Do you honestly think he'll be pumping cash into a club he currently only owns half of? Can't see it myself. Furthermore, FFP means you could be owned by Bill Gates and you still will only be able to spend the same as you can now.
As well as improving the commercial running of the club, the only place he could make a significant difference is funding the stadium situation but as above, it's highly unlikely that he'll be putting his own cash into the club while he only owns half of it.
FFP does nothing to stop you spending by injecting money as it stands.
It screws you if you're making heavy genuine losses but that is about it. New guy comes in and sorts out a sponsorship deal providing 50mil more a year... absolutely fine. Pays for a new stadium which increases earnings by 50mil a year, fine. Can currently directly inject 30mil cash a year outside of the other easier ways of doing it like sponsorship.
This was the current rules where the first year you could be punished for breaking it would be this year, they still don't appear to actually have established the rules/fines/points that may get deducted because everyone stopped caring about it.
UEFA are a little stricter in that they said you'd be thrown out of the competition for breaking basically the same limit structure(except the wages increase rule) as the prem league ffp... but after the PSG court case Uefa FFP appears to be letting itself go. Basically the exceptionally corrupt Platini saw PSG were getting screwed the worst and scaring off investment in other French teams and tried to undo the damage he was doing to the French league.
For someone with serious money, investing in a team is incredibly easy. City did it, jack up sponsorship with deals through other businesses you own or your mate owns.... that is about it. The only way FFP really hurts you is the trying to get to the top by getting into massive debt on the hopes you might make that money back in the future. It does absolutely nothing to stop super rich owners making their clubs rich.
.
