I agree with this. In a way SAF was Manchester United. His management brought success at a time where the football landscape was changing, and it put the club in a position to capitalize on that. They became the richest and at one point the most popular club in the world. That was the club the Glazers took over.
True, and I'd say he made success look easy. Even without much Glazer backing he kept the club afloat. The Glazers underestimated how difficult what he did was, and I think that he knew that with the Glazers if he stayed any longer he would just tarnish his reputation. The "no value in the market" and him and Gill leaving so suddenly at the same time, to me says there's more to the story than meets the eye, but that's just conjecture on my part.
It is telling though that they thought Woodward and Moyes could fill those big shoes.
Regarding the spending, yes they have spent enough for success, but we're very erratic about when to spend and when not to.
The main problem I have with them is that the club have become more of a financial institution, geared more towards profit than a football club looking for success. As long as the club do well financially, there is no incentive for them to make any meaningful change, while we as fans care more about what happens on the field. Our vision of what we want from the club and theirs are at odds, but they own the club and call the shots, while we, the fans that love the club just vent our frustration on social media.
I don't think I'll ever be able to look at the clubs accounts and say "The Glazers are OK" while the club seems to be suffering.