I think you over-estimate how rich Randy Lerner is.
Yes, he's got a bob or two, but he's not rich enough for 25m to just be some loose change down the back of his sofa.
I think the debt is a slight red-herring in the debate. Randy has enough money to do what's needed with the club. What is needed is for the club to stand on it's own two feet, without having a sugar-daddy and constant financial bail-outs. Randy et al have a long-term view for the club and that is ongoing sustainability. I would imagine he is looking at the current spending levels across the board and realises how unsustainable it is and will not jeopardise Villa for the sake of chasing glory. I think that in the not-too-distant-future, there will be a reigning-in of the sort of spending that Citeh and Chelsea have done in recent years and when that happens, a lot of clubs will struggle to survive as they will have overstretched themselves to the enth degree. This sort of thinking is already being planned for by the Premier League and the noises coming from FIFA and Uefa, indicate that this is the only direction football is heading. By being prudent now, Randy is setting us up as a real force for the future.
I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Milner but Randy is quite clear about how he is running the club, not as a sugar-daddy but as a supportive parent who helps when needed but is encouraging the club to work within it's means.
Actually, I do know what this means in terms of Milner. It means that we want to grow as a club but that when a gift-horse comes along, we cash in on it.
I'm not sure that any of what I typed actually adds anything to the debate though - the points I've raised have been raised many times already within this thread and those who are of the same mind as me will agree and those who aren't won't.