|
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
|
|
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,806 Views)
|
|
Adam Smith 11
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:18 AM
Post #4321
|
Contract up for renewal, now on a diet and trying harder.
- Posts:
- 7,826
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #26,117
- Joined:
- 29 May 2010
|
- idyllwild
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:30 AM
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:04 AM
The CEO's bonus will probably be constructed year on year to take into consideration the specific objectives to be met. There may be a consistent set of criteria (probably the KPIs listed in the accounts) with changing weightings all the way down to 0%.
Also within the year an adjustment can be made (I think this is why the continual emphasis on "delayed" sale of players whenever the loss is mentioned), PL may have had a profit target of £5m, selling a £10m player way above book value may have triggered this. The board though may have asked to delay this for footballing reasons which at a personal level PL could argue that this was moving the goalposts which would trigger a renegotiation.
I believe that DD works on the premise that PL's negotiating skills on the big deals gains the business more than the £1M he costs and that a less experienced CEO would be a false economy. I'm not saying that I agree with this just rationalising his thought process.
Changing a CEO who is a safe pair of hands when the business is trading steadily in a market with no great upside potential without major investment is not something that happens a lot in normal business.
The board as part of their "Business Review" are not seeing attendances or merchandise fall, 10% reduction in attendance since the second phase of downsizing started and staying steady the last couple of years would not be grounds for removing a CEO normally unless the board felt they were missing out on something that their direct competitors are picking up.
On a business level currently PL is bombproof. Why take a risk when their is not a high chance of bigger reward.
On a football level we are probably now punching below our weight in Europe and if that continues it will eventually impact the business, I would guess failure to qualify for CL next year would put PL's position under severe pressure.
As a fan it is frustrating to see this and I would hope the board feel under pressure to try and resolve the difference between our view of the CEOs performance and his bonus. I think at least 50% of it should be champions league qualification.
Aye, I agree that PL probably brings in transfer revenue which exceeds his salary. So as far as our transfer dealings go, it would indeed be a false economy to punt him.  I've no problem with him being paid £1m if his only remit (and the only thing for which he is responsible) is transfer negotiations. However, as the CEO he is responsible for everything. It's a false economy to pay him £1m a year, even if he can bring in an extra £5m because he's great at negotiating a higher transfer, if we then lose £20m because we can't qualify for the CL. He is being given a full bonus for something that is only one part of his remit. Either change his bonus structure or change his remit.
If I was on the board and given that the strategic constraints are that the club has to live within its own means and gradually reduce debt I just can't see the argument I could produce to say that the risk of changing CEO is worth it.
As a fan I can come up with lots of arguments, everyone of them in a boardroom though would probably fail after objectively being put through a process of risk v reward and expectation of success backed up with supportive data. My instinct tells me it is time for a change but that cuts no ice so I can understand why the board support PL and do what they need to to keep him happy.
This season coming will probably show profit of around £3m and but for one bad night in Malmo would possibly be £14m, the margins are small but the differences in profit are massive. I couldn't argue with certainty that a new CEO with the same strategical constraints would make the difference to get to the CL more than 50% of the time, the board will therefore stick with the safe pair of hands.
This leaves PL in the enviable position of almost being able to phone in. Only a backlash from the "core" support will change this and I don't see that anytime soon.
This may not be popular but I think it is a realistic of the boards position and why.
|
|
|
| |
|
Adam Smith 11
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:37 AM
Post #4322
|
Contract up for renewal, now on a diet and trying harder.
- Posts:
- 7,826
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #26,117
- Joined:
- 29 May 2010
|
- JimG31Bhoy
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:04 AM
Unfortunately, our business model is not based on ambition on the field but on transferring our best players for a profit. Ki, Ledley, Wanyama, Hooper, Foster, Matthews, Van Djik with Bitton and Johannsen being the next to go. It has been a disaster with regards to Europe and a rapidly diminishing fan base. Agree with the first point.
The fan base though is not rapidly reducing. There was an approx 7% drop (probably due to oldco) and then it has evened out at around 46k. See last 5 years below:
Average home league attendance (no.) 45,400 45,757 46,754 49,019 49,719
The board will expect to see some of this 7% to come back up if Sevco are promoted. The data then tells the story that the downsizing has not affected attendances.
