[Official TC Thread] General Fan Action & Sack the Board Thread - TalkCeltic Signed letter

Sack the Fryer

 

Don't be doing that mate, we're all here for you would be understanderable tho

 

From Aaron over at CeltsAreHere on Substack




I attended Wednesday’s meeting organised by North Curve Celtic, chaired by Eddie Toner of the Celtic Trust, with Paul John Dykes of ACSOM assisting. The room was packed, with many more tuning in via Zoom, bringing together fan groups, fan media, and CSC representatives.

The Green Brigade and the Bhoys were present, and from the outset, it was clear this wasn’t just another talking shop — it was about deciding how far supporters are willing to go to force change at Celtic.





The headline number set the tone: 38,832 supporters responded to the Fan Action survey in just three days. The results were staggering, with “yes” responses in the high 90s across the board:

• Vote of no confidence in the Celtic Board? 99.4% yes.
  
  
• Remove Michael Nicholson (CEO)? 99.3% yes.
  
  
• Remove Chris McKay (CFO)? 98.5% yes.
  
  
• Remove Peter Lawwell (Chairman)? 98.8% yes.
  
  
• Implement a Fan Advisory Board? 99.5% yes.
  
  
• Support a democratic Celtic fan body? 99.5% yes.
  

When it came to potential actions, fans showed a huge appetite for collective protest:

• Withdrawing from the Home Ticket Cup Scheme (93.9%).
  
  
• Boycotting Europa League fixtures (92.2%).
  
  
• Boycotting Celtic products (97.5%).
  
  
• Silent protests (95.5%).
  
  
• Late entry (93.7%).
  
  
• Early exit (91.4%).
  

Fans want to act, and they want to act now.

That said, the unity shown in the survey didn’t fully translate into the room. While there was agreement that something must be done, the methods sparked debate. Roughly 85% (by a show of hands) backed the idea of a delayed entry protest at Sunday’s match against Kilmarnock — arriving after 10 minutes, then giving full backing to the team for the remaining 80. Others pushed back, arguing Celtic should be supported for the full 90 minutes. That view was passionately voiced by one supporter but gained little traction, aside from a broad consensus that boycotting merchandise was a baseline everyone could agree on.






The discussion was healthy, though far from conclusive. At times, it felt like everyone wanted their say, but little was resolved. The conversation shifted from Sunday’s plans to discuss corporate law and even potential AGM protests outside Celtic Park. This was only the first meeting, and it showed. The organisation wasn’t watertight, but the will to act was undeniable.

The HCTS and the issue of attending Europa League games remain contentious. The survey numbers don’t fully reflect the 10 CSC buses polled by organisers: 7 had a majority against leaving the scheme, 2 were mixed or unsure, and 1 favoured leaving. However, two attendees said their buses were in favour. One noted their bus had dropped from “about” 60 HCTS members to just “about” four.

One point came through strongly: while Dermot Desmond may seem untouchable for now, the focus is firmly on Lawwell, Nicholson, and McKay. They are seen as the immediate problem. Non-executive directors who have sat on the board for up to 17 years were also mentioned from the floor as part of the long-term issue, but the priority in the room was clear — shift the three names above. Some argued that the NEDs should be the immediate focus, and there was no rebuttal from the chairs, the GB, or the Bhoys.

It was also noted that Nicholson, when asked about the club’s strategy, admitted he keeps a document pinned to his office wall with sections highlighted in yellow — the parts he “needs” to communicate to fans. The room laughed.

The first actions look likely to come on Sunday against Kilmarnock at Rugby Park.

If the survey results are anything to go by, the movement is only just beginning. The second meeting will be crucial in shaping what comes next and whether Celtic fans can stay united to put serious pressure on the board. There is a sense of urgency now, and the time to act together is while emotions are still raw and shared. Everything discussed on the night and the survey was not taken as a mandate to begin certain types of actions, but it was the beginning of a long process.

 

Thanks Crow, interesting and sounds better organised than I thought it might turn out to be

 

Some real positives from the meeting


Obviously more to come from others

 

Listen to this from about 1hour and 1min in

Prolly shared already

Skickat från min SM-F956B via Tapatalk

 

does he mention sneaking his burd into the team hotel in the Austrialia Tour and thats why Ange bombed him out?

 

What's wrong with that?

 

No but he talks about the board. Only had good things to say about the management and fans in general. He slaughtered the board

 

It's going to take time. We just need to persevere and be patient with one another

 

I’m all in that we need massive changes, and that has to be done with action
My huge worry though is with boycotts, walk outs, staying quiet during games, etc that just effects the team
I remember a game before when the green brigade did a silent protest and the game was awful

Back the team sack the board. I’d rather we made as much noise as possible

 

Early days but I get a good bump of optimism around this, no sure how many of you guys were around but it feels very reminiscent of Celts for Change in the 90's. Difficult to align so many CSC's and fan organisations which are their own unique entities under one unifying goal but when needs must we've done it before and it'll be good (although unfortunate that it's needed) to see it again. A real sense across the fanbase that enough is enough seems to be coming across.

Football without fans is nothing, we are Celtic.

 

I'd suffer one season for change to avoid 10 more of the current mob.

 

We can do both.

 

I’ve metioned it before about the upcoming AGM and the fact it’s been alluded to that fans collectively hold around 20% of the shares in the club. Now, I know the reality of actually mobilising that kind of wide-scale support is a massive undertaking in itself, but hear me out on the potential impact if it could be pulled together.

If a coordinated boycott of the AGM happened from the fan-shareholder side, it might not technically block the meeting from going ahead, but the headlines it would generate could be huge. Media outlets would jump on “fans turn their backs on the board” or “supporters walk out on AGM,” and those kinds of stories very quickly start to tarnish the club’s reputation beyond just our fanbase. Once that happens, sponsors start to get nervous about being associated with the negative press. Add to that, the wider markets don’t like the look of instability and the PLC share price can come under real pressure when confidence dips. Then there is the small matter that could compound everything further in the media and on the markets that if such a movement could be made - then it could then be pushed further with the fanbased shareholdings calling an EGM.

Now if alongside a strong stance from fans on the terraces and a genuine commitment to a matchday and merchandise boycott. That combination of reputational and financial damage is where the board will finally have no choice but to listen. It’s not just noise at that point, it’s tangible impact on the bottom line, and we all know that’s where decisions are really made.

It is perhaps all just fanciful thinking from my part but I dont see how the board give a * unless there is a direct attack on the bottom line and share price by this movement utilising the * Scottish media