I think the point he is making is they've done a good job from their own point of view. If I was running a club and were able to take out £20 million plus every year I'd be pretty happy with that regardless of the match results.I think that's a bit of a strange argument tbh.
By way of illustration, if a CEO runs a company into the ground, no-one would say he's done a good job because he managed to pay himself £2m/year for a few years. In fact they would say the very opposite.
By the same token, I don't see how one could argue that the Glazers have done a good job simply by making money for themselves.
I still think part of the blame lies with the previous hierarchy. They knew the Glazers had no money of their own to put into it when they sold out to them.
But anyway, who gives a toss.