The following article was written by a member of the Celtic Trust and is an initial contribution to a discussion on what a FAB is, what it might look like at Celtic and why it is a good idea. Further articles will follow.
Background
Every major large UK football club except Celtic has a FAB since the European football governance crisis that prompted the UK government to undertake an independent Fan Led Review of Football Governance in 2021. One of the main reasons for the crisis is due to the disinterest of large football clubs in facilitating meaningful fan engagement that would support club governance and accountability in relation to their clubs’ football business strategies. The UK Fan Led Review (Crouch, 2021) acknowledges that a major improvement of the governance of football clubs requires a fan advisory board (FAB). An elected and independent FAB will be part of football clubs’ governance arrangements that will provide fan oversight in relation to their club’s strategies and operations. It is recognised by the review that the FAB is the most effective form of stakeholder engagement when 100% fan ownership is not feasible.
One major issue with Celtic is it is a massive football club, which is registered as a public limited company (Celtic PLC) on the AIMS London stock exchange with around 100 million ordinary shares and diverse ownership base. However, this should not hinder fan and small shareholder engagement in relation to ownership and governance of our iconic club. One major governance problem is that Celtic PLC who own Celtic FC has around 28,000 small shareholders that includes individuals as well as fan organisations. Those shareholders with around 42% shareholding (Celtic Trust, 2022) but do not have representation on the Celtic PLC’s board of directors.
One of the largest, independent survey on ‘Celtic FC: an assessment of stakeholder engagement’1 in 2024/25 was conducted by the University of Glasgow. The survey provided in-depth analysis of Celtic FC’s stakeholders (i.e. supporters, season ticket holders, members of fan organisations, and small shareholders) preferences in relation to important fan engagement issues.
Do Celtic stakeholders want a FAB?
The independent survey findings show that Celtic’s stakeholders do desire an independent FAB. That is, when asked if there is a need for a FAB at Celtic – the overwhelming majority of stakeholders said YES – over 66% of supporters, 69% of season ticket holders, 76% of members of fan organisations and 67% of small shareholders. Further, there is overwhelming support for a fan organisation to be involved, either solely or in co-operation with Celtic, in setting up and running the FAB. Interestingly, less than 10% of respondents from any of the 4 stakeholder groups want Celtic to solely set up and run the FAB. Furthermore, the survey indicates that Celtic’s stakeholders would like a widely diverse (supporters, season ticket holders, shareholders, and fan organisations) representation on the FAB. This would suggest an independent, large ‘non-expert’ FAB with ‘distributive intelligence’ of at least 20 or more representatives. Further still, the survey indicates that all 4 stakeholder groups highly ranked the following topics/issues that they deemed should be discussed at the FAB: operational match day issues; Celtic’s strategic vision and objectives; Plans for broader fan engagement and ownership; Stadium plans/issues; and Club heritage issues.
What important factors need to be addressed for the establishment and running of an independent and functional FAB at Celtic?
- The independent stakeholders’ representatives should control the Chair and vice-chair positions and set the agenda for FAB meetings. The FAB meeting should, where feasibly possible, have the same or similar agenda has Celtic PLC’s BOD agenda topics.
- The FAB meetings should be held at around 10 working days of Celtic’s PLC’s Board of Directors meetings.
- Celtic’s CEO and other Celtic executive directors, e.g. Finance director, should attend the FAB meeting to present information on important Celtic topics/issues as well as respond to questions from the FAB. The CEO and Celtic executive directors should leave before FAB discussions and voting on issues by FAB representatives.
- The FAB needs to have ‘one voice’ when communicating with Celtic PLC. Thus, FAB voting needs to be based on unanimous decisions and all communications to Celtic must be approved by FAB and needs to go through the Chair (and vice-chair ). On very rare occasions a super majority FAB vote of 80% can be used on issues, however, this must include the Chair’s and vice-chair’s vote. This will ensure that all (or most) of the stakeholders FAB representatives will have voted for a resolution and stops individuals ability disrupt the functioning of the FAB through a veto .
- Confidentiality issues in relation Celtic PLC’s sensitive business/football information should be provided to FAB in accordance with London stock exchange rules. A mechanism for disclosure to FAB may require confidentiality agreement, e.g. in relation to financial data. With that said it is important to enable FAB members to discuss agenda items with their stakeholders/ electorate. It is also recognized that Celtic PLC may be reluctant to supply information and thus, detailed discussion between FAB and Celtic on confidentiality issues will be required. The following can support such discussions:
- Confidentiality agreement on all financial data, e.g. revenue streams and amounts
- Where Celtic PLC, on an ad hoc basis, deem other information ‘commercially sensitive’ they need to get agreement with FAB to treat such information as ‘commercially sensitive’ before FAB meeting. The agreement discussion between Celtic and FAB on ‘commercially sensitive’ information needs to be held at least 10 working days before FAB meeting.
- All other information is treated has not requiring confidentiality agreements.
- When there are FAB recommendations to Celtic, then we expect Celtic to take them seriously. It is acknowledged that Celtic PLC and its management have the legal right to reject recommendations but for the FAB to function effectively there cannot be continuous ignoring of recommendations. Continuous ignoring of FAB recommendations suggest to Celtic stakeholders that the FAB is not being taking seriously be Celtic. The following is proposed:
- All non (full or partial) implementation of FAB recommendations needs Celtic PLC to justify why the recommendations were ignored at the FAB’s next meeting with documentation provided at least working 10 days before the FAB meeting.
- If FAB (full and partial) recommendations implementation conversion rate per year falls below 60% then the FAB can ask for adjudication by the joint tribunal to seek remedy.