AGM 2004 REPORT

The Club's strategy to have the AGM on a weekday to dissuade as many fans
as possible to attend served its purpose by attracting as usual only a
fraction of the shareholders we have. In fact one look around the crowd
tells you that the average age for these do's is about 60, which is again
important in ensuring a relatively quiet affair.

On first scouring the top table which is precariously perched on a
scaffolding at the front of the Celtic End, a familiar face was missing as
the song says. Dermot Desmond, the man with 29% of the shareholding and
mates with shareholders who tie up a further 20% deemed us not important
enough to show up for. Never mind the "prior engagement" tosh that we are
expected to fall for. One day in the whole year he is asked to make free
for us and he can't even do that. Last year he departed the stage before
the Question & Answer session and this year he snubs us again. Two years
ago he was forced into replying to a question from yours truly about
"speculating to accumulate" and the importance of backing the Manager's
judgement. It was the first time he actually answered a question at an AGM
and it's clear he didn't like it.

Ironically my question this year was directly addressed to Dermot Desmond
before Brian Quinn decided to take only two more questions (bringing a
total of only 8) with me third in line.

For the record my question was as follows ; As major shareholder what are
your plans to take the Club to the next level? What exactly is your input
into the Club, what is your contribution? what do you actually do? Do you
even have a plan or are you quite happy to just plod along with the easy
option of a no risk strategy? How would you like to be remembered? As an
absentee landlord who turns up for the odd glamour match OR as the man with
the vision and the ambition to take the Club to the next level?

The Meeting started with the usual video presentations with Tony Hamilton
of Celtic TV infamy asking the nicey-nicey questions. This is a bad idea
for a start as the Club would gain a lot more credibility if the interviews
were conducted by a fan with real questions.

The elusive Dermot Desmond was first up making a cameo appearance, although
with sightings of him so rare these days it would be difficult to be sure
if the part wasn't played by an actor. The Double D casually batted back
questions about such important matters as the atmosphere on European nights
to how good last season was. When finally asked a question about "the
environment" we play in, the budget for players in January or where he
would like to see us in a year's time his answers were almost in the style
of  i donno, why you asking me anyway?

Peter Lawwell was next up but unfortunately despite at least looking like
he could inject a bit of passion into the proceedings, his answers had
already been leaked to the press in advance of the meeting so there was
nothing new. Again he admitted that he was "irritated" by questions about
where the money goes despite a record turnover. Not as irritated as we are
when we see the Manager given only £1.5 million of the millions we bring
into the Club to make the record turnover Peter.

Next up was Saint Martin and while he was happy to go on at length rightly
about last season's success he dodged completely the question that he was
tardy in the transfer market over the summer, answering instead about the
late availability of Dwight Yorke. When asked about the constraints he
works under, significantly he did say that "it gets more difficult as the
years go on". "Football is changing greatly and the big teams are getting
stronger" he remarked not including us in his reference to big Clubs.
"There is a ferocious difference in the TV money but we must still do our
utmost" he said. "Football is not played in the Boardroom" could be seen as
a dig at the Board, and "we would certainly have a better chance if we
spend money" was his parting remark. With regards to renewing the contracts
of the likes of Lennon, Hartson and Balde he replied that whilst not going
into the specifics he would like to conclude the deals and the player's
agents will be spoken to before the next fortnight is out.

Finally it was the turn of Brian Quinn to come up with the usual soundbites
about not being obsessed with reducing the debt before adding that he would
like to see it a bit lower. Significantly with regard to the question of
playing in a different environment he made 3 points on why he believes
things will change and he is convinced we will play in the English Premiership.
1. Because the customer always gets what he wants (except us when we want
new players of course)
2. Because competition must be on fair and equitable lines and whereas you
can sell beer, beans or beef!! anywhere in Europe, you can't do it with
football.
3. English teams have only won 1 European competition in the last 20 years.
They are not achieving their best and top English Clubs should key into the
competition factor that Celtic would bring.

