The light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. Before I begin, let me make clear some of my post will be conjecture and some facts quoted directly from their source. Another thing I will afford our foes something they never afforded us, which is innocence until proven beyond all reasonably doubt, guilt. 1st, we all know (now) Celtic have 3 companies running them, or basically 2, as 1994 co, we don’t know much about but it begs the question why in 2001 did 1897 co. separate and create a trading co. 2001? In life, timing is everything; in fact there is a cause behind every affect. So this was not done without a purpose, and please keep in mind that the business acumen behind certain influential Celtic minded people. Well the year is significant, in fact it was one year after Celtic under Martin O’Neill, had spent very heavily on their ambitions to keep up with Rangers. now also bear in mind, that 7 years previously Celtic were 60 minutes away for bankruptcy, and now in 2001 were about to embark on a massive spending spree. What do they do at this point? They separate club (ground and players and all other assets) from trading company. Why? Celtic was ensuring even then, that should another bankruptcy threaten, that no creditor could touch the entirety of their assets. Nothing wrong with that, I hear some say but lets examine more. Now bear in mind that in 2001 Celtic now have 1 co. with assets separate, from another co which they will trade with. Two separate entities, which although one owned by the other, stand or fall on their own merits. Now was it possible, that Celtic trading co. 2001 could run up say 50 million debts, bankrupt the co at this stage, without affecting 1897 co the holding co, walk away without one creditor being able to claim one penny, and the 1897 co, able to trade and play away as if nothing happened? The answer is an emphatic yes. Bear in mind the business acumen behind this little group. Keep in remembrance that not one single media outlet or anybody else knew that Celtic had separated their companies in this fashion. in fact they could have bankrupted the 2001 co. and not one person been any the wiser who or what they were. Genius? Ingenuity? So it begs the question, was this the intention of the Celtic minded people? What went wrong then I hear people ask as you keep saying Celtic are hiding debt but its there. well at this stage let me state that Celtic ltd are already bankrupt, these figures on companies house accurately bear out my statement and I will quote in full, cash at bank 880,000 net liabilities £37,520,000, assets £5,984,000 giving a net liability of £31,657,000. This is the 2001 trading company. So how is the company trading? No one would lend any company with these liabilities and debts one single penny. This I conjecture is where it all went Pete tong (wrong) for them. One thing that puzzled me after reading their Feb. accounts, was, where had this debt come from? Bear in mind that Celtic plc are the 1897 co. backed up by the accounts themselves. Celtic plc Registered number SC3487. That’s 1897 co. now on their accounts published on their website is the same statement. On the Feb. accounts the net liabilities spring out of nowhere, and I racked my brain to find out exactly what had happened. Remember that I have claimed that they are hiding the 2001 debt from the 1897 co. I have to be consistent. I can’t say on one hand its being shown and the other hand being hidden. Don’t worry I will prove my consistency. I did not know at this stage where or what or how they had these figures of loss, they were incidental. Even a glance at their website accounts which I viewed in March I could not find the answer. I knew they were there, from statements from their accounts but not how they got there, as reading from them all that was revealed was this, No provision for corporation tax is required in respect of the year ended 30 June 2012. The provisional tax computation for accounts purposes provides tax losses carried forward of approximately £33m (2011: £27m). There was this incidental figure again. Boom right out of nowhere with no explanation from the accounts were from. What was I missing? The apostrophe!! The Financial Statements give a true and fair view of the state of the Group’s and the parent Company’s affairs as at 30 June 2012 and of the Group’s loss for the year then ended group’s plural!. This is when I found the gallous pioneer’s blog and the midday sun shone so brightly. Now as I stated, the 2001 co. is already bankrupt, how then are they continuing to trade? With a little bit of help from the mother co. you see the borrowings of 37 million would not be allowed on any viable company, with an asset of 5 odd million. Its not good business sense, that’s self explanatory. in borrowing’s you have secured and unsecured. Take for example a personal loan, most lenders only go up to about 10k of unsecured for the simple reason if you default their chances of recovering the debt are slim. Now if you had 37 mill borrowings as opposed to 5 mill assets you realise your chances of recovering your total losses are impossible! At this stage, I’d say a beak, above had a word with the lower, possible Celtic friendly beak, who received free corporate days, and match tickets, that he was putting his bank or lenders in a perilous position? Conjecture now. At this stage was it demanded that the lenders wanted more security for their money, besides a co. who claimed they had 5 mill assets? Did the CEO reluctantly agree to put up Celtic park as security for the debts and then the 7 charges against Celtic park make sense? Follow the trail. At this point and after Celtic FC Ltd could not bankrupt and have no affect on Celtic 1897 as their security was 1897. Oh dear. Remember if Celtic FC Ltd go bankrupt the creditors have the authority to seize Celtic park and the players. Now does everyone see how they hide the debt? You see although the losses are in the 2001 co. which should not be trading as its bankrupt, its being allowed to trade simply because 1897 has become its guarantor, and if it defaults then 1897 now goes down with it!! So you see 1897 uses the income from 2001 to explain its income, although 1897 receives none, and brings in as incidental, 2001 liabilities as if from no where, because the liabilities are very likely secured against the ground. Not the original intention I may add for obvious reasons. This is a corporate structure that planned long before Craig Whyte was even heard off, to ensure in the event of a bankruptcy they could walk away without a creditor getting a penny, and the club operating as if nothing happened!! But was their original plan to run up the debts, and then bankrupt the 2001 co. and walk away? Remember the business acumen of their people. I would conjecture that their arm was proverbially put behind their backs by someone who forced them to secure the debts against their biggest assets. Don’t worry Celtic fans I hear the Aviva stadium will welcome you with open arms. Which now begs another question, is Neil Lennon’s self fulfilling prophecy that the third biggest team in Scotland are a champion’s league failure to reach the group stage’s away from bankruptcy? Billy/rfc
Posted on: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 14:52:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015