I have league parity and football development concerns about these efforts, likely the same as others...
But this is really just a manifestation of the forces of economics at work, which makes it very difficult to stop. Ultimately, the argument is that the Top Six is deserving of a larger piece of the TV broadcast revenue pie as they—on the whole—generate the majority of it. While most of us blues, coming from where we have in the football supporters world, would prefer there to be an equal distribution of the spoils in this context (even perhaps a contra-position distribution), we would likely never advocate for such a system to be applied to our own lives (at least not in its purest, most comprehensive form, anyway—I think a fair few of us do support social wealth redistribution within a reasonable framework). And that’s the simplist explanation for why this is occurring and will likely come to fruition.
I cannot find any indication that there will not be systems in place to support (financially or otherwise) the club’s out of the Top Six, though, as it is still in the league’s collective interest to ensure a certain standard of competitiveness, even if it is not quite to the level we would like. Probably more important to the league is to maintain the financial viability of all member clubs. And, as others have noted, the Top Six can change, leading to the benefits being given to other clubs.
It is not ideal but fighting these basic economic forces is like trying to stop coastal erosion: you may be able to do it for a time, with limited success, but eventually Mother Nature wins out.
Note: for the fellow pedantic posters among us, I am not implying that economic forces are natural laws, only offering an analogy for their strength of influence in this context.