Who exactly.needs to go and when?

Already had our fans protesting against him so maybe no the guy to get behind

 

I think Desmond accepts Lawwell's direction, as they've been successful financially and trophy wise. If a new group came in with a convincing argument about how Lawwell's way was * and there is a way to be more ambitious without much extra risk.

We're never going to get rid of Desmond, he's not selling up and I don't think his family will if he sells up.

 

Anyone who's been a director for 10 years or more. As soon as possible.

 

I am with you there. Dermot Desmond is front and center who we must get rid of. Now obviously the issue with that is its a cooperate level battle we face. But facts are upto 20% of Celtic shares are dormant. If we can start a campaign at corporate level that gathers as many of them as possible and start to put pressure on the other shareholders for change and to ultimately force Desmond to sell up it can be done IMHO especially alongside fan protests and coordinated boycotts. We pile as much pressure on as possible outside the corporate level but ultimately we need to have a corporate level campaign for the success we need.
I understand getting Desmond to sell up seems near impossible. I hear that and understand those arguments but for me this is Celtic so I don't care if its that hard. If the club I have supported and that has been a core part of my whole life is to be saved we must begin the fight now to get Desmond out regardless of how hard it is to do.

 

Agreed, I think we would be out of the frying pan into the fire with Dennis O'Brien from what I know of him.

 

For me Dermot Desmond ultimately is responsible for the shambles Celtic has become in terms of how we are run and that shambles has now reached a level where it has not only once again sabotaged deliberately our ability to be a respectable force at a Champions League level it now has put our domestic success at serious risk. His board cronies Michael Nicholson, Peter Lawwell and Chris McKay all must go also. For me this past weekends cowardly attack on Brendan Rodgers and the so called club statement sent out Saturday night was the complete end. Any possibility where I could be convinced that reform could come from within and that the club could change died with those 2 events.

I said it before if Desmond, Nicholson and Lawwell are the Celtic fans they have all claimed to be they would resign as a result of where we are under their control. They of course will not do so and I never expected they would. They have zero interest in doing whats best for Celtic. As such we need IMHO a two tired strategy. At corporate level we need to find a vehicle to go after the dormant shares and build up a base from where we can go after other shareholders and put them under pressure to get rid of Desmond. It would be great if alongside this we could find a major investor or 2 to help back this effort. Especially a group that could outline a clear future vision and plans and strategy of how to achieve that if they were able to buy Celtic shares and invest in the club. Alongside this we need to keep the pressure on the board and Desmond as fans by as many boycotts and protests as possible. It is not going to be easy and it won't happen over night unfortunately but if we all want a Celtic for the long term that is progressive and looking to improve and get better on and off the field we need this major level of change and renewal at Celtic.

 

Removing Desmond from the board will make little difference. It's a token move. He is one of 7 votes in the board. If he can control Celtic to the level he does with 1 vote then he can do it with zero vote. The only way things change in that regard is if we get a significant change in shareholding or current shareholders grow a pair and start questioning this board and it's direction.

The first 2 to go should be Lawwell and Nicholson. Nicholson holds the most important position at the club and is so out of his depth it is unbelievable. Lawwell is the architect of our failed strategy. The 12 months or so he was gone from Celtics boardroom was the most competent we've been ran. I think he is the most influential person in that boardroom and has to go.

 

The board are who they are because of Desmond's influence on the club, which is facilitated by his 34% share in it and the inactivity of other shareholders. If you remove a board member, then the shareholders (i.e., DD) will appoint their replacement. If DD is happy with how Lawwell and co run it, then the replacement will presumably sing from the same hymn sheet.

There's no sense in lopping off the hydra's heads. There must be a change in ownership. Whether that's DD selling up or - alternatively - a coalition between other shareholders (Train, Trainer, etc.), that's what needs to happen to effect lasting change.

 

But DD only owns 34%. All our shareholders are completely aligned on how we are ran, if there was dissent then they would not be returned by landslide.

Apathy is the biggest issue among our shareholding. They don't care, as long as we are profitable and solvent I think they are happy with this board and Celtic will continue to be operated in Lawwell vision.

I don't agree with pinning it 100% on Desmond when none of other shareholders do anything to go against. We don't have a majority shareholding so Desmond can't possibly act without alignment from other shareholders.

 

We better make * sure Gerry McCulloch goes aswell.

 

34% equates to an effective majority because of the level of inactivity of other shareholders. There's something like 20% of shares that are just unaccounted for - fan-owned shares sitting idle and not represented in meetings. Other shareholders are often also checked out and absent, so he basically has a majority just on his own.

The bottom line is that DD to all intents and purposes runs the club as if he owns it. It's not about blaming him for the running of the club, it's just literally the case that he has control over who sits on the board and what policies they pursue. The board are DD's guys - if they resign, their replacements will also be DD's guys. That's just the reality of the situation whilst he maintains an effective majority.

An alternative to getting rid of DD would be to unite other major shareholders but they are apparently as apathetic if not more so than DD. The main other holders are Train and Trainer, who account for something like 20% of shares. The rest own significantly fewer shares, so you're talking about needing quite a lot of people to even match DD's voting share. Far easier just to convince one man to sell up than to convince possibly dozens of unknown people to unite behind a currently leaderless cabal.

 

Didn't get them anywhere tho did it?

Decent gesture but very easily ignored by the Glazers

 

Couldn't even watch the Iheanacho interview bcoz I can't listen to that * and his stupid questions.

 

If we make enough noise and create enough news I wonder if powerful people will take notice.

There's so many foreign owners now in football, people with serious money might see this current situation as the ideal time to make a move.

The idea scenario would be a wealthy Celtic supporting businessman comes forward, buys up enough shares to surpass Desmond with the view of gaining control before eventually handing over his percentage to the Celtic Trust

 

99 percent of them

 

I need to go to my bed, right now.

 

But it still doesn't explain why there has never been a hint of dissent between any of our shareholders. Ousting Desmond is an impossible task unless it's his own decision to sell. What we need is shareholders who will oppose him and the board and right now they don't exist, be it Trainer, Keane or whoever else.

There is complete alignment between all of our major shareholders on how the club is run. Keane and Trainer in particular have not said boo.