The celtic way

Would take a Fergus McCann any day compared to a shyster like Murray .

Say what you like about the Bunnett but he took a big risk putting up most of his fortune to bail out Celtic at the time . There was no guarantee that he would get his money back .
Yes , many Celtic supporters invested in the club - but none of them could have done what McCan did .
Murray NEVER risked a penny of his money at Castle Grayskull , yet he got all the plaudits from the press .
 
Last edited:
It WS never a risky investment,mate. All the spadework had been done some time before,please believe me, and by men who wanted nor received much credit for their efforts. Two at least, to my certain knowledge took time away from their very successful businesses to go around the world canvassing for investment should they be able to get rid of the board.
 
Friends Tims countrymen, lend me your dough I come to bury the bunnet not to praise him. The evil that men do lives after them, the good is often interred with their bones.....so let it be with the bunnet. HH
 
Micmac said:
It WS never a risky investment,mate. All the spadework had been done some time before,please believe me, and by men who wanted nor received much credit for their efforts. Two at least, to my certain knowledge took time away from their very successful businesses to go around the world canvassing for investment should they be able to get rid of the board.
Click to expand...

So who else was lining up to bail out the 'tic ?
 
Last edited:
"I like many many others didn't give a fuck about an " investment" I cared about my club. The " investment" has not and never will be returned, the shares will stay with my family forever."

Thats what the Huns thought MM but ours will be what they say on the tin thats the diffeence the bunnet made. Your shares are vetted and are not allowed to go to anyone other than another person in your family or a nominated and vetted friend(s) person, but the main difference is you have made an investment that has ensured you have shares that stop any buying up and one man control of the club and you have a say in your club, end off. Your shares cannot be devalued or your say taking away, how about that for someone who thinks he has not invested you have invested in our long term future and history HH MM and thanks.
 
Micmac said:
When you are asked " are you an investor?"by the man and told your investment is doing well, it kinda let's you know where the guy is coming from. I like many many others didn't give a fuck about an " investment" I cared about my club. The " investment" has not and never will be returned, the shares will stay with my family forever. I could not imagine many bigger insults to us all than to describe our uptake of shares other than an emotional imperative. He did what he said he would, surely did, and walked away with fair recompense fair enough. Again sorry to be a naysayers, am just the wrong person to beatify the bunnet .
Click to expand...

Thats a simplistic way to look at things. And yes most small shareholders will indeed be hoping to hold their shares in their family for long time.

But if the people running club arent running it as an investment then you might not have any shares to pass onto the future generations.

I bet your life the shareholders of RFC were expecting to pass their shares onto their future generation. But that simplistic assumption that the club cant die means the shareholders of RFC have bits of paper that dont correspond to the New Club they claim is the same club.

Two separate entities, both with their own unique share holding certificates, one club dead, the other one dying.

So the simplistic version of I dont buy shares for investment is flawed. Because if you arent looking after your investment then the stewards can and will run off with the investment and eventually if you dont get your act in gear and start looking after your investment then you will find yourself in the same sad place that RFC shareholders exist. No investment, worthless bits of paper, and trying to conbince people their club didnt die, despite other people with new bits of share papers controllinga completely different entity.

The way I look at it is this.

If you buy shares and dont pick worthy stewards to look after your investment but are satisfied with short term frittering of your investment for short term glory then when your club dies you can thank the simplistic investment assumptions that made your investment worthless.

The club only has value if the stewards look after your investment.
And sadly in this highly monetised modern capitalist system if you arent looking after your investemnt the vultures will pounce on your emotions and fill their pocket with your investment till they have the capitla and you have the worthless bits of paper.

So the bunnet did the entire Celtic family the greatets service when he kept the biscuit tin and let the vultures destroy the false glory hunter across the city.

Their deid and Celtic are now the financial power, but unless you have the creepy capitalist stewards being very frugal and tight with the investment (even if they seem to be doing very nicely for themsleves in process) then you will get vulture capitalists who will crush the cclub into dust while convincing you the investment is in safe hands.

The bunnet deserves the applause for having the balls to stand up against the mob who want short term glory at expense of sustainable glory.
 
TET said:
Thats a simplistic way to look at things. And yes most small shareholders will indeed be hoping to hold their shares in their family for long time.

But if the people running club arent running it as an investment then you might not have any shares to pass onto the future generations.

I bet your life the shareholders of RFC were expecting to pass their shares onto their future generation. But that simplistic assumption that the club cant die means the shareholders of RFC have bits of paper that dont correspond to the New Club they claim is the same club.

Two separate entities, both with their own unique share holding certificates, one club dead, the other one dying.

So the simplistic version of I dont buy shares for investment is flawed. Because if you arent looking after your investment then the stewards can and will run off with the investment and eventually if you dont get your act in gear and start looking after your investment then you will find yourself in the same sad place that RFC shareholders exist. No investment, worthless bits of paper, and trying to conbince people their club didnt die, despite other people with new bits of share papers controllinga completely different entity.

The way I look at it is this.

