That's really the point, isn't it?
There are a whole lot of gradiations between 'stay right where we are and don't change a thing' and 'do whatever is necessary to maximize revenue'. So the question is, 'when is it too much?'
The rebuilding of an old stand? Clearing them all and starting over? Starting over somewhere else in town? Out of town? Bear with me, as it's gonna get a bit silly ... Changing the club's colours for a sponsor? Or maybe even the name? These things have happened.
Of course, no one is endorsing those last things (actually, there's been some 'RedBullWednesday' talk, but whatever). No one wants their club to be the next MKDons. But the question is, where along the line does draw the line? When Spurs were going through their 'Stratford saga', there were plenty - I mean, a lot - of Spurs fans who were perfectly happy with pulling up stakes and moving to East London. Who am I to say they're not fans? They are. But I couldn't get my head around that. I may not like the new stadium relative to the old one ... but I think it's great relative to Stratford. Nobody anywhere would suggest that St James Park is soulless, despite being redeveloped; but neither did Newcastle pull up stakes on a century's history to get there. But I digress.
I'll gladly admit that I tend to draw that line earlier than most, and no chairman would do well to take his cues from the likes of me. I don't expect Luton to say, 'let's not leave Kenilworth Road, there's a fella in Indiana who really likes it'. But the further you take it, the more you're giving away. And that stuff - a club's heritage - matters. Otherwise, in the end, there's nothing to differentiate 'your' club from any other.
'Keep one foot in the past and you won't move forward'. Well, you certainly won't if you keep both feet in the past. But if you pull up both feet, you'll lose your moorings. Hmm ... I'm not sure how sound that analogy is, but you get my point. The way forward is, indeed, as stated above, about striking a balance. But even those who agree on that point will have differences on where the balance lies.
Serious question, then: What about West Ham? In fiscal terms, the London Stadium has to be better than Upton Park. F*ck me, though, if it's not shit; and they've not given up a lot for it. Where do folks come down on that? If I were West Ham (and thank f*ck I'm not, for myriad reasons), I know how I'd feel about it (and folks can pretty much guess). How would folks feel if they gave up Hillsborough and ended up with something like that?