The intention of these proposed "financial fair play" (not!) rules is to ensure that clubs in the CL cannot spend more than they earn in football revenue. If I remember rightly, in the original article on the subject, twatini also commented that they would scrutinise any sponsorship deals to ensure they were realistic. Thereby ensuring our rich benefactors could not get 'round this by bunging us a few million via dodgy sponsorship deals.
If this comes in then it means the top teams in Europe who currently qualify for CL will continue to remain in the CL. Their current football revenue meets the clubs finances (whether or not they are in debt - as in the case of rags) - and as long as the continue to qualify for the CL, it self-perpetuates because as we all know, the CL can generate income of circa £35million - and it's all football revenue. We upset the apple cart when we made bids for kaka, Eto'o and John Terry (that's why abramovich is all for these new rules - we can't entice any of his players with an offer of better wages, because, if our football revenue doesn't meet the overall wage bill and other football finances, we can't enter the CL - even if we win the PL). It's perfect for twatini because his continental friends in italy and spain get to keep/get the best players in Europe without having to pay extortionate wages (as in the case of Ronaldo at real madrid), and unless we are in the CL, we're not likely to attract them.
So, the way 'round it is to examine the various legitimate means of generating football revenue. Currently, the biggest earner (both in the PL and the CL) is TV. So, we need to agree a deal with TV companies in the Middle East to televise all our matches - this would generate enormous amounts of football revenue which would allow us to continue our current investment programme!
