Yes, we all want new and better facilities. However it is a balancing act and any debt has to be sustainable, otherwise it can readily become a white elephant and scupper us even quicker than living with poor facilities.
We've had scattergun economics with our on-pitch dealings/decisions that has been disastrous and as a result have FFP breathing down our necks. Now we also have an already very expensive stadium project, that according to Moshiri has cost-inflated by 50%. The original financial strategy collapsed into "bank of daddy" only, with the then projected debt "seemingly" only sustainable due to an apparently limitless "bank of grand-daddy" USM naming rights deal. Without that, there must be a massive shortfall. I'm more than happy to be corrected if anyone has seen figures/projections that show otherwise. Let's be honest, the uncontrolled money-no-object approach hasn't served us well so far.
So, I think it's fair for some people to still question the whole sustainability..... especially given the disastrous state of the club due to the quality of all other decision-making to date.
Of course beyond that, there is the whole "new stadium effect" that can hopefully elevate our value to help facilitate new owners/investors coming in to absorb that debt..... which is what we are seeing being played out now (before it is even complete). However, that may all still be as dangerous and as speculative a thin line as our current league position.
In my opinion, the whole future of our club has been wildly gambled with. Let's hope it pays off.