For more than two decades Celtic FC has been the most stable balance sheet in Scottish football. Annual reports underline cash reserves north of £70m, a wage-to-turnover ratio that comfortably clears UEFA’s Financial Sustainability thresholds, and a shareholder register dominated by Dermot Desmond, whose 35 per cent stake insulates the board from short-term agitation.
To many clubs, this is the model. To many supporters, it is a source of frustration.
The paradox is that Celtic’s directors are accused not of being too cautious, but of running a high-risk sporting model precisely because they are so conservative financially. The Glasgow club is not immune to the modernisation sweeping Europe: directors of football, multi-club ownership structures, and billion-pound stadium projects are now the norm across Europe’s top 15 leagues. Celtic, by contrast, retains a governance model dominated by accountants, lawyers and long-serving executives.
Transfer strategy: premium avoidance, sporting exposure
The January window has become emblematic. Celtic entered 2024 with more than £70m in the bank, defending a league title, and in clear need of reinforcement. The board delivered Nicolas Kühn from Rapid Vienna and Adam Idah on loan from Norwich. Both contributed, but the optics were stark. Supporters and Brendan Rodgers himself had signalled a need for proven quality.
Chairman Peter Lawwell, speaking in a rare television interview, argued that Celtic were consistently met with inflated prices: selling clubs knew cash reserves were abundant, and demanded premiums that directors deemed unjustifiable. “We hit a wall,” was the essence of his defence. It was an explanation that revealed much: a board unwilling to chase auctions, even at the cost of under-strength squads.
That posture reduces financial risk but increases football risk. A recruitment model weighted heavily toward young, resale-friendly players can protect margins; it rarely guarantees the immediate impact that group-stage Champions League participation requires.
Organisational gaps
Lawwell’s son Mark, previously Head of Recruitment, exited in early 2024. The subsequent appointment of Paul Tisdale as Head of Football Operations was framed as progress toward a modern sporting structure. Yet the title is telling: the boardroom retains primacy, while football functions are coordinators rather than directors.
By comparison, leading continental clubs employ empowered sporting directors whose influence over strategy is near-total. Celtic’s organisational compromise reflects a plc heritage: the primacy of financial governance over footballing autonomy.
Infrastructure: maintenance not transformation
Celtic Park remains one of Europe’s iconic grounds, but also one of its older large stadiums. Expansion of the South Stand — once costed at £100m — has stalled. Instead, capital expenditure has flowed toward the Barrowfield training complex and “stadium maintenance projects.” This is consistent with UEFA’s Financial Sustainability rules, which allow youth and training investment to sit outside squad-cost ratios. From a regulatory perspective, the prioritisation is logical. From a supporter’s perspective, it represents drift. The last time that the club mentioned Barrowfield it was in relation to a November 2024 opening, it remains unopened, typically with no comment from a ‘club like no other’.
Predictable outcomes
The pattern is now entrenched.
- Low financial risk: retain cash, comply with FSR, maintain dividends.
- High sporting risk: accept squad gaps, gamble on value recruitment, risk continental underperformance.
It is not conspiracy, nor personal vendetta against a manager. It is the product of governance structure and incentives. A concentrated shareholder base, a conservative plc board, and an economic environment where Champions League qualification is disproportionately lucrative all conspire to make “optionality” the default transfer posture.
The result is paradoxical: a board accused of timidity is, in reality, exposing the club to a different class of risk. In the modern European game, where infrastructure, youth development and strategic continuity determine competitiveness, Celtic risks falling behind not because they spend recklessly, but because they spend too cautiously, too narrowly, and too late.
For now, domestic dominance continues to mask these flaws. But as the new Champions League format ratchets up both the financial rewards and the competitive bar, Celtic’s model will face its most severe test. In Kazakhstan it was exposed and failed miserably.
Last night Kairat Almaty joined Maribor, Malmo, AEK Athens, Cluj, Ferencvaros and Midtjylland in exposing the ambition of the Celtic board which consists of staying just ahead of their city business partners no matter how low that bar is set.
RELATED READING
10 Comments
by Stevie Bhoy
We have lost our last 5 CL qualifiers. Over the last 20 years since Artmedia we have lost more often than not at this stage. Beyond pathetic. Everyone was telling them to replace kyogo n kuhn before this match. They gambled and paid the price and heads should roll
by Eddie Edgerton
I think this article sums the situation perfectly. The only thing I would add is that the aspirations of the current board match those of a sizeable number of celtic fans – as long as we seem financially safe and are better than Rangers, then that’s all that matters
by Che
Stop giving them your money
by Che
Dermot Desmond plc with a fading former great football club attached
by Che
Heads won’t roll this hegemony
by Che
The laughing stock of Europe
by Bhoy4life
Just what is the purpose of stockpiling money at a football club if it isn’t to improve the playing staff which in turn further strengthens the bank balance through success on the pitch?
Even if they had spent 20-25m pre-window, it would have, I think, ensured qualification, so therefore the outgoings would have been retrieved plus profit, add to that the money made on Kyogo & Kuhn and no money would have been lost at all.
Is there a plan that we don’t know about?
Are there ground improvements coming costing 10’s of millions?
Is there a Euro league afoot that requires financial stability before being invited?
We don’t know do we, because we are the mushroom support, and we all know that saying don’t we.
BR bought Engels & Idah, they haven’t exactly set the heather alight, so what?
We wouldn’t have paid anywhere near what we did for those two if the board hadn’t played their usual last minute lowballing.
For me there is an obvious impasse between PL & BR, I would think brought on by the fact DD went over PL’s head to get him, twice.
The manager is his own man and won’t buy into PL’s “vision” so therefore he’s undermined in the dirtiest way possible.
Any fan who thinks PL doesn’t pull the strings at Celtic is just kidding themselves on. That’s the reason we haven’t heard from Nicholson, he’s just a patsy, a stooge, Peter’s puppet.
After the first game I doubt there were many fans confident of a result, its one thing being blindly loyal, but another to look at it for what it is, a clusterf*ck of the boards making that most could see unravelling in front of us.
The question is….why can’t the men who take rather large salaries out of season ticket money see the same….or can they…and they just turn a blind eye with a view to reaching their objective?
Celtic will not find another manager of BR’s calibre, we cannot replace like for like, given proper backing, he’s the man that can move us up a level, last seasons exploits in the CL proved that, so why doesn’t the board want him at the helm?
Just what exactly is going on upstairs?
by Jim M
Apparently nothing has been learnt.
World class in everything we do!
Hollow words from old men that have long since served THEMSELVES! rather than their purpose , enjoy your bonuses for failing my club …bastards the lot of them.
by Trough Watcher
Appreciate the comments on this piece. It’s my first on the site and a lighter tone than my usual way of speaking, but it shows what I wanted — the board’s dark arts, media weaponisation, and a malleable audience.
I don’t have all the answers, and I’m not pretending to. Protest is gritty and uncomfortable, and the board are too comfortable. They fear shame and bad publicity, and that’s where their weakness lies.
Until people look beyond a signing, a game, or Champions League money, and take action that actually matters, the directors remain content.
Don’t let the man get you down, they don’t lose a moments sleep worrying about you.
HH
by Bhoy4life
No Celtic fan expects them to go out a spend themselves into oblivion like Sevco did, but to not bring in 2 or 3 players for 10-15m in time for the qualifier, which would have seen us through, is willful neglect.
The spending would have been recouped in 2 matches.