Newcastle fans hoping for a major spree by their club's perspective Saudi Arabian owners are set to be disappointed as the Premier League and UEFA insist spending restrictions will stay in place.
Both governing bodies have their own versions of 'financial fair play' (FFP), with the Premier League limiting owner-subsidised losses to £105million over three years and UEFA limiting three-year losses to £26m.
Spokesmen for both organisations have reiterated that there are no plans for either set of FFP rules to be softened. 'That's not under consideration,' said a Premier League spokesman.
'The fundamental principles of FFP will remain unchanged,' said a UEFA spokesman.
In addition, sources at both bodies say future commercial deals at Newcastle will be tightly scrutinised so the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) cannot 'cook the books' and inject extra cash in trumped-up sponsorship deals above market rates.
The proposed takeover has prompted huge controversy not least because of Saudi Arabia's terrible human rights record. Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is widely perceived to have ordered the murder of dismemberment in late 2018 of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the Saudi regime.
But at least some of Newcastle's fanbase, fed up with the stewardship of Mike Ashley, appear to be happy to welcome investment from PIF, not least if it turns the club into top-flight contenders.
As leading sports lawyer Daniel Geey writes for Sportsmail: 'As Newcastle will want [to aim] to participate in UEFA competition, they will be required to adhere to more stringent UEFA FFP rules… and cope with a maximum of a £26m loss over three years.'
Given that Newcastle made just a small profit in their most recent available accounts (for 2017-18) and are expected to have done worse in 2018-19, PIF's ability to burn through money to sign and pay big-name players is likely to amount to tens of millions of pounds per season of net spending at most, not hundreds of millions or billions.
Those with knowledge of PIF's plans are privately briefing that PIF don't intend to spend hugely anyway - and that instead they will invest bigger sums in the club's academy, scouting, youth development and talent ID programmes. This kind of spending is allowed outside the FFP rules.
But in order to achieve an impact big enough to challenge for titles quickly, the examples of Chelsea and Manchester City show that enormous sums of money are required if an owner is too impatient to grow organically over the long term.
Analysis by Sportsmail showed that Roman Abramovich spent £518m on net transfer fees and additional player wages alone in the first three seasons of his ownership of Chelsea from summer 2003 to summer 2006. In that time, Chelsea clocked up cumulative financial losses, according to club accounts, of £308m.
In the first three years' of Sheik Mansour's ownership of City from summer 2008, City spent £584m on net transfer fees and additional player wages alone, up to 2011, clocking up cumulative losses of £395m in that period. It then took another year and hundreds of millions more in spending before City won their first Premier League title.
City currently face a two-year Champions League ban for breaking UEFA FFP for a second time, pending an appeal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, another reminder that Newcastle under Saudi ownership won't just be able to spend without limit to buy success.
