David Strelec

No really, he'll be playing against us soon..

 

Put them out then sign him on the cheap

 

But can he play?

 

Maybe Kairat will do them and we get a cut price 2.99m deal and DD wont need to come of the golf course to sign it off

 

Why would DD have to sign it off he is just a majority shareholders who owns less than a third of the club the fans own most of it . So the decision should be ours.

 

Aye is it not the case with appointing a new manager he always gets last say? * just saying it from a WhatsApp rumour about transfers I think

 

I don't see how DD has as much power as people say he does. If we all stopped buying merchandise and stopped buying season books his money would be gone. They board needs to realise who has the power and it's the fans.

 

We have no power, frustratingly.. for every season ticket holder who would give up their ticket, there's 10 waiting to take their place..

The fans own roughly 17%, DD owns double that just by himself.. he absolutely controls Celtic..

 

Might as well just lock every single one of these transfer threads. Endless disappointment.

 

The bottom bit is false. He can't control Celtic without a majority shareholding. He is without doubt the most influential shareholder but he still needs about 16% of the shareholding fully aligned with his outlook to control us. The issue I see with Desmond is not that he micromanages Celtic or controls every decision, it's the opposite, he is a passive investor who doesn't really care - all the signs point to that rather than the narrative that Celtic is under his complete control which seems to have gained legs without anything substantive.

The board control Celtic and the most dominant figure in that boardroom without doubt is Peter Lawwell.

 

Which would be good, except then then have a trip to the borders of China, before a sevco game.

 

He can't though. He's not a majority shareholder. From reading threads and discussions here I think we need to clarify a number of items.

Shareholders have little to no say on the running of the club, unless they sit on the board. What shareholders have a say on is the composition of the board who are voted in and can be removed by the shareholders. As Desmond only owns 34.7% he cannot appoint or remove a board full of his lackeys by his own shares alone.

The board are responsible for all the major strategic and long term decisions on the club, there are sub boards set up on the board usually for appointments, remuneration and audit. These sub committees provide oversight and make recommendations but they any decision made still has to be voted on by the board. Each board member carries one vote, all votes are equal as such though the chairman can cast the deciding vote in some cases. It's the board who can appoint or remove our CEO, CFO etc.

Sitting under the board is you executive team who are salaried employees appointed by the board to implement and carry out a strategic management of the clubs day to day duties.

In order for Desmond to control the board, he needs a majority shareholding, if he doesn't have a majority shareholding (he does) then he needs like minded investors to support him. So it's completely false to suggest or labour under the misapprehension Desmond control the club.

The way we are run to me is not down to Desmond's desire or control for us to be ran this way, it's down to complete apathy on his part - he lets the board at it and we all know Peter Lawwell is the dominant figure on that board. Desmond's investment is stagnant, it hasn't really moved for better or worse in 10 years, he's never in Glasgow, he doesn't even attend board meetings himself. The whole sum of his contribution is using his private jet and making a few phone calls when we are trying to appoint a new manager.

When people say Desmond has to sign off on transfers, it shows a lack of understanding on how this work. The purchase of major assets is something that will most likely in any organisation require board approval, it doesn't require shareholder approval. Desmond isn't even a majority shareholder, he's not even the chairman. He sits on the board along with 6 other Directors, his vote carries the same authority as any of the rest of them. This really needs to be understood.

 

Your naive if you think DD doesn't run Celtic the way he wants..

Lawwell is only in post as DDs behest..

He said this..

Celtic's principal shareholder Dermot Desmond said: "I am delighted that Peter has agreed to take up the position of chairman. He is the outstanding candidate.'

Using the word candidate demonstrates how he was involved in the appointment..

Feel like we're going around in circles a bit..but..

He absolutely puts in place, who he wants to steer the club.. he makes himself available for Rodgers too, who mentions him regularly.

You need to read up or listen to how the board is made up.. Desmond, Lindsell Ltd & Trainer combine to form a 53% bloc.. effectively a majority shareholding. Then you have PL who as an individual actually owns more shares than thd Celtic Trust.. and PL is DDs man..

He runs Celtic.. maybe not day to day but be in no doubt he's in charge

 

No. Rather than being naive, I actually work in this sphere, I actually know the dynamics and legal requirement with regards to boardrooms and how listed companies work. Control means having authority that cannot be diminished - that is simply impossible for Desmond with a 34% shareholding. The closest thing to what you're saying is the that he is wholly reliant on shareholder alignment.

You mentioned a quote on Desmond appointing Lawwell. Desmond is a shareholder with 34% stake of the club, Desmond is a director on the board with 1 of 7 voting rights on any decision that goes to vote. Neither of these are enough to push through a decision - he needs the backing of either another block of shareholdings or 3 other board members to push through a decision.

Desmond cannot put in place the people he wants to steer the club without the backing of other shareholders. An absolute cast iron fact.

 

You're missing the point...

I'll say it again, his shareholder bloc includes a shareholding that equates to about 54% .. and that is the well publicised, a football club isn't like any other business.

He has put PL in place, he is DDs man.. and PL controls Nicholson, his former apprentice..

Nothing major happens at Celtic without DDs say so..

 

The only thing more depressing about this window so far is seeing threads bumped and checking them to see it's just an argument over a page and a half. Especially given it's the same guy in nearly all the arguments.

 

Of course he's involved in the process, he sits on the board. He still relies on support from the majority of the board to put through his decisions. He would still rely on support from a significant proportion of other shareholdings to appoint or remove anyone from the board. It's not a dictatorship.

He didn't put PL in place, that's a misunderstanding from you. It's the board and shareholders who put them and DD does not have control over either, he relies on 3 other board members supporting him and around 16% of other shareholdings supporting him for any decisions made.

Major things can and should happen at Celtic without DD's say so. To state something opposite to this is ignoring all the memorandums that govern these boards and believe me this cannot happen.

 

Are you referring to me? It takes two people to argue. I'm not arguing with myself here. I happen to have a working knowledge on this subject, it's why in all my post I attempts to explain and educate people on these matters in a civil manner, without abuse. If the people who are completely wrong on this and with all due respect, don't really have the knowledge or expertise to talk on these matters could accept correction - then there would be no argument - instead its tending to turn into a big long exchange when they are contradicting all the compliance and procedures and basic fundamentals that govern boardrooms.

The narrative being put out there that Desmond controls all decisions in relation to Celtic is a steaming pile of horseshit. I've explained why and people keep ignoring the reasons why that is the case.

 

We're going around in circles here...

He has control of the boardroom and subsequently control of the Club..

His allies on the board including the Chairman ensure that isn't likely to change, unless he wants that. Or new investors come into the club, then you may find people like Trainer could become potential 'kingmaker'..

There are numerous examples of DD being directly involved in our business.. getting Rodgers in the first time is a prime example.

 

You may have knowledge on how a PLC works or boardroom.. but are utterly clueless on how things work in reality at Celtic...