Celtic AGM Friday November 20th 2015 at 10.30am

Does he accept his job back is the real question or have we lost him?:smiley-laughing002:

 

Still acting like a sanctimonious * I see!
That infantile behaviour of yours is becoming a compulsion when your '*' Lawwell gets critically analysed, im being serious here you should be worried if your adulation of Lawwell has became parabiosis - Its becoming more evident that the greater ad hominems you present I tend to believe its your default setting. Throw out criticism of Lawwell - you get hurt and emotional, its evident you just can't handle it.

Your assertions are egregious, ego nourishing and inaccurate, which isn't a surprise.

1. He doesn't invest into the team, he redistributes operating capital where its in a order to keep coequal salaries which consequently has seen our quality deplete over time as he takes no alternatives to counteract the growing Footballing inflation.

(i) The coequal salaries - He has the ability to proportionally give a greater salary to proven quality, £40k for example. To excute this process he must sell players or release to that available capacity or discharge earners to alleviate the squad and keep it infinitesimal, 25 players max. Its completely incorrect to assume we cant when majority of our players are on the same coequal wages. I cant comprehend the element in our support when they dismiss the law of physics when you tell them if we sold 4x10k earners we would have the ability to bring in a £40k player, theres some that go to the lengths to state it would threaten or even jeopardise our Clubs finances when we (if carried out robustly) have that operating capital available. I cannot BELIEVE this thought process of creating available capital to be used for a £40k is paradoxical, its no coincidence its from the same people who bring up the necessity to empathise the Huns financial mismanagement which has got * all to do with us. Its ridiculous and I am sick of it, if our supporters want there intelligence insulted then they can carry that out. Lawwell got questioned on this (30th August 2014 if you want to Google since you can't link on here) and he stated.

"We could buy a £4m, £5m or £6m player who is value. But the consequences of that are he would want the £50k to £70k a week he would get elsewhere. That screws up your wage structure when you already have great players here who would make a case"

I find that illogical because I have not read, seen or heard a sudden request for the highest wage possible from a squad of players who are on a higher wage, that to me is an excuse. Funnily enough there is no restrictions to his salary regardless of his performances, but no doubt knowing you, you're the first to justify his overcompensating salary.

(ii) Counteracting the growing Footballing inflation - Ironically Lawwell stated on the 8th March this year that if we ditched the current TV deal and played majority of our games at 3pm we would raise more capital.

"At 3pm on a Saturday, we’d get more people coming to our games and that money would far outweigh what we get from the TV deal"

Hmmmm, and here I was being scorned at when I raised the reality of a new alternative. Let me get this straight, the contract we accepted (yes, lets not be under any illusions Lawwell isn't on the SFA Board) governs scheduled dates and times of our games, not only does Lawwell recognise we can get more if we left it and went independent to dictate our matchday times he takes no exertion to do it. But then again..... Present dissent to acquire greater means of revenue you get subjected to ad hominem nonsense.

So, critically analysing over these two points Lawwell has refused ambition, and takes no action to counter the TV deal which we ACCEPT would be worse with, and here was someone in another thread calling him "a miracle man"

Furthermore.

2. Nominated to be CEO of the Year - because he runs the Club in a sequence to one dimensionally keep us in the Green to hand out dividends? He steady flows income into investors pockets who have no indication to put effort into the Club (which they don't need to of course I have been persistant we need to reform for fan ownership as the corporate structure is not working) what a great reminder that is when you are a Celtic supporter and do not agree with the corporate consequence of rich groups or individuals who have bought shares and are at the end of recieving dividends. It would be greatly appreciated if we could get a cash injection into our club - No wonder Lawwell is a Hero, taking £1m (and rising) a year regardless of performances and quality while consistantly paying dividends to shareholders! No need for a performanced based salary, Lawwell is the 'miracle man' you see. Also, no need for the living wage as Lawwell's bonuses is more important. It would be ridiculous to assume our dedication is being taking for granted as our season ticket revenue is still one of the highest in Europe which is our predominant source of operating capital while they refuse to take the initiative to pay that Living Wage. Can't wait for you to defend that and all the other Lawwellists on here

(i) Also, before someone even tries to say Dermot Desmond takes no money from us is inaccurate. He doesn't take dividends, he gets his money through the activity of our support placing bets inside Celtic Park. He is the owner of Betdaq ltd which is the parent company of Ladbrokes, that indirect revenue raised from our support ends up in his pocket. No wonder he doesn't take dividends, he also has indirect control of the sponsorship of the SPFL. Its a great reminder of how susceptible our support is by believing people who do not inhabit our day to day reality. Golf, anyone?

