Honestly, that is fine as long as they ensure that it is run properly on the field (and do put money aside for stadium and training ground improvements). The issue with the Glazer's isn't what they've allowed us to spend, it's the fact that the people they put in charge of running the club proved absolutely incompetent but stayed in their roles for a decade or so. There are also rumours that one or two of the Glazer's insist on having their own say on things like transfers which is also a huge issue if true.
The perfect owner for me would be one that did treat us as a business, but did so in a competent way. Take a small dividend out each year but otherwise all the money that the club makes stays with the club to spend. Headhunt the best-in-class for different positions throughout the club, ensuring that money is spent correctly. Stay out of the decision-making themselves, allowing those employees to run the business that they are hired to do. Doing it this way just ensures the long-term health of the club, rather than having to rely on a suger-daddy owner treating us as a plaything.
Other than maybe needing the owner to dip into their own pockets to help with something big like Old Trafford renovation (replacement?), I actively don't want an owner who puts their own money into the club. We are financially strong enough to not need it, and all it would do is cheapen any success we got afterwards in my eyes. Of course I don't want them taking out too much either (either directly into their own pockets or indirectly to handle debt). A small dividend each year, and then just enjoy the worth of the club increasing.
I have no idea if Ratcliffe would do it this way, but he does seem more likely than some others.
