Investment apparently being announced tomorrow

[boabie 230]

38 minutes ago, craig said:

"When added to the Close Brother's debt".... that statement right there tells me that they are talking absolute shite.  We don't have any DEBT to Close Brother's - it is a credit facility and cannot be considered debt unless drawn upon.  They really need to get their facts straight for people to pay them any credence....

 

There is also absolutely ZERO chance that UEFA's maximum debt threshold is 25 million Euros - there would be no European competition if that were the case

As I said, it gives them more shyte to work with as their weekly prediction of impending bankruptcy was starting to bore even their most ardent supporters.

When did facts ever bother those tramps ?                

[Bluedell 5,329]

36 minutes ago, craig said:

"When added to the Close Brother's debt".... that statement right there tells me that they are talking absolute shite.  We don't have any DEBT to Close Brother's - it is a credit facility and cannot be considered debt unless drawn upon.  They really need to get their facts straight for people to pay them any credence....

It may be drawn upon at the moment, but chances are that it will have been repaid by the year-end due to season ticket money coming in.

 

Also, how will UEFA/SFA know what our debt is? You'd think that the source would be our audited accounts which aren't due until later this year. The 2017 net debt was around £11m from memory.

[boabie 230]

5 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

It may be drawn upon at the moment, but chances are that it will have been repaid by the year-end due to season ticket money coming in.

 

Also, how will UEFA/SFA know what our debt is? You'd think that the source would be our audited accounts which aren't due until later this year. The 2017 net debt was around £11m from memory.

The obsessed already KNOW what our accounts say.  They don't however tell the rest of us how they KNOW.              

[pete 2,499]

2 hours ago, craig said:

"When added to the Close Brother's debt".... that statement right there tells me that they are talking absolute shite.  We don't have any DEBT to Close Brother's - it is a credit facility and cannot be considered debt unless drawn upon.  They really need to get their facts straight for people to pay them any credence....

 

There is also absolutely ZERO chance that UEFA's maximum debt threshold is 25 million Euros - there would be no European competition if that were the case

I think the debt threshold is a certain percentage of something but I am not sure what.   It is not a set limit it depends on a clubs income plus maybe asset  worth.  As say I am not sure exactly what.

 

[Gaffer 1,665]

I just thought it might be useful to look at the facts surrounding this.  Many of the figures being referred to are accurate, but the application of them is not.  I could explain how it works in detail but again that's missing the point of the regulations.  The point is to ensure that clubs do not spend beyond their means.  Every club submits a financial plan to UEFA.  This plan covers every aspect of the balance sheet and anticipated funding for the club in forthcoming season.  This will for us include how the directors will fund the club in the 2018/19 season.  It's an estimate but it has to be sensible and is open to challenge from UEFA's review body.

 

If the club was to be found to have failed on any of the criteria, UEFA would put the club on a monitoring programme and could potentially take action, ranging from a reprimand through to banning from the competitions.  I know that UEFA does not plan to ban any club unless they fail to complete the actions they've committed to whilst being monitored.  That's why PSG, Man City, etc have been penalised, because they failed to stick to the actions they agreed to.  It wasn't because they breached the criteria.  Stories of banning are just there to create impact and hysteria amongst their readers.

 

However, going back to our own club.  Our plan will be submitted and UEFA will either accept it, or challenge it.  I'll be very surprised if they don't challenge it, given the losses.  At that point, it will be up to the directors to demonstrate that the funding is there to cover losses.  It should be noted that another nuance missed by some commentators is that youth programmes and infrastructure costs are not included in the assessment of losses.  What is then likely is that there will be ongoing monitoring to ensure that the actions are completed as planned.  Under that circumstance I'd expect the club to be removed from monitoring.  Like most of these Celtic bloggers' stories, there's a mountain being created from a molehill.  That's what I'd expect from these obsessive clowns, but it's just not how regulators work and clearly they don't have the experience or brains to understand that.

 

What is interesting however is that Dave King's "house of cards" point is a good one.  If Celtic do fail to qualify for the group stages, and especially if they do not qualify for the CL each season, they will find themselves being monitored too (due to their certain losses in that circumstance).  They will then be required to take actions as we will be.  What will be interesting is how they do that.  Will their shareholders be willing to finance the club and covert debt to equity?  Will they be willing and able to slash their wage bill?  They would have a much bigger problem than us to achieve that, given their current wage outgoings.  Celtic are quite rightly funding their team to guarantee CL qualification each season because they know they can't afford not to now.  It will be interesting to see how far they're willing to go on this gamble.  Can you imagine the timplosion by their supporters if we win 55?  Well I can tell you that it'd be nothing compared to the timplosion going on in their boardroom if that were to happen.

