The point of the article is that Terry seemed to think that producing proof that he was paying more fees to third parties, regardless of the value, was in any way reassuring to the players, senior or otherwise.
you have gone off on a complete tangent here fella
Probably not being clear; Terry's problem was both lack of money, and lack of credibility.
Showing the players an uncompleted deal, (which itemises a $35 bank transfer fee), completely fails to address both of his problems.
The real problem is that Terry seems to have thought this would be reassuring!?!