Next up was "the boring bit" ie most of the 10 Resolutions which ranged in
excitement value from the approval of the renumeration report to the
re-appointment of PKF as auditors. Whilst the voting may not be the
highlight of most folk's day it gives a classic insight into the running of
the Club when the Proxy votes are read out. Resolution 1, the Report and
Accounts. For 19,610,587 or 99.53%, Against 91,487 or 0.47%. In other words
a resolution could receive 100% backing from the floor but once one or two
of the major shareholders join in then the vote is carried their way with a
massive majority.

Resolution 9, The Scheme for Supporter Board appointment or the Fan On The
Board to you and me was eagerly awaited. Janette Findlay from the Celtic
Trust took to the mike and again spoke well to outline the advantages to
the Club, despite knowing that the Board were against the Resolution
therefore for another year it was doomed, for reasons explained in the last
paragraph. Cleverly Janette detailed some advantages of backing the
proposal by outlining some blunders the Board had made which a fan on the
board could have helped us alleviate.
1. We wouldn't have been told that we got a new home strip because "we
wanted it" (A reference to the incredible statement about the demand being
there put out by the Club after the 4th strip in 14 months)
2. We wouldn't have had to wait over a year for junior strips without the
alcohol sponsor's name on it.
3. We wouldn't have a merchandise catalogue with demeaning sexual
references on woman's wear (check out the catalogue, you will not believe it)
4. We would push harder for adequate training facilities instead of
spending money doing up the Boardroom.
5. We would have a dividend re-investment scheme.
6. OUR money would be spent on first team players.

In his reply Brian Quinn stated that the Board were against the principal
of a member of the Board being there to represent any one group or segment
of the Club. This is despite the fact that long serving Board member
Michael McDonald was only ever co-opted onto the Board because of
Weisfield's shares. Weirdly he then made the comparison with no
representation of the team, management, retail department or Ticket Office
being on the Board amid whispers that he must be losing the plot!

When it came to the hand count the vote was at least 70% in favour of the
Trust resolution however once the major shareholding votes are counted then
it's a different story (as explained already)

And so to Resolution 10. The introduction of a dividend re-investment
scheme. Again Janette Findlay from the Celtic Trust spoke passionately
about the benefits. For example £3 million could be raised for the Manager,
which was noted as 10 times what The Saint has spent on players in the last
2 seasons. Money could be spent on Youth Facilities, charitable donations
etc, etc, etc. "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth" was Janette's closing
remark.

Brian Quinn then replied that there was a degree of misunderstanding about
the Resolution (loud laughs all round) and that the Board were not against
the idea but would need to seek further details as there was a degree of
complexity about the Resolution which had to be looked at.

The hand count which pre-empted the Proxy voting was again in favour of the
Trust's Resolution and received the backing of approximately 65 to 70% of
the floor. (Refer above reason why Resolution will be defeated in Proxy vote)

And so we finally got to the highlight of the day. The Question & Answer
session where we finally get the opportunity to confront the Board face to
face with our points (minus Mister Desmond of course who by extreme
coincidence had an earlier, more important of course, engagement)

Question number 1 was a good one, short and straight to the point. The guy
asked if it was true what the papers were reporting about Saint Martin only
receiving a budget of £1.5 million for new players as he had difficulty
believing anything the papers wrote. Peter Lawwell replied that it was the
case and although there was a bit of flexibility (give or take ten bob
presumably) the figure of £1.5 million was what The Saint had and spent.

Question number 2 started off well enough with a question about why Ian
McLeod had left the Club carrying a large bag of gold, but as often happens
developed into a bit of a ramble with subjects such as Arsenal being in
debt, Juve's Champion's League crowd of 6000 for a home game, over 100
seats allocated in the Press Box before finally coming back down to earth
with a question about youth development. Brian Quinn answered that the
former Chief Executive was in the money because of the terms of his
contract before informing us that only 5 Clubs in the Premiership run at a
profit. Saint Martin then took over to tell us at length that youth
development is coming along at the Club and we have some very good players
coming through. We do however need the experience alongside the youngsters
as the youngsters on their own would not have us finish in the top 3 of the
SPL.

