You'll have fans like that.
I'm pretty indifferent to sugar daddies and state ownership in general though as the hypocrisy of who can and who can't and how much and what means we take their money annoys me. I mean no offence to anyone with this, but I know hundreds of human rights activists on this forum will suddlenly be doing mental gymnastics as to why their club is different if United or Liverpools sale does go through as you said.
For me its also hypocritical to say "United can't be owned by Qatar but Bayern can be part owned by Adidas" given the latters human rights record while not on the same level is still absolutely vile or "We can't be owned by Qatar but we'll gladly take their sponsorship money". If we're removing owners based on hr records, we have to deal with it root and branch in my opinion. All or nothing. That Bayern fan banner at the Etihad nearly had me pissing myself laughing. "Football is for the people" whilst their kit manufacturer who own 10% of their club run sweatshops that have 8 year olds make their gear...
Truth be told I'm also a hypocrit, I own a smart phone but I complain about samsung and apple, I own Nike, Reebok and Adidas clothing, I didn't walk away from City after the takeover. So I kinda get what alot of fans here will do because I'[ve already lived it.
Don't get me wrong, I believe City are guilty, I don't know if we'll be found guilty which is my usual argument here. Legally its harder to stick. I also believe despite what the owners have done for the club if guilty they should be expelled from football as should everyone who is knowingly involved. There should be zero tolerence for cheating. Then I look at Juve and the Italian clubs and I think "shits rotten to the core anyway".
In an ideal world we'd have a proper ownership test, personally I'd love to see a real level playing field with homegrown rules, salary caps, transfer fee caps, limited transfers etc..