If you are 30-years-old or above, chances are you have been going to Celtic Park since a time when the stadium itself and the area around Parkhead was derelict and economically challenged. The Parkhead Forge and Barr’s factories, large local employers in their day, were long gone.
In the early 1970s, the government attempted to regenerate inner-city areas across the country, with the Glasgow Eastern Area Renewal (GEAR) project first to launch, followed by Docklands projects in London and Liverpool. GEAR ran for almost 20 years, but when it shuttered in 1987, the east if the city was still hopelessly impoverished. That’s not to say it would not have been worse still, were it not for the limited impact of GEAR.
What the area lacked was an anchor project but one arrived seven years after GEAR when the foundations were laid for the new Celtic Park.
The regeneration of Celtic brought improved management to all aspects of the club and associated business, while visitor numbers increased. A seven-day-per-week retail operation was the first step in bringing people to the area out with match days, as Celtic continued to acquire adjacent land and make improvements to the stadium environment.
This anchor sporting facility soon drew the Commonwealth Arena and the Sir Chris Hoy Velodrome, build directly opposite Celtic Park. Glasgow had a sporting quarter, drawing athletes and well as spectators from across the globe.
Progress has not stopped. Celtic have outline permission for a hotel to be built onsite, with a museum to follow and continually petition for a fan zone, where the tens of thousands who arrive on match day will be able to buy refreshments and access toilet facilities.
Strathclyde University’s Fraser of Allander Institute’s report on the economic impact of Celtic, published yesterday, outlines the enormous importance of the club to the economic success of the city and beyond:
Equivalent of 2820 full time jobs created.
£165m contribution to Scottish GDP.
A net inflow to Glasgow of over 1 million people in one season.
Celtic are a successful Scottish exporter, 47% of revenues come from outside Scotland.
What is happening through Celtic in the east of the city is not the only story in Glasgow. The SEC Centre, with the Exhibition Centre, Clyde Auditorium and SSE Hydro has turned the Finnieston area into a world-leading venue for conferences, exhibitions and concerts. Glasgow is now a destination city.
Much of this happened organically. The success of the SECC encouraged more development in the area, while Celtic have had several iterations of insightful planning since the mid-90s. In different parts of the world, cities compete to bring economic icons like Celtic to their patch. In Glasgow, the Council heard objections to the Celtic Superstore plans as it may compete with the local Tesco. Public transportation infrastructure caters only for local resident volumes, with no plans to move into the 21st century, while Glasgow City Council are planning to drive visitors away by insisting the nearest they can park will be 1 mile from the stadium – displacing the parking problem and increasing the time cars will be left in the area as spectators walk to and from the stadium.
The report was issued ahead of Celtic’s AGM, which is currently underway. It is an explainer for those in positions of power who carry an economic responsibility, but seem to have little grasp of how to Let Glasgow Flourish. The subtext to why the club asked the Fraser of Allander Institute to undertake the report is one of frustration. Things are going well for Celtic, for Parkhead and for Glasgow, but so much more could be done if others worked with the club.
266 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- »
EBT McLeish on 5Live. Talking himself up big time. All the success he has had. No mention of how it was achieved or of any of the many failures.
Spoke well about James “Foster”.
They have finished ahead of two teams with a combined world ranking of over 150! With a team full of Champions League and English Premier League players!
Ally MacLeod would be embarrassed about boasting about that.
What an absolute ar$e of a man!
FRIESDORFER on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 9:02 PM
https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/History/1/UK0002181523A
Dessy
Bankier and Riley are not Celtic supporters. Believe the rest are Tims.
YNWA
Bada Bing,
I have long held the view that it might well have to come to Celtic shareholders suing our club for failing to fulfil their fiduciary responsibilities. HH
Friesdorfer
That is my thinking too.
You willing to lead the charge?
I will drum up support for you. Physically and financially if required?
Go for it A.
You could make change for our betterment.
YNWA
and if anyone else wants to complain about The rangers being credited with rangers historical ownership of the “old firm” trademark you’ll find it here
https://response.questback.com/isa/qbv.dll/ShowQuest?QuestID=4963982&sid=80CB2CAqUG
You’d have thought this would be the organisation that would be most strict when it comes to copyrighting brand names and phoenixing liquidated brands.
Canman, thanks. HH
DD,
Ha, I’ve thought about taking it to the Small Claims Court just for the embarrassment factor. Anyone with legal knowledge care to give an opinion? HH
In my opinion Celtic supporters suing Celtic would be a massive own goal and bring delight and merriment to our opponents.
Not to mention the disdain they would be held in by fellow supporters.
HH.
GREENPINATA on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 9:23 PM
In my opinion Celtic supporters suing Celtic would be a massive own goal
………………………………
Why ?