Question number 3 was a good one, again straight to the point, no messing
about. Referring to the Liam Miller fiasco, why was the player not signed
earlier? Saint Martin, finding himself busier than normal at AGMs again
took the mike. Now Saint Martin for all his greatness has his weaknesses
like everyone else and sometimes when he starts an answer he can go on and
on and on without getting to the crux of the matter. He knows exactly what
he's doing of course and is something we will come to again later in
another question. After giving a full recital of the situation from the day
he first played Miller in 2000, to his injuries over the next 2 years, to
his loan spell at Aarhus, to his sudden explosion into the first team after
good reports coming from the Under 21s, The Saint gave full attention to
the question even sounding quite angry in his voice. During last season's
pre-season he had started to talk to his agent about a new contract however
the goalposts were moved after Miller's performance against Anderlecht.
Miller was made a very, very good offer but it was not good enough compared
to Man Utd's The Saint stated. What was missing from The Saint's frank and
detailed reply was why did it take so long to try and tie the player down,
a charge that cannot be allowed to repeat itself with Lennon, Hartson and
Balde still available to walk away for free at the end of the season.

Question 4 started well with a short and sweet query. Is £1.5 million a big
enough budget to make Saint Martin stay or will he feel that he has taken
the Club as far as he can take it under the restrictions placed by the
Board? Unfortunately the questioner started to get carried away and started
to prattle on about seriously less pressing matters like getting no replies
to letters when he was out in Africa! The Saint replied in jest that he may
join the guy in Africa before joking further that he was glad the guy had
made all the difference on hearing we had won 3 games in a row after the
guy's return from Africa! All very jolly but still no answer to the
question we all wanted answered. Another 5 minutes about the tremendous
away support in Milan and Tannadice passed before Saint Martin finally got
round to the question again and the opportunity to put everyone's mind at
rest. "My job depends on results" was all that he would say totally
refusing again to commit long term to the Club and who can blame him?

Question 5 was about the Club's Cost Rationalisational Programme that had
cost 60 part time staff their jobs at Celtic Park at the same time when he
noted that Eric Riley had received a 25% bonus and Peter Lawwell a 35%
bonus worth £68,000 between them. How can this be justified he
asked?  Peter Lawwell answered that there had been some tough decisions
since his arrival at the Club and savings made from overhead reduction had
amounted to £2 million. Tom Allison then explained that the bonus system at
senior and executive level was taken after independant advice on salaries.

Question 6 contained some very good points although maybe they could have
been made in a less aggressive manner. Dermot Desmond's absence had been
noted and was taken as a snub, the Board's penny pinching was criticised,
the queues at the Ticket Office was brought up and also the 35% increase in
ticket prices for European matches at Celtic Park. In classic style the
advice was also offered "If Martin O'Neill leaves you should all get your
coats too" receiving rapturous applause from many of the shareholders
present. Brian Quinn too was in the mood for some one liners as he retorted
after complaining about the personal abuse that "You don't know how lucky
you are that we have Dermot Desmond" which only brought about outbursts of
laughter and more abuse. Peter Lawwell then took the mike to promise that
they were looking at things such as ticket prices, queuing and mail order.

With the pressure finally cranking up Brian Quinn decided to announce that
they would take just two more questions bringing a total of only eight,
albeit with time moving on. Unfortunately the last 2 questions could not
have been easier to bat back and were both directed tamely to Saint Martin.
What about the player's late lapses in concentration that had cost us dear
in the Champions League and what had happened to our scouting network in
Europe. Did it need improving or was there a policy at the Club to rely on
tried and trusted players playing in British football? The Saint took full
responsibility for his players and replied that nearly every goal could be
blamed on lack of concentration, strategy or tactics. On the European
scouting he answered that he had got Balde for not one cent, also Varga had
come without costing a penny and also Agathe had done well at a cost of
only £50,000. He also stated categorically that ALL signing targets were
watched by himself personally before any deals were concluded.

In summarising you get the feeling still that the PLC Board got off the
hook once again with many fans unable to make AGMs or unwilling to go as
they are seen as a waste of time and "The Board don't listen anyway"

One thing that did come out of this AGM is the distaste that Dermot Desmond
has for facing the fans and once again his commitment to the Club must come
into question. His failure once again to make himself available to the fans
has been noted. Maybe he should remember that we are a proud Football Club
with a proud history, not a toy to be used by a multi millionnaire.