I slightly disagree in the sense that I think that Infantino's plan is a response to the threat of a cartel-centred superleague rather than the other way round.
Put simply, despite controlling UEFA, the cartel didn't get their own way and City (not PSG, by the way, they are a member of the G-14, hence why £100m sponsorship by Qatar was deemed an acceptable "market rate") weren't kicked out of the CL.
In my view, we're watching the denouement of a battle that has been raging since the formation of the CL. We'll find out who runs football, UEFA and/or FIFA or a cartel of clubs. None of the outcomes are particularly palatable for traditionalists but that boat sailed many years ago.
I see a number of potential outcomes. The non-cartel clubs whose directors benefit from the CL, shit themselves again and give in. Infantino is removed and an impotent, and probably corrupt, puppet like Platini is inposed. He instigates another "investigation" as a result of which the desired result is achieved and we are thrown out of the CL, we lose that income and can't compete any more.
Alternatively, the football authorities finally grow some bollocks and call their bluff. Infantino survives and the cartel clubs either shut the fuck up and get on with it or form their own authority and competitions with the implications Infantino has outlined.
The outcome depends on the backing of the non-cartel clubs. Past experience shows they're happy to settle for crumbs at the masters' table. However, there's just a chance that they'll realise that if they don't stand up now, they're fucked forever because, in the event that they can acquire investment, they won't be alllowed to compete either.