Sorry if I'm sounding like a board or PL apologist today.
|
|
|
| |
|
sevilliano
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:42 AM
Post #4323
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 10,619
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #80
- Joined:
- 1 September 2004
|
Agree that 250k would be more than appropriate
But even were there to be an argument that raking in transfer fees from neighbouring market justifies £1m salary (cause that's what it is - and there's no tax benefit to bonus) the issue being missed here is that the football knowledge on rest of board is pitiful so pl is de facto director of football and primarily responsible for quality drop
For every £2-3 he's lost on cl qualification he's made a £1 gain on transfer fees
And critically year on year our asset value is dropping
He needs to go
Even if de risking is get CEO at 250 k and DOF at huge number we'll be better off both on and off the pitch
The interesting issue is what well networked football guy would be right for dof - there ain't many bayern Munich types around Scottish football who combine huge football knowledge and business nous (don't mention tax)
And don't anyone mention that pumpkin Nevin
|
|
|
| |
|
TK57
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
Post #4324
|
- Posts:
- 11,895
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
- Favourite all-time player
- Bobby Murdoch
|
First of all, we are a football club. I don't give a flying fig if all we ever do is break even, but we are £1m down before a ball is kicked because of Lawwells income.
Anyone in the employment of Celtic should be paid on results on the park. Failure to qualify for the CL should cut out any friggin bonus. What justifies the CEO a bonus in a one horse race for the league?
GTF Lawwell, greedy carrot.
|
|
|
| |
|
Midfield Maestro
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
Post #4325
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,379
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #32,740
- Joined:
- 6 August 2013
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul Lambert
|
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:37 AM
- JimG31Bhoy
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:04 AM
Unfortunately, our business model is not based on ambition on the field but on transferring our best players for a profit. Ki, Ledley, Wanyama, Hooper, Foster, Matthews, Van Djik with Bitton and Johannsen being the next to go. It has been a disaster with regards to Europe and a rapidly diminishing fan base.
Agree with the first point. The fan base though is not rapidly reducing. There was an approx 7% drop (probably due to oldco) and then it has evened out at around 46k. See last 5 years below: Average home league attendance (no.) 45,400 45,757 46,754 49,019 49,719 The board will expect to see some of this 7% to come back up if Sevco are promoted. The data then tells the story that the downsizing has not affected attendances. Sorry if I'm sounding like a board or PL apologist today. I don't believe those figures.
|
|
|
| |
|
tinytim81
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:51 AM
Post #4326
|
- Posts:
- 12,473
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #24,932
- Joined:
- 11 December 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
- idyllwild
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:01 AM
- tinytim81
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:49 AM
- fatboab
- 15 Oct 2015, 09:48 AM
There is absolutely nothing to justify that kind of salary/bonus for the CEO of a small Company like Celtic PLC.
As Aldo suggested, the only thing that will make DD sit up and take notice is being hit in the pocket. We are fast approaching the time for some kind of concerted action to try and remove Lawwell and his preposterous salary.
The AGM should be a good place to start. There is absolutely nothing to justify that kind of salary/bonus for the CEO of a small Company like Celtic PLC. Serious question, how do you know? What metric is everyone using to categorically conclude that a salary (including bonus) of one million is unjustifiable for a CEO of a company that turns over fifty one million? This isn't a loaded question. I'm genuinely curious to know if there is some sort of standard measure when it comes to CEO wage packets. Is there a general rule of thumb for CEO wages (i.e. salary percentage against turnover) or are the many claims that he gets paid too much entirely subjective?
The average CEO salary in the UK is £100k. Football isn't a complex business, and Celtic aren't a large company. Asda in the Forge probably turnover more than Celtic. Of course it's subjective, but even his base salary is significantly disproportionate to the role. It's a £250-300k role. Cheers
|
|
|
| |
|
Mackin
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:53 AM
Post #4327
|
- Posts:
- 13,178
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #323
- Joined:
- 2 November 2004
- Favourite all-time player
- TS10
- Twitter Name
- @Mackin83
|
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:37 AM
- JimG31Bhoy
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:04 AM
Unfortunately, our business model is not based on ambition on the field but on transferring our best players for a profit. Ki, Ledley, Wanyama, Hooper, Foster, Matthews, Van Djik with Bitton and Johannsen being the next to go. It has been a disaster with regards to Europe and a rapidly diminishing fan base.
Agree with the first point. The fan base though is not rapidly reducing. There was an approx 7% drop (probably due to oldco) and then it has evened out at around 46k. See last 5 years below: Average home league attendance (no.) 45,400 45,757 46,754 49,019 49,719 The board will expect to see some of this 7% to come back up if Sevco are promoted. The data then tells the story that the downsizing has not affected attendances. Sorry if I'm sounding like a board or PL apologist today.
