Documents at Companies House show that certain debts were paid and new loans taken out recently. I believe these longer term loans were used to pay however much the overdraft needed to be reduced by. I think that where the stagnant comment stems.
The £5m loss isn't really a true reflection of our finances either. Without selling assets, players and properties, we would actually lose close to £15m a season/year.
The Arteta firesale was because all the other fixed assets had been sold and the club couldn't afford a massive headline loss as everybody we owe would have sheet the bed. Don't forget we didn't buy a proper player for three seasons and It's about four since we actually had a net spend.
There are smaller clubs with bigger debts, no doubt. The crucial thing is who the monies are owed to. Most owe to thier owner. Somebody will never liquidate a business that owes them money if they own it.
We arent in that boat.
I stand to be corrected, but I believe the Companies House records show the repayment of the small loans that we take out each summer to cover cash flow. We then do the same loan for another year before it is paid back. We still had to pay the overdraft back though when the bank demanded that we do so, an overdraft that was used to cover circa 5million pound losses over a number of years.
Surely you agree with this, otherwise there would be no explanation as to where all the Arteta and Bellefield money went, especially whilst you are also arguing that our debt has remained stagnant as you put it?
We really aren't in that bad of a position. Granted, we have to watch our expenditure, but we can be ambitious at the same time. For example, the club wouldn't (couldn't???) have racked up losses of 5million pound per year if they didn't have the foresight to apply for a 30million bank overdraft, and I doubt the bank would grant a 30million pound overdraft that is repayable on demand unless they had the confidence in Everton being able to do just that (pay it back on demand).