Is that the opinion of someone who doesn’t know the difference between sectarian and political songs. Or, who has no problem with the Plc supporting the continuation lie and associating our clubs name and reputation with fraudulent copyright claims of our newest business partner?
I expect nothing of the Board, i have pretty clear idea in my head of what they are about and what they are and aren’t interested in. If ever win the £150m in the Euromillions i would begin a process of chasing them down London road. My only concern left is that their ineptitude and dysfunctionality will run Brendan Rodgers out of town. My belief is it will, sooner rather than later. Spineless, money grabbing cowards.
Friesdorfer
Go For It A.
May open a floodgate?
YNWA
GreenP
Sure Celtic fans would have laughed if Rangers fans had sued their own club…. but, perhaps if zombie fans had been more proactive, and less deferential to their Board, they might not have ended up in the situation they did.
Resolution 12 will only work, if, it is backed by 000’s of empty seat’s.
But, the Old Firm PLC board, know that, Brendan, the PLC’s same club ‘fudge’….has made the 53,000 faithful, look the other way, since £49 Sevco FC came into the top league, two year’s ago, and, get this,….Celtic supporter’s, queued up for their £49 Sevco tickets, a carefully constructed move by the, Old Firm PLC board, who deceitfully, used the Brendan ‘bounce’ to, cash in whilst, the Celtic supporter’s were blinded by the Brendan ‘bounce’ and, got Celtic supporter’s to rubber stamp, £49 Sevco FC, as the same club as, £49 Rangers FC, ie: sweeping the £140 million hun tax swindle under the carpet, which enabled £49 Rangers FC, to cheat Celtic player’s, manager’s, and supporter’s out of twenty 20 odd trophies.
Who’s fault is that ?
Only empty seats will set you free, from propping up the Old Firm.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Friesdorfer,
don’t waste your time or money, this will end badly for them.
Greenpinata
Why would it?
Open, honesty, transparency. None of these words apply to Celtic plc board. Charlatans does.
YNWA
Canamalar,
I suggest you Google the word perceived.
As for the CSA, utterly useless. Too busy enjoying their seats in the Directors box and corporate hospitality to do anything meaningful and worthwhile. They get their cozy wee sit down with PL every once in a while to make them feel important. Lawwell must be pissing himself.
DD,
You are entitled to your opinion,and that may certainly be the opinion of a section of our support, however that may not be the opinion of the vast majority of our support who see unprecedented success on and off the park with a top class manager.
HH.
GreenP
To be fair, while by many measures, our Board has been very successful … tiltes of late (but no competition), and revnues ..
but, by many other key measures, are they not the worst Board ever (how many other Boards had 10 titles and 10’s of millions of pounds stolen from under their very noses, and then did nothing about it.
I am all for giving credit where it is due … but if people expect praise for their accomplishments, then they must also accept responsibilty for the failures…
Greenpinata
I respect your opinion on All Celtic matters. I would love a blether wi a couple of pints wi you. This is too deeply emotional for typed words. ?
YNWA
Three strikes and yer oot
Greenpinata,
I don’t need to, perception is subjective, sectarianism is an objective concept with a clear and definitive meaning. People who use perception when applying the concept of sectarianism either don’t understand the meaning or are deliberately driving a nefarious agenda.
eg anti-zionism = antisemitism
DD,
I look forward to a few swallies with you.??
Cheers.
There are many Christian zionists, yet if I have a go at zionists your argument supports the claim of me being sectarian.
Anyroadup
bawbaws time
Eh !!!!!!!!!
Anyways, Agree. And so to bed.
Counting Aberdeen fans and contemplating on how did football got so complicated.
Thanks for the debate guys, it’s been a pleasure.
Cheers and HH.
Dallas I knew played for tic wasn’t to sure about Airdrie HH
Greenpinata
Tiochfaidh ar la ????
Friesdorfer- fan on fan action- to protect the huns? You couldn’t make it up
Sod em all, scunnered at the Board inaction and deflection. Off to bed now, got a funeral to attend tomorrow, some things are more important.
Good night all. HH
CANAMALAR IT LOOKS LIKE OCD OBSESSION on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 6:31 PM
HRVATSKI JIM on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 6:05 PM,
—————–
Sorry for my delayed reply. I had to go out after my post
I note your comments at 6.31 and a few subsequent posts
You stated “Prior to this new partnership with The rangers, Celtic Plc had sole copyright to this trademark as the original rangers died and as the surviving partner became outright owner”
When original Rangers company was liquidated, the assets that it owned were bought by another party. Unless I very much misunderstand insolvency and intellectual property law, Celtic never had “sole copyright (even if that term made any sense as ownership of a trade mark is not “copyright”) ” of the assets.
If i am wrong, please tell me under which law assets of a liquidated/deceased partner revert to the joint owner party rather that the Administrator/Liquidator to sell on behalf of the creditors.
