FFP

[Mister E]

... it works very effectively and is the cost of keeping the arsehole clubs from running off to their super league.

I agree with the logic of having the 85% compared with UEFA's 70% but the unintended consequences still make it difficult to execute in practice. The Premier League claims that "the 85% rule will 'allow clubs that do not regularly participate in European competitions to have sufficient headroom to compete for qualification', but - as we found out - once you're there unless the team is in the Chumps League it is very hard to make it work (because the revenues from the Europa and Conference are insufficient, relatively).
CD's idea of applying the 85% to newly-promoted clubs has some legs (although they, of course, get a massive cash injection anyway from having come up from the 2nd tier). Maybe it should be 70% across the whole Premier League and - if it wants to make Europe-qualification more competitive - award more money than currently to the lower-placed clubs (with the logic that the top-placed 7-8 clubs get Euro-rewards in the following season).

And, as if by magic, today sees an article about improving the Europa League rewards.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/mar/11/clubs-propose-revenue-redistribution-predictable-champions-league-union-of-european-clubs

[Mister E]

Presumably the plan is to gradually bring the 85% closer to the 70% in time.

The Premier League doesn't seem keen; see my longer post above

[Dante Lavelli]

Clubs should have a pretty decent handle on what their income will be regardless of the competitions they qualify for.

Maybe any % missed gets knocked off a future season’s ratio so clubs have XX months to sort it out.