See, it's also a risk of repeating the same endless things
but I've always thought it depends what you want a club to be, as well. I don't necessarily think successful in a business sense is the same as successful stewardship of a club. There's certainly an argument that as a business we should have been closed down long before now, and in effect she's trying to make something from nothing - it's a free hit as we're knackered if she didn't try, knackered if it fails so... if it succeeds we end up with a bit of a bonus.
The counter argument is a club is about a lot more than that, it's about community, relationships with people and place, and that a lot of that was destroyed unneccesarily (and yes, GR, MM, underappreciation by other stakeholders also done similar, but that doesn't negate this particular point). So in many ways the stakes are higher because the actions taken would make it harder to rise from the ashes if we were to fall completely. We can see now, we do better in many of those areas than we have for years but, it's a long way back!
An owner should be a steward, rather than a business person, in my view. Sometimes those two things coincide, as the aim of the steward is to hand the club on to the next party in good shape, but being a steward also means doing things that, at times, aren't necessarily what you would do as a ruthless cut-throat business person.