3. That is some assertion you're stating he would get a higher pay at another Club. You're insinuating the Arsenal offer in 2008? He got offered £1m it is reported, he gets that now. Lawwell recieves a Barclays Premier League salary - you can find this from the Guardian that reported it on the 28th July this year. Lawwell claims to be a Celtic supporter (which I think he is because its reported that he has family that are Season Tickets at Celtic Park) why would be leave to a Club that offers him a relatively similar salary than he does right now at Celtic? Isn't it ironic hes reluctant to go in for BPL players yet gets a BPL salary. I'm obviously deluded to acknowledge the hypocrisy

4. Providing the manager with enough of a financial backing to qualify for the UCL each year? That is nothing more than pathetic revisionism.

Since his appiontment to this current season he has given Strachan, Lennon and Deila £8-10m at there disposal on player amortisation, if you don't believe me read up the AGM accounts. As a result over 13 seasons we have seen us participating in the Champions League 6 times, 05, 07, 08, 12, and 14 (46.15% success rate). Finishing Top 3 in the Groups 3 times (50%) (Europe after Christmas is our unambiguous objective, Lawwell stated himself when we got the last 16 against Juve, I provided the link via DM to another member on this forum).

If we take the objective of European Football after Christmas, since we have been subjected to Europa League Football it stands since his appiontment at, UEFA Cup Quarters 04, Last 16 07', Last 16 08', Last 16 12', Last years Last 32 of the Europa League making it 5 appearances out of 13 seasons in Europe (38.46% success rate).

Its no coincidence after Lennon left he publicly stated that investment was a component on why he left (STV, 31st July 2014). He also went on to say that in the qualifers he felt isolated under the transfer policy as the lack of replacement made it difficult. But, we will deliberately refuse to acknowledge this just to save the embarrassment.

So...... Since Lawwell's success rate on nearly every juncture is on and below 50% lets engage in denial like a good Lawwellite and assume that its been enough financial backing during these campaigns. Lets just refuse the reality of embarrassment of Braga, Artmedia, Tel-Aviv, Utrecht, Legia, Maribor, Sion, Malmo and Molde. One exception and that is Arsenal. The rest is a embarrassment to our European history and testament to how inconsistant the player recruitment is at our Club (Which Lawwell appoints; Scouts, Dudu Duhan and his son Mark Lawwell which you'll sidestep and use an excuse for) and the adequate quality in the squad that is becoming regular over the years. Bangura, Pukki, Ciftci, Balde, Boerrigter, Daryl Murphy, Olivier Kapo, Freddie Ljungberg, McGeouch, Ambrose, Blackman, Rabiu Ibrahim, Blackett, Paweł Brożek, Miku, Rami Gershon, Mouyokolo, Friðjónsson, Berget, Tonev and Šćepović. Notice that main area that is constantly a problem is the Strikers position? Thats because it requires significant capital, still lets just deny that reality and overcompensate Griffiths in the process and choose to refuse the lack of ambition to replace Hooper.

I fully expect a non-constructive, sarcastic, infantile, ad hominem reply because facts and reality on Lawwell does not seem to admit into your consciousness while you have some sort of defence mechanism where you're not willing to accept that your illusion of Lawwell of being some sort of * like figure while using his concept of authority is a fallacy when he is critically analysed.

 

Like most other people on this forum, I'm far from qualified to analyse the ins & outs of a multimillion pound company, but here's my view for what it's worth.

Now, I know we've had people posting here claiming that the club is a plc and so on, and that's correct of course, but even so, what would happen if a company were to continually reduce the quality of the people responsible for the product they put in front of their customers?

