Most disciplines offer the training and legging up part as service.
And I don't think it is a bad thing when an absentee owner is being told which horse of the string he can ride.
But (and here I probably disagree with the H/J crowd) I have read plenty of examples where the owner happily relinquished control of horse and pocket book to the trainer, even down to what I can only call as micro management.
if it floats your boat, that's fine.
But be honest enough about it and question the motives to make sure it is for the right reasons.
it's no different IMHO from the trainer, regardless of discipline, who pushes a client into buying a horse the client is unable to ride on the best day, just so trainer has something to ride and show.
yes, people do like the idea of owning horses. It makes the industry go round, after all, whee would our top riders gt their mounts if not for those individuals!
But in many instances it's borderline unethical.
You can't fathom not doing it this way, I can't fathom going along with it.