I don't believe those figures. They will be 'tickets sold' rather than people who actually turned up.
|
|
|
| |
|
fatboab
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:55 AM
Post #4328
|
Just before the Dawn
- Posts:
- 56,818
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
|
- Mackin
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:53 AM
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:37 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I don't believe those figures.
They will be 'tickets sold' rather than people who actually turned up. in fairness, the business only counts tickets sold.
|
|
|
| |
|
Midfield Maestro
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:57 AM
Post #4329
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,379
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #32,740
- Joined:
- 6 August 2013
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul Lambert
|
- Mackin
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:53 AM
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:37 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I don't believe those figures.
They will be 'tickets sold' rather than people who actually turned up. Exactly. They will include all season tickets, despite the fact that many season ticket holders don't turn up.
So, they are accurate from an economic perspective but they are not an accurate reflection of how many people are actually showing up to watch Celtic at home league games.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mackin
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:58 AM
Post #4330
|
- Posts:
- 13,178
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #323
- Joined:
- 2 November 2004
- Favourite all-time player
- TS10
- Twitter Name
- @Mackin83
|
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:57 AM
- Mackin
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:53 AM
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
They will be 'tickets sold' rather than people who actually turned up.
Exactly. They will include all season tickets, despite the fact that many season ticket holders don't turn up. So, they are accurate from an economic perspective but they are not an accurate reflection of how many people are actually showing up to watch Celtic at home league games. Given that Dermot Desmond didnt attend a single board meeting (again) last year, he probably believes that they are the correct figures.
|
|
|
| |
|
fatboab
|
15 Oct 2015, 11:59 AM
Post #4331
|
Just before the Dawn
- Posts:
- 56,818
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
|
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:57 AM
- Mackin
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:53 AM
- Midfield Maestro
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
They will be 'tickets sold' rather than people who actually turned up.
Exactly. They will include all season tickets, despite the fact that many season ticket holders don't turn up. So, they are accurate from an economic perspective but they are not an accurate reflection of how many people are actually showing up to watch Celtic at home league games. but they never were. Season book sales don't guarantee attendees, and it is more noticeable now than before because of lower numbers buying season books.
|
|
|
| |
|
The Green Lantern
|
15 Oct 2015, 12:03 PM
Post #4332
|
- Posts:
- 7,663
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #497
- Joined:
- 14 January 2005
|
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:37 AM
- JimG31Bhoy
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:04 AM
Unfortunately, our business model is not based on ambition on the field but on transferring our best players for a profit. Ki, Ledley, Wanyama, Hooper, Foster, Matthews, Van Djik with Bitton and Johannsen being the next to go. It has been a disaster with regards to Europe and a rapidly diminishing fan base.
Agree with the first point. The fan base though is not rapidly reducing. There was an approx 7% drop (probably due to oldco) and then it has evened out at around 46k. See last 5 years below: Average home league attendance (no.) 45,400 45,757 46,754 49,019 49,719 The board will expect to see some of this 7% to come back up if Sevco are promoted. The data then tells the story that the downsizing has not affected attendances. Sorry if I'm sounding like a board or PL apologist today. Your analysis is very interesting - nothing to do with being an apologist.
It's incredibly frustrating that someone who can preside over failure on the park can keep his job - and get a bonus - because it's safer to have him than not have him.
|
|
|
| |
|
Dannybhoy95
|
15 Oct 2015, 12:07 PM
Post #4333
|
- Posts:
- 22,588
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #29,742
- Joined:
- 25 October 2011
|
- paulfg42
- 14 Oct 2015, 06:49 PM
A bonus of 75% of salary is disgusting.
And what does Eric Riley do to earn nearly a quarter of a million? Numbers and stuff...
It's cool but. We're not dead like the Rangers.
|
|
|
| |
|
Exercelt
|
15 Oct 2015, 12:22 PM
Post #4334
|
- Posts:
- 657
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #31,131
- Joined:
- 12 June 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- The Bhoy who would be King
|
- TK57
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:47 AM
First of all, we are a football club. I don't give a flying fig if all we ever do is break even, but we are £1m down before a ball is kicked because of Lawwells income.
Anyone in the employment of Celtic should be paid on results on the park. Failure to qualify for the CL should cut out any friggin bonus. What justifies the CEO a bonus in a one horse race for the league?