 

However that's their gamble and their problem.  Our challenge is simple.  We need to win our next game, get into European competition and then challenge for the league again.  There's nothing else we need to be worried about.

[der Berliner 3,245]

Given that Hearts beat Hibs, we are almost certain of an EL place, unless Hibs hammer us by 10 or more on Sunday.

[trublusince1982 243]

2 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I just thought it might be useful to look at the facts surrounding this.  Many of the figures being referred to are accurate, but the application of them is not.  I could explain how it works in detail but again that's missing the point of the regulations.  The point is to ensure that clubs do not spend beyond their means.  Every club submits a financial plan to UEFA.  This plan covers every aspect of the balance sheet and anticipated funding for the club in forthcoming season.  This will for us include how the directors will fund the club in the 2018/19 season.  It's an estimate but it has to be sensible and is open to challenge from UEFA's review body.

 

If the club was to be found to have failed on any of the criteria, UEFA would put the club on a monitoring programme and could potentially take action, ranging from a reprimand through to banning from the competitions.  I know that UEFA does not plan to ban any club unless they fail to complete the actions they've committed to whilst being monitored.  That's why PSG, Man City, etc have been penalised, because they failed to stick to the actions they agreed to.  It wasn't because they breached the criteria.  Stories of banning are just there to create impact and hysteria amongst their readers.

 

However, going back to our own club.  Our plan will be submitted and UEFA will either accept it, or challenge it.  I'll be very surprised if they don't challenge it, given the losses.  At that point, it will be up to the directors to demonstrate that the funding is there to cover losses.  It should be noted that another nuance missed by some commentators is that youth programmes and infrastructure costs are not included in the assessment of losses.  What is then likely is that there will be ongoing monitoring to ensure that the actions are completed as planned.  Under that circumstance I'd expect the club to be removed from monitoring.  Like most of these Celtic bloggers' stories, there's a mountain being created from a molehill.  That's what I'd expect from these obsessive clowns, but it's just not how regulators work and clearly they don't have the experience or brains to understand that.

 

What is interesting however is that Dave King's "house of cards" point is a good one.  If Celtic do fail to qualify for the group stages, and especially if they do not qualify for the CL each season, they will find themselves being monitored too (due to their certain losses in that circumstance).  They will then be required to take actions as we will be.  What will be interesting is how they do that.  Will their shareholders be willing to finance the club and covert debt to equity?  Will they be willing and able to slash their wage bill?  They would have a much bigger problem than us to achieve that, given their current wage outgoings.  Celtic are quite rightly funding their team to guarantee CL qualification each season because they know they can't afford not to now.  It will be interesting to see how far they're willing to go on this gamble.  Can you imagine the timplosion by their supporters if we win 55?  Well I can tell you that it'd be nothing compared to the timplosion going on in their boardroom if that were to happen.

 

However that's their gamble and their problem.  Our challenge is simple.  We need to win our next game, get into European competition and then challenge for the league again.  There's nothing else we need to be worried about.

Is it or is it to ensure nobody can upsurge the normal competition leaders? Italian football doesn't want to see shieks in England neither does Spain. That is the only reason for financial fair play. If they wanted financial fair play they would spread the money. They don't. The best get the most. That's not financial fair pay, that's giving the benefits to the rich.

[JFK-1 1,671]

4 hours ago, boabie said:

The obsessed already KNOW what our accounts say.  They don't however tell the rest of us how they KNOW.              

I was thinking about asking them how much our transfer budget is since they appear to know more than Gerrard does. And UEFA should clearly just cut the club out of the loop and go to those in the know for our financial reports. 

[boabie 230]

1 minute ago, JFK-1 said:

I was thinking about asking them how much our transfer budget is since they appear to know more than Gerrard does. And UEFA should clearly just cut the club out of the loop and go to those in the know for our financial reports. 

Having spent years both undercover and overt on their sites fighting our corner I can say that they don't react well to be questioned on "details".

Some demented yahoo gets hold of a rag of rumour from another yahoo and before you know it there's yet another one holding out a begging bowl peddling some steaming pile of manure as fact.

Ill Phil hasn't said anything of worth since the guy stealing details from HMRC for him went away. The tramp beggar liar JJ has never said anything that came true. McConville who despite being an incompetent thief lawyer was only the respectable face of lying bigots like Muirhead and 3 or 4 others.

Dig into what they are saying and it becomes like trying to move Carnoustie  beach an inch to the left - pointless.

[forlanssister 3,050]

3 hours ago, der Berliner said:

Given that Hearts beat Hibs, we are almost certain of an EL place, unless Hibs hammer us by 10 or more on Sunday.

Six is enough to give them a superior goal difference.