Hervé Bacqué

Yep, and Killie should be applauded for that, although a large slice of that debt reduction came from a large creditor basically writing it off did it not? That is by-the-by though. Killie are working through a debt repayment with Lloyd's and they, the bank, only allow that to happen at its current rate based on Kilmarnock's projected income playing in the current SPL. Drastically reduce that by either a diluted TV deal or by relegation, thus not being able to demonstrate a clear path of income designed at clearing the 9 million and they would take other options and that would inevitably be busting the business and recouping the debt through a sale of assets. Michael Johnson knows this, hence his stance. As the Chairman and a director of Kilmarnock FC, he has a duty to protect the short, medium and long term interests of the business. Potentially slitting your own throat is something I am sure he is keen to avoid, no matter what that means or how unpalatable it may be for the average fan at Rugby Park. Even if, potentially and at the worst case scenario, it meant the death of Kilmarnock FC in its current form? Playing Devil's Advocate here by the way!

Stu, If you read my post, you'll see that's not what I said at all. I said that, in my opinion, a 'Newco Rangers' would punish RFC more than a 'CVA Rangers'. You've turned it into a to punish or not to punish. I think we all agree on that. I am making the point that I think people have their protest mixed up. As I've said, in my opinion, despite all the threats and talk of boycotting the SPL in the event of a Newco Rangers, I would argue a CVA Rangers, which people strangely see quite happy to accept, will see RFC in a much stronger position than a Newco yet the protests are complaints are in the reverse.

I have deliberately avoided this topic other than to read now and again however I would like to make this point which doesn’t appear to have been picked up yet. What actually surprises me in this whole mess is that no one has really clocked that any Newco Rangers would likely to be more punished than the current Rangers negotiating their way out of administration via what looks to be a very weak Creditors Voluntary Agreement. In the instance of Rangers coming out of administration via a CVA, they are essentially going to shed over 100 million pounds worth of debt (assuming the BIG tax case does go against them), retain all the assets of the current company including stadium, training facility, top players, history etc and be virtually unpunished other than the ten point deduction they faced last season which, to be honest, didn’t matter a jot as Celtic ran away with the title anyway. Yet fans seem to be completely okay with this, only threatening boycott if they Newco. Sure they (current Rangers) still have the SFA issue hanging over their head but the court of session judgement the other day basically means they will either be fined, which will no doubt be minimal, or suspended (most likely for a year from the Scottish Cup), neither of which will present them with any real problems whatsoever. I don’t think for a second anyone really expects the SFA to expel Rangers. Whether people like it or not, and the SFA know this, no Rangers would be the final nail in the coffin for some clubs and they have a duty to look after everyone. Let’s take Kilmarnock as an example. They are only able to meet repayments on massive debt repayments based on current levels of income both from gate money and mostly from the current value of the TV contracts. Any radical shift in that arising from either this or, for example, relegation is likely for force Lloyds’ hand in liquidating the club and selling off the assets (stadium, hotel and players) to recoup as much money as they can given the unprofitability of the club at that time (either a vastly reduced income in the SPL or relegation from the SPL under the current circumstances). Why do you think Michael Johnson has gone public about how everyone should now go easy on Rangers despite their seemingly endless list of misdemeanours? Furthermore, Rangers would also retain full voting rights within the SPL i.e. they will be able to veto, along with Celtic, any proposal to change the 11-1 voting structure as it currently stands. Essentially, aside from what is likely to be a watered down punishment from the SFA, they will be the same Rangers as six months ago, minus debt, starting completely afresh and most importantly when considering this debate, in a very strong position. However, you have got to believe, given the furore that has been around a Newco, FC Rangers (or whatever name they are likely to dream up) will potentially face strict penalties from fellow SPL clubs as a given for league re-entry, including the very, very important possibility of rushing through a change in the voting structure I mentioned earlier which is really crucial in all this and what makes the SPL lop-sided at the moment. Do that and the whole landscape of how we distribute finance in this country can virtually change overnight. I really can’t for the life of me understand the whole flag-waving for the anti Newco argument. If anything, fans should be protesting about “No to a CVA”. You also have the fact they would be banned from Europe for three years, a punishment NOT set down if they agree a CVA, I honestly think fans have got it completely the wrong way around. So for what it is worth, I say bring on a Newco and say no to a CVA.

From memory, did it not go something like 2004 – 2006 – Xara and Zoom (last two year home kit) 2006 – 2007 – Xara and Anglian (2-year deal with Zoom ended) 2007 – 2008 – Bukta and Anglian (Xara pulled out the Scottish market) 2008 – 2009 – Bukta and JAXX (2-year deal with Anglian ended) 2009 – 2010 – Canterbury and JAXX (Bukta withdrew from pro-kit market) 2010 – 2011 – PUMA and Commsworld (Canterbury UK went bust and 2-year deal with JAXX ended) 2011 – 2012 – PUMA and Cash Converters (1 year deal with Commsworld ended)

And almost always, it would appear, in the Daily Record. Between them and their Sunday sister, that's about what - six or seven articles in the last few years. The most galling thing is that there are more than a few clubs who participate in this programme but it appears Motherwell are singled out any time there is a 'story' on any one individual. Either they have an axe to grind or it's lazy journalism using FOI because they remember a similar story from a year ago. What was it? 'Murderwell' a few years ago.