GTF Lawwell, greedy carrot. Anyone in the employment of Celtic should be paid on results on the park - For bonus payments yes For everything else that's absurd!
Do the ticket office impact team performance? Why should their pay be affected by result? Their job is to sell tickets.
Can see your argument but you've got it mixed up with normal daily operations.
|
|
|
| |
|
aldo
|
15 Oct 2015, 02:30 PM
Post #4335
|
And that's the way we like it...
- Posts:
- 13,737
- Group:
- Senior Member
- Member
- #211
- Joined:
- 13 September 2004
|
- McStay
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:28 AM
- fatboab
- 15 Oct 2015, 09:48 AM
There is absolutely nothing to justify that kind of salary/bonus for the CEO of a small Company like Celtic PLC.
As Aldo suggested, the only thing that will make DD sit up and take notice is being hit in the pocket. We are fast approaching the time for some kind of concerted action to try and remove Lawwell and his preposterous salary.
The AGM should be a good place to start.
There is little appetite within the support to go and force the necessary changes IMO. Most can't even be arsed to turn up to the games these days. You're right, of course. It's as true in real life as it is in football, that the majority tend to accept what their perceived betters tell them, while dissenters who don't meekly toe the line are in the minority. C'est la vie, haw hee haw, 'nat...
But people not being arsed turning up is a start. It would be better if there was a petition/web site-thingy they could simply add their name and season ticket number to, something that spells out their non attendance is an act of protest and not simply apathy, or that any apathy is result off his Board sucking the joy out of being an active Celtic supporter. I seem to recall Desmond declaring WGS had a job for life if he wanted it, but season ticket holders stopped turning up 'cos they couldn't stand the awful football, and that became his last season. Depriving them of money is the only language they understand; backing that up with a noisy, visible campaign of protest will force them to act.
Edited by aldo, 15 Oct 2015, 02:31 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
MBhoy1888
|
16 Oct 2015, 10:17 AM
Post #4336
|
- Posts:
- 4,785
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #25,976
- Joined:
- 3 May 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- David Bingham
|
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:18 AM
- idyllwild
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:30 AM
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:04 AM
The CEO's bonus will probably be constructed year on year to take into consideration the specific objectives to be met. There may be a consistent set of criteria (probably the KPIs listed in the accounts) with changing weightings all the way down to 0%.
Also within the year an adjustment can be made (I think this is why the continual emphasis on "delayed" sale of players whenever the loss is mentioned), PL may have had a profit target of £5m, selling a £10m player way above book value may have triggered this. The board though may have asked to delay this for footballing reasons which at a personal level PL could argue that this was moving the goalposts which would trigger a renegotiation.
I believe that DD works on the premise that PL's negotiating skills on the big deals gains the business more than the £1M he costs and that a less experienced CEO would be a false economy. I'm not saying that I agree with this just rationalising his thought process.
Changing a CEO who is a safe pair of hands when the business is trading steadily in a market with no great upside potential without major investment is not something that happens a lot in normal business.
The board as part of their "Business Review" are not seeing attendances or merchandise fall, 10% reduction in attendance since the second phase of downsizing started and staying steady the last couple of years would not be grounds for removing a CEO normally unless the board felt they were missing out on something that their direct competitors are picking up.
On a business level currently PL is bombproof. Why take a risk when their is not a high chance of bigger reward.
On a football level we are probably now punching below our weight in Europe and if that continues it will eventually impact the business, I would guess failure to qualify for CL next year would put PL's position under severe pressure.
As a fan it is frustrating to see this and I would hope the board feel under pressure to try and resolve the difference between our view of the CEOs performance and his bonus. I think at least 50% of it should be champions league qualification.