If you buy shares and dont pick worthy stewards to look after your investment but are satisfied with short term frittering of your investment for short term glory then when your club dies you can thank the simplistic investment assumptions that made your investment worthless.

The club only has value if the stewards look after your investment.
And sadly in this highly monetised modern capitalist system if you arent looking after your investemnt the vultures will pounce on your emotions and fill their pocket with your investment till they have the capitla and you have the worthless bits of paper.

So the bunnet did the entire Celtic family the greatets service when he kept the biscuit tin and let the vultures destroy the false glory hunter across the city.

Their deid and Celtic are now the financial power, but unless you have the creepy capitalist stewards being very frugal and tight with the investment (even if they seem to be doing very nicely for themsleves in process) then you will get vulture capitalists who will crush the cclub into dust while convincing you the investment is in safe hands.

The bunnet deserves the applause for having the balls to stand up against the mob who want short term glory at expense of sustainable glory.
Click to expand...
Very well put TET.
HH?
 
TET said:
I started writing that last month mate, just finished it in time today.

:p
Click to expand...
And when you cannot live within your means and the christmas presents are been demanded, it usually ends up bad you either spiral down and out or you remain forever in a shadow with debts piled to the ceileng.
“It would’ve cost less, and left the previous owners with nothing, to go into liquidation. But it would also be humiliating for Celtic. So we paid all the bills. Celtic means the same to me as it does to other fans. I identify with the club and wish to be proud of it.”
Fergus McCann (2013)

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/11/19/january-light-blues-redux/
 
We can only agree to disagree on the merit or otherwise of a memorial to Fergus McCann. I am and will remain in the ":no" camp. I appreciate the other point of view but respectfully dissent.
 
Micmac said:
No , quite the opposite, I believe he was a very good steward in very many ways. There were quite a few things I disagreed with him about, some I resented him deeply for, but I appreciated his tenure at the club. Just not enough for a stand to be named after him or a statue.
Click to expand...

Fair enough I suppose, I dont know enough about your reasons to be against that idea, but personally I think especially given the benefit of hindsight regarding some of his bold decisions back when i couldnt understand why a club smaller than ours could afford much better investment in players.

I was once very critical of the bunnet, but since then I learned a lot more about finance and investment and well I thought wee McCann was very very good steward for Celtic especially now when you know for certain the whole system was trying to crush the club out of existence.

There may well have been better investors short term. But I geneuinley think the long term business strategy and his hard nosed and often brutal honesty is something that should be looked back and remembered for long long time.

Unless there is something vicious about the bloke that I am unaware I would say he was perhaps the best thing that happened to the club. He gave fans the chance to save their club by financing and putting in place at risk to his own capital the means to save the club.

He was confident the risk of his own capital was worth it, he didnt pretend or lie about his mission, he had the gumption to stick to the plan and laid the foundation for future growth and financial acumen at club, he gave ordianry fans the chance to be part of their own clubs wealth growth and laid a controvertial unpopular plan despite the whole of Scotland laughing at his frugality and he turned out to be right. Well at least from the way things have panned out he seems to have been vindicated in his fundamental business sustainablity concept.

I genuinely think a statue of the man isnt such a bad idea.
 
TET said:
Fair enough I suppose, I dont know enough about your reasons to be against that idea, but personally I think especially given the benefit of hindsight regarding some of his bold decisions back when i couldnt understand why a club smaller than ours could afford much better investment in players.

I was once very critical of the bunnet, but since then I learned a lot more about finance and investment and well I thought wee McCann was very very good steward for Celtic especially now when you know for certain the whole system was trying to crush the club out of existence.

There may well have been better investors short term. But I geneuinley think the long term business strategy and his hard nosed and often brutal honesty is something that should be looked back and remembered for long long time.

Unless there is something vicious about the bloke that I am unaware I would say he was perhaps the best thing that happened to the club. He gave fans the chance to save their club by financing and putting in place at risk to his own capital the means to save the club.

He was confident the risk of his own capital was worth it, he didnt pretend or lie about his mission, he had the gumption to stick to the plan and laid the foundation for future growth and financial acumen at club, he gave ordianry fans the chance to be part of their own clubs wealth growth and laid a controvertial unpopular plan despite the whole of Scotland laughing at his frugality and he turned out to be right. Well at least from the way things have panned out he seems to have been vindicated in his fundamental business sustainablity concept.

I genuinely think a statue of the man isnt such a bad idea.
Click to expand...
Well we are not in Robroyston for a start so thats good!!
 
Don't remember a crowd of millionaires running tae save Our Celtic, when BoS were threatening tae close us down.

Aye the Wee Man walked away with a few Million in his back pocket., but he put plenty of his own cash in & plenty of hrs of hard work insuring the funding was in place for stadium rebuild.

Met him a few time's when flying down to London on the red eye & few time's on the last flight back to Glasgow. He was a supporter just like us, so if anyone deserves a statue outside Paradise it's Fergus McCann, but he probably wouldn't want all the fuss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 380 (members: 6, guests: 374)

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top