Just looking at all this through a different lens for a moment (not saying this is my opinion or that I know anything, but just suspend disbelief for a while)...
Bill apparently holds around 23% of the equity, same roughly as Earl and Woods. Earl holds his in a BVI brass plate entity, allegedly funded by Green. Woods holds his in his own right, we think. Bill originally borrowed the money to fund his purchase from his good friend [insert most appropriate name, but let's say Green for argument's sake - I've seen a number of posts over the weeks and months to suggest this is the case, but not sure how / if it can be proven either way].
Anyway let's assume it's true.
Fast forward to the rash of negotiations with numerous 'investors' banging down our door - and that elusive £150mm valuation. To what extent do you think Bill has any say in the matter? In this scenario, Green holds all the cards. He can afford (literally) to hold out for what ever price he likes - he has no loyalty or affection for the club, it's just another financial transaction. Kenwright has to play along because he's beholden to Green and out of his depth in the financial stakes. For all we know Green could be funding Bill in other areas, such as his theatre enterprises. Kenwright is in fact the gimp, the stooge put up by Green to take the flak and do the 'PR'.
So when Bill says 'David will have the Arteta money in January', and then through the voice of
Moyes we hear that this has changed, you need to look very carefully at Bill to notice the strings holding him up and moving him around.
OK, back down to earth. The bank situation is fluid. When we sold 'Tater, Yak, Beckford, Pienaar et al and reduced the wage bill, I could easliy believe that this would appease the banks, even without Mikky's transfer fee being needed to reduce the debit balance. However the bank will reserve it's right to review the position at any time, especially if the debit balance was already in excess of any agreed overdraft, such that the bank was 'accommodating' the club. This is the way banks work. They could since have said - actually, we'd rather you did pay us that now, since you have sold off your TV / Premier revenues for the next 2 years...
Re the signing of players on long term contracts, as has been said by many earlier, makes absolute sense to get them nailed down so that higher valuations can be placed on these 'assets' - the banks will also welcome this.
All in all, for all the public wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth around Bill and his pronouncements, empty promises etc (and I'm absolutely certainly not an apologist here), the facade this presents of our club just may be a complete sideshow to the real agenda - the wizard behind the curtain as someone so aptly put it earlier.
Just sayin like...