Aye, I agree that PL probably brings in transfer revenue which exceeds his salary. So as far as our transfer dealings go, it would indeed be a false economy to punt him.  I've no problem with him being paid £1m if his only remit (and the only thing for which he is responsible) is transfer negotiations. However, as the CEO he is responsible for everything. It's a false economy to pay him £1m a year, even if he can bring in an extra £5m because he's great at negotiating a higher transfer, if we then lose £20m because we can't qualify for the CL. He is being given a full bonus for something that is only one part of his remit. Either change his bonus structure or change his remit. If I was on the board and given that the strategic constraints are that the club has to live within its own means and gradually reduce debt I just can't see the argument I could produce to say that the risk of changing CEO is worth it. As a fan I can come up with lots of arguments, everyone of them in a boardroom though would probably fail after objectively being put through a process of risk v reward and expectation of success backed up with supportive data. My instinct tells me it is time for a change but that cuts no ice so I can understand why the board support PL and do what they need to to keep him happy. This season coming will probably show profit of around £3m and but for one bad night in Malmo would possibly be £14m, the margins are small but the differences in profit are massive. I couldn't argue with certainty that a new CEO with the same strategical constraints would make the difference to get to the CL more than 50% of the time, the board will therefore stick with the safe pair of hands. This leaves PL in the enviable position of almost being able to phone in. Only a backlash from the "core" support will change this and I don't see that anytime soon. This may not be popular but I think it is a realistic of the boards position and why. I have to agree with your assessment on this, I don't personally feel that Lawwell should be sacked unless there is a clear upside to being rid of him and having someone else in. It's clear that Lawwell has become associated in the eyes of many with the downsizing and the effects it's had on the club, which is fair enough as he's been chief exec throughout its implementation. I think it bears asking though, do the people who think our current strategy is all wrong have a viable alternative in mind and if so what is that alternative ?
|
|
|
| |
|
antbhoy
|
16 Oct 2015, 10:58 AM
Post #4337
|
Marshal of the Soviet Union
- Posts:
- 8,293
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #21,797
- Joined:
- 19 September 2008
- Favourite all-time player
- Lubomir Moravcik
|
- MBhoy1888
- 16 Oct 2015, 10:17 AM
- Adam Smith 11
- 15 Oct 2015, 11:18 AM
- idyllwild
- 15 Oct 2015, 10:30 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
If I was on the board and given that the strategic constraints are that the club has to live within its own means and gradually reduce debt I just can't see the argument I could produce to say that the risk of changing CEO is worth it. As a fan I can come up with lots of arguments, everyone of them in a boardroom though would probably fail after objectively being put through a process of risk v reward and expectation of success backed up with supportive data. My instinct tells me it is time for a change but that cuts no ice so I can understand why the board support PL and do what they need to to keep him happy. This season coming will probably show profit of around £3m and but for one bad night in Malmo would possibly be £14m, the margins are small but the differences in profit are massive. I couldn't argue with certainty that a new CEO with the same strategical constraints would make the difference to get to the CL more than 50% of the time, the board will therefore stick with the safe pair of hands. This leaves PL in the enviable position of almost being able to phone in. Only a backlash from the "core" support will change this and I don't see that anytime soon. This may not be popular but I think it is a realistic of the boards position and why.
I have to agree with your assessment on this, I don't personally feel that Lawwell should be sacked unless there is a clear upside to being rid of him and having someone else in. It's clear that Lawwell has become associated in the eyes of many with the downsizing and the effects it's had on the club, which is fair enough as he's been chief exec throughout its implementation. I think it bears asking though, do the people who think our current strategy is all wrong have a viable alternative in mind and if so what is that alternative ? I tink the fact of the matter that everything is getting downsized apart from his salary/bonus.
I would imagine a competent individual could do the CEO job without being the highest/2nd highest paid employee at the club, probably on a quarter of the wage and especially with the turnover of the club to wage.
As someone mentioned earlier on this page he is failing in a lot of the aspects of his job.
|
|
|
| |
|
mick405
|
16 Oct 2015, 11:50 AM
Post #4338
|
- Posts:
- 24,878
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #21,723
- Joined:
- 16 September 2008
- Favourite all-time player
- Cortez The Killer
|
Had a call there from some Celtic-related insurance mob who are phoning season book holders.
Has this fat wink sold my details?
|
|
|
| |
|
Quiet Assasin
|
16 Oct 2015, 01:50 PM
Post #4339
|
..for the maintenance of dinner tables for the children and the unemployed
- Posts:
- 42,247
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #24,627
- Joined:
- 18 October 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- 'The Assailant'
|
- mick405
- 16 Oct 2015, 11:50 AM
Had a call there from some Celtic-related insurance mob who are phoning season book holders.
Has this fat wink sold my details? Had that last week wasn't impressed.
|
|
|
| |
|
ronny_is_not_da_man
|
16 Oct 2015, 02:48 PM
Post #4340
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 12,151
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,169
- Joined:
- 14 May 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
- mick405
- 16 Oct 2015, 11:50 AM
Had a call there from some Celtic-related insurance mob who are phoning season book holders.
Has this fat wink sold my details? Is this maybe related to the shareholders being targeted in boiler room scams lately? Sounds dodgy and you should report it to the club.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|