You stated “Celtic Plc have provided an income stream and made a business arrangement to partner The rangers, wonder when that plan was hatched and negotiated eh”
My point was that Celtic and Rangers registered the trademark “Old Firm” in 1998 (via the company i work with at the time) as, at that time “the Old Firm” was known a known phrase which was exploited by both clubs to promote games between their teams, although I cannot remember any jointly marketed products by them. Both clubs registered the mark, at least partly, to avoid it being registered and controlled by any other party and renewed it today for the same purpose – I may be wrong in this and will accept any evidence to the contrary.
From 2012 onwards, Celtic Plc has not used the term “Old Firm” as far as I know so I don’t see where Celtic has provided an Income stream to The Rangers via the use of this mark.
Please advise me how The Rangers received any income stream or become a partner of Celtic from the use of this trademark due to Celtic’s actions when Celtic does not refer to the terms “Old Firm” any more.
It is inevitable that enemies (USA/North Korea) or rivalries (Celtic/The Rangers) will at some times work together to resolve a problem/come to a deal which suits both parties but what evidence is there of any “partnership” between the current clubs? Apart from the market exploitation by both clubs selling the derby matches at a premium ticket price, what examples of active income generating partnership activities between the clubs are there to support your point?
I am off to beddy-byes soon but i look forward to your comments and will respond tomorrow. Have a good night
Seems a couple of fake WhatsApp update messages out ,containing a virus,don’t open ,delete.
PilMaCup’SLatest,
If you want to bee takin seeriusly then lern to spel FGSRFC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNRFumI2ch0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHe_qmo3gX4
My thoughts are with NorrieM tonight.
May God repose her soul Norrie.
YNWA
friesdorfer
“… the market exploitation by both clubs selling the derby matches at a premium ticket price…”
Isn’t that the very definition of a partnership?
Sorry for butting in.
HRVATSKI JIM on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 10:20 PM
CANAMALAR IT LOOKS LIKE OCD OBSESSION on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 6:31 o
HRVATSKI JIM on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 6:05 PM,
—————–
p.
CANAMALAR IT LOOKS LIKE OCD OBSESSION on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 6:31 PM
HRVATSKI JIM on 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 6:05 PM,
—————–
Sorry for my delayed reply. I had to go out after my post
I note your comments at 6.31 and a few subsequent posts
You stated “Prior to this new partnership with The rangers, Celtic Plc had sole copyright to this trademark as the original rangers died and as the surviving partner became outright owner”
When original Rangers company was liquidated, the assets that it owned were bought py another party. Unless I very much misunderstand insolvency and intellectual property law, Celtic never had “sole copyright (even if that term made any sense as ownership of a trade mark is not “copyright”) ” of the assets.
If i am wrong, please tell me under which law assets of a liquidated/deceased partner revert to the joint owner party rather that the Administrator/Liquidator to sell on behalf of the creditors.
You stated “Celtic Plc have provided an income stream and made a business arrangement to partner The rangers, wonder when that plan was hatched and negotiated eh”
My point was that Celtic and Rangers registered the trademark “Old Firm” in 1998 (via the company i work with at the time) as, at that time “the Old Firm” was known a known phrase which was exploited by both clubs to promote games between their teams, although I cannot remember any jointly marketed products by them. Both clubs registered the mark, at least partly, to avoid it being registered and controlled by any other party and renewed it today for the same purpose – I may be wrong in this and will accept any evidence to the contrary.
From 2012 onwards, Celtic Plc has not used the term “Old Firm” as far as I know so I don’t see where Celtic has provided an Income stream to The Rangers via the use of this mark.
Please advise me how The Rangers received any income stream or become a partner of Celtic from the use of this trademark due to Celtic’s actions when Celtic does not refer to the terms “Old Firm” any more.
It is inevitable that enemies (USA/North Korea) or rivalries (Celtic/The Rangers) will at some times work together to resolve a problem/come to a deal which suits both parties but what evidence is there of any “partnership” between the current clubs? Apart from the market exploitation by both clubs selling the derby matches at a premium ticket price, what examples of active income generating partnership activities between the clubs are there to support your point?
The p
I am off to beddy-byes soon but i look forward to your comments and will respon tomorrow. Have a good nightPp
From 2012 onwards, Celtic Plc has not used the term “Old Firm” as far as I know so I don’t see where Celtic has provided an Income stream to The Rangers via the use of this mark.
Please advise me how The Rangers received any income stream or become a partner of Celtic from the use of this trademark due to Celtic’s actions when Celtic does not refer to the terms “Old Firm” any more.
It is inevitable that enemies (USA/North Korea) or rivalries (Celtic/The Rangers) will at some times work together to resolve a problem/come to a deal which suits both parties but what evidence is there of any “partnership” between the current clubs? Apart from the market exploitation by both clubs selling the derby matches at a premium ticket price, what examples of active income generating partnership activities between the clubs are there to support your point?