I don't have the football history that some of you have so somebody needs to explain why Man City gets so much shit for being bought by wealthy owners and when Liverpool FC was sold to wealthy owners as well. The key difference I noticed is the owners' source of wealth.
A decade or so ago, Liverpool Football Club was owned by 2 absolute leeches, who drained us of nearly every penny we had. We were not far from going into Bankruptcy. FSG came and bought us, and loaned us the money to get us out of our debt. Loaned it, we still pay it back (I'm not sure how much is left). FSG then made the right moves, changing how the club was run, getting in managers who could get the best of the players they had (we had a few bad decisions in this department too), and getting better sponsorship deals for the club - like the one with New Balance. We signed it as a progressive contract which meant the more successful we were, the more money they would pay the following season(s).
We also spent a good few years, building players up and selling them for ridiculous amounts of money (see Sterling, Suarez and Coutinho). We then reinvested that money back into the squad, getting some really good bargains in the market (like Mohammed Salah) and some freebies in Milner and Matip. Slowly but surely, we addressed all of our weaknesses using money we had amassed from sales, sponsorship's and cup/league placements. We earned the right to spend that money.
City's owners came in, bought them and just started piping money in via dubious sponsorship deals with companies they themselves owned. They are now being investigated for breaching various different versions of Financial Fair Play.