I think the topic is fairly relevant given our current ownsership situation, so basically I put it to you:
Would you rather have an owner that treated the club as a play thing or an owner who wanted to make money?
I can see an argument for either to be honest.
An owner that wanted to make a profit would balance the books and put the club in a stable position, so if he did eventually leave, a new owner could take the reigns and handle the club. However it could mean the sacrafice of regular new shirts and an increase of ticket prices. As well as a lack of new signings coming through (at least big names anyway)
A rich owner could easily come in and sign whoever the hell we please and get us the glory. Would it taste as sweet as it did back then? or would it simply be us selling ourselves to the devil in return for trophies? The club wouldn't be in the healthiest position but as long as the owner's there we would be fine and always fighting for the title and getting far in Europe.
There's obviously a lot more pros and cons to each but it's late and I can't be bothered to think of everything

I know in an ideal world we'd want a loaded passionate owner who came along, gave us success and a new stadium.
so I put it to you, which of the two would you rather have? Remember, its totally hypothetical
Please justify your choice