Which explains the measures taken against City by UEFA :/
You're right, there's a slight leeway (in the short term anyway) but this idea that owners can bankroll clubs anymore is *******s. As is this dodgy sponsorship thing you keep bringing up - Leicester's owner isn't anything like a Gulf state with a bottomless pit of money and state owned companies to sponsor the club.
I can't remember the exact details off the top of my head but the PL's FFP also has limits on how much clubs can increase their wagebill by each year too.
4mil previously 7mil for next season and beyond
OR every bit of increased revenue excluding soley tv revenue from the league and only applies when wages are over 67million. So Leicester don't fall under it anyway currently, the CL money can go straight into wages, the increased money from league position can go into wages, the increased stadium income can go into wages, they can add 7mil, they can add every penny from increased sponsorship.
The current rules are max loss over 3 years is 35mil average or 105mil if equity is invested in the club, 5mil average or 15mil total with no equity. IE even the rules say the club can have an owner pay literally 30mil a year into the club without being penalised.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/32784375
the uefa/CL rules are being relaxed anyway and City and PSG weren't fined for exactly the same things. PSG didn't post losses but did so by having one insane Qatar sponsorship deal for 250mil which stopped them making a loss, this sponsorship was deemed out of fair play. They already 'fixed' that by changing to multiple smaller deals from multiple companies that can all be considered fair value compared to other clubs who already have such deals. City made bigger losses and thought some numbers wouldn't count but were counted. They got a meh 60mil euros fine but if they stick with the punishment things they will get 40mil of that back in a year or two.
These fines didn't stop either club, neither were thrown out of the competition, neither became crippled by the fines and both have multiple completely bogus sponsorship deals, the issue was how/when they were done, the perceived value and how they split them up, both have been fixed. Even so the rules have been relaxed further and every other club just has to copy what these two did to fix their fake sponsorship/equity injection deals and they wouldn't be fined under the old rules let alone the new ones.
However my post was mostly to say, Leicester are barely spending today, they'll be able to increase wages easily and sustainably(without CL long term) by lets say 30mil based purely on stadium income and current tv value deal having increased. Look at Everton with infrequent european seasons spending 70-80mil range very comfortably before the current tv deal increases. On top of that Leicester could move from their own owners sponsorship deal to a new one with an outside company(not fake equity but a genuine deal) which would be worth way more than 16mil a year for next season at least and likely for multiple years still being higher than current deal. They can get an increased shirt/kit deal as well, then there is the CL money itself.
Leicester are a club that will have this year a huge capacity for expansion of wages/squad size without compromising the club financially at all, if they want to increase spending further there are MANY ways to do it without any issues with FFP.
