If you can afford it then the money isn't an issue.
Not entirely true.
First of all, the fair play rules set to kick in make *sure* that it's at least a concern, if not an out and out "issue".
Secondly, the pleasure of pissing away a half billion a year must be worth the expenditure, since the owner isn't out for profit. Khaldoon is playing with around one-fifteenth of Mansour's net worth, if you include takeover costs, salaries, net transfers and capital expenditure. It's possible for whatever reason - economic conditions, political instability, oil prices, investment regulation, frightening levels of short term loss, and pure fucking boredom, that the taps may be tightened. If there is no management model behind "Yalla, jeeb Rolls Royce", even a temporary tightening of the investment spigots could result in disastrous consequences - no youth system, no budget bench, fat long-term contracts, huge accounts payable and spoiled fans are a recipe for disaster.
Finally, the track record of prudently managed teams have a greater claim to "chances created" than the boom-and-bust cycle typified by the Galactico model. Smart ownership is making a mark in worldwide sport at the current time, and those types of models - John Henry leading the list - will be tough to knock off the ball.
The time of the sugardaddy is over. The era of the sustainability is at hand.