Transferring the debt so that's it is owed to Moshiri without any interest payments is clearly a good thing for Everton, and something which I welcome very much. However I still have a few questions, which I do not know the answer to, and to which I am happy to be pointed in the right direction by someone who does.
Is it not orthodox business practice for debt to be paid off during a takeover process?
When debt is paid off through completing a takeover, is the money used to purchase the company considered to be part of the acquisition cost, and therefore not owed to the new owner?
Would Everton be financially better off if Moshiri had conducted orthodox business practice and paid the debt off through completing a takeover process which saw him purchase the club outright, rather than strategically choosing to keep his shareholding at 49.9 and then lending the club money?
Just wondering. I'm happy with Moshiri and things are looking positive at the moment.