Yes – well over | Former MP; provides political & public affairs expertise.
Brian Rose        | Independent NED             | 2023     | ~2y     | No – very new  | Apple/Universal exec; brings digital & media expertise.

Abused ChatGPT for this, gotta love a bit of AI sometimes. But interesting to see who is all on the board, how long for and a brief background. Most come from financial and commercial background and absolutely * none of them come from a football or even wider sports background.

Funny thing, Dom McKay did have a background - about 13 years - in sports and boardrooms, funny thing is, we operated like a * sports club for that brief moment.