If Celtic are being run purely as a business then surely the people who buy the season tickets are the customers? If the customers recognise that the product being sold is slowly decreasing in quality then they'll stop buying it, won't they?

If Apple, for example, decided that in order to "play it safe" financially that they were going to stop hiring the very best developers and designers and rather hire guys straight out of college who may or may not turn out to be skilled enough to do the job, what do you think would happen?

Sure, they'd save a bit on wages and would probably never find themselves in financial trouble due to the fact that they can, to a certain extent, always rely on their name value and history, but they wouldn't progress either.

I think we're going down the same road.

I also think that we'll see a slight change when the Huns come back up, as along with them will come more interest in sponsorship and a better TV deal due to the much-vaunted "old firm" games that will be available again.

 

Just signed it and it shows it's at 9848 signatures.

 

I don't think that is comparable in the slightest. It would be easy enough to stop buying an Apple phone, as there are many other options available. It would maybe be an inconvenience if you like the Apple phone, but you wouldn't lose any sleep over it. It's not as simple to turn your back on the team you love and have supported all your life though is it? Even if the product on the park is getting worse each season. I think there is slightly more of a connection with Celtic, than a mobile phone etc.

Apologies if I've picked you up wrong on this.

 

You're looking at my point all wrong. What I'm saying to those who claim Celtic are being run purely as a business is that even companies who are run in such a way have to invest and speculate in order to grow and flourish.

We aren't doing that.

 

Thank * somebody said this, I was trying to think of a way to phrase it.

This, * this.

Ask yourself what is the point of our business?

 

I picked you up wrong. I agree with this completely.

 

And before anyone jumps in with the Rangers point, I'm obviously not meaning we go down that road.

There's a difference between looking to be pro-active in business and just being negligent, which is what Rangers were.

 

It's weird being on the receiving end of one of Roy's Keane's oh so witty put downs.

Seems it doesn't matter who you are - even if you agreed with him in the past - the minute you question his lord and master you become an illiterate buffoon.

Ah well.

 

* sake Sean - you said yourself a few days ago that you don't feel the need personally to fly with the crows and have the same position as certain posters all the time. Totally agree with that stance btw.

You've always been a Lawwell Botherer and I....not so much. No need to take it so personally ffs.

The illiterate comment was clearly aimed at our derivatives / diamentiaonally / social collectivism / false dichotomy friend.

All comments (mostly) tongue in cheek mate

 

RoysKeane, how far would it take for the wuality to deteriote on the pitch, without the business model changing at all, would it take for you to think Lawwell needs to shape up and do something?

We've went from a proper Champions League team to a pathetic Europa League team in 3 years. That's alarming for me, where would you draw the line?

 

Sorry to jump in there, but I honestly believe that we will only see an increase in investment in the playing side of things once the Huns are back in the top flight.

At that point we'll see an increase in sponsorship, television money and attendances as well. I really do suspect that our board have simply been treading water waiting on our so-called main competition returning.

 

Personally I don't think the investment is the problem, we invest a lot, we just need to focus that investment. A smaller squad, with larger wages available, transfer fees spent on one player instead of 2/3 average players.

It's risky, because you're investing more into the one possible point of failure but I believe lowering the overall quality but having quantity isn't working.

 

I guess time will tell, but I definitely think it'll be interesting to see what the club do if & when the Huns are promoted.

 

I think that depends on what the Huns do and I find that very, very sad and disheartening.

Lack of ambition for me.

 

Absolutely. I had hoped that by the time they got promotion to the top table that we'd have set in place a system that would have seen us a million miles away from both them and the rest of Scottish football.

Some could say that we're in much worse shape than we were when Rangers were demoted.

 

Agree 100%. We had an opportunity to wrap up Scottish football for decades to come over the last couple of years.

We * it, we should be worrying about rubbing shoulders with the elite in the CL, not about Scottish Football.

 

So, do you think we have maybe been holding off a bit as to not widen the gap so much between us and them?

I can't even see them challenging us anyway, they are so woeful. They are millions in debt again - an absolute shambles.