Utd do have a 'huge' debt. Also, why should we pay any interest? It was a leveraged buyout, we gain nothing by having the Glazers running the club, so even if the interest was $1, it would be $1 too much!
Who are we?
And please take a serious moment to consider this question, because the fact that there are no we is whats wrong with all of your posts.
You act like there is an alternative reality where Manchester United actually is a fanowned club and the Glazers are just parasites that has attached themselves to the club.
Well, thats not the case and we are so past that ever being the case.
United is the Glazers asset now, like it or not. I did not like the takeover either, but that was 15 years ago now and the club is doing remarkably fine financially. Does it really matter if this is because of the Glazers, Gill, Woodward or Sir Alex?
And the simple reason to why we should pay interest is that the alternative is worse and would leave less money to the club for transfer fees and wages. You understand this basic concept yes?
Its simple: its cheaper for the Glazers (and thus the club) to partly finance operations by debt instead of equity.
All companies do that.
Do you want to force them to finance by equity instead?
It will be more expensive for them and thus less money for the club, if you grasp the basic fact that the Glazers control United fullstop and that there is no la-la land where United economy is not integrated with the Glazers own.
If they were to finance with equity they would take more dividends instead, but they would lose money on doing it that way and it would NOT come out of their own pockets.
Whatever is better for the "group" as a whole is better for United.
You can have a serious discussion about the ownership of United without these weird unicorn assumptions that you like to make.