Love United? For some fans, perhaps a little less than before. Hate the Glazers? Not so much, it seems. Not any more. From a high point of insurrection around the green and gold protests of 2010, that discord is now no more than a low-level grumble.

Despite, ironically, a period of relative underperformance on the pitch in the post Sir Alex Ferguson era, the talk among supporters is now of who will follow Memphis Depay into Old Trafford rather than whether the Glazers will sell up.

The visceral chants of “Die Glazer Die” that accompanied protests around Old Trafford 10 years ago, some from fans who may have now turned away from the club altogether, belong to an earlier age. Exactly a decade on from their audacious, divisive takeover Manchester United’s American owners have seen English football morph to resemble them rather than the other way around.

The anniversary coincides with this weekend’s first “United: Live” fan festival in New Delhi, presented by “Manchester United’s official tyre partner in India” and billed as “a must for any United fan”. Culminating in a live screening of the game against Arsenal it will also feature a personal appearance from Mikaël Silvestre and a special airing of The Greatest Story Ever Told, a biopic of the club’s illustrious history designed to cement its romantic allure.

A commercial unit that now employs 140 staff worldwide has delivered a segmented sponsorship model that others are scrambling to copy. Meanwhile, the global growth of the Premier League shows no sign of abating whatever the debate about its relative quality, with a commensurate rise in television income.

Even Andy Green, the financial analyst and Manchester United supporter who assiduously counted the cost in pounds and pence of the Glazers’ leveraged takeover – total in interest and fees: £800m and rising – now says: “Most supporters don’t particularly like the owners but they are resigned to the situation. They got very lucky but when you get lucky in a leveraged buyout this is what happens – you get a fantastic return.”

For the six members of the Glazer clan who since the death of the patriarch, Malcolm, last year now share the club between them, that has meant raising $400m (£256m) through selling a 10% slice on the US stock exchange and seeing their asset double in value to about $1.6bn (£1bn).

Through a mixture of luck and judgment the Glazers survived the 2010 crisis point summed up by David Beckham stringing a green and gold scarf around his neck on his return to Old Trafford with Milan as the stadium rocked with righteous fury.

That period also took in a £500m bond issue that laid bare the financial high-wire act, the mirage of a bid from the so-called Red Knights and the eventual repayment of the Payment in Kind high interest loans that weighed heavily on the balance sheet.

By mixing a savvy global commercial strategy with the genius of Ferguson in eking out continued success on a budget and a large dollop of luck in booming TV-rights income, they made it through their riskiest period unscathed. Despite the on-field shockwaves caused by Ferguson’s departure and the ill-starred David Moyes era, there has also been a shift in the way the club engage with their match-going fans.

In 2010 David Gill, the then chief executive who had initially opposed the takeover but later defended his new employers with the zeal of the converted, said it would be “odd” to have a dialogue with fans he saw as being “at war with the club”.

His successor, Ed Woodward, despite – or perhaps because of – his closeness to the Glazers, has pursued a more conciliatory path. Season ticket prices have been frozen and lines of communication re-established.

The takeover was in many ways a product of its time and the freewheeling nature of the pre-crash, globalised financial markets. As such, the idea of buying England’s most famous club in a highly geared deal at eye-wateringly punishing interest rates did not cause the Glazers to skip a beat.

It was the natural conclusion of a process that began in the 1980s when clubs first floated on the stock market. It also paved the way for a new breed of Premier League owner with the likes of Stan Kroenke at Arsenal drawn by the siren call of international growth, increasing broadcast revenues and financial fair play rules that would limit their exposure. It is telling in all sorts of ways that, within football, the great Old Trafford debt financing experiment is viewed with respect bordering on admiration.

Not that the Glazers have sought to gloat. Or, indeed, say anything. Ever since Joel Glazer gave his first and last interview to the club’s TV channel MUTV immediately after the takeover – in which he explained “debt means different things to different people” – they have been silent.

Behind the scenes, however, Joel in particular is hands-on. They have proved just flexible enough when required, sanctioning that new contract for Wayne Rooney at one pivotal juncture and breaking the club’s vow not to sign ageing players for Robin van Persie after losing out on the title to City on the final day of the 2011-12 season.

With the financial brakes now off and the FFP era having locked in the advantage of those clubs with the biggest revenue streams, they can now afford to compete again for the world’s most expensive players.

Ferguson will argue to this day, even in private, that the Glazers never constrained his spending. Many fans who watched as the club failed to reinvest the proceeds of Cristiano Ronaldo’s transfer or build on their 2008 Champions League triumph find that very hard to believe. Those who opposed the Glazers and all they stand for will always ask what sort of club Manchester United would be if that £800m had been reinvested in the team, facilities and keeping a lid on ticket prices.

They look enviously on how Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern Munich have pulled away on the pitch even as Manchester United have remained in the top three revenue generators.

Manchester United Supporters Trust, who said it was “impossible to imagine worse owners”, might have failed to force the Glazers out but believe its pressure had stopped them taking cash out of the club, seeking a naming rights partner for Old Trafford or raising season ticket prices.

“It’s just a shame we had to go through all the pain and waste of the last decade simply to allow a family with no connection to Manchester United to enrich themselves at the expense of our club and fans,” it added.

Yet with debt down to “just” £380m, less than half of the figure at its height in 2010, and revenues continuing to rise, Louis van Gaal is free to target virtually any player in world football. The signs are the Glazers will enjoy the upside for years to come, with the option of selling further tranches of shares if they want to raise money while sitting on an ever appreciating asset and retaining absolute control. The Glazers have won – but at what cost?