Premier League’s £750m new advertising proposal met with resistance from the ‘Big Six’ – with clubs wary US-adopted model won’t be beneficial and cause a conflict of interests with other team sponsors

A Premier League proposal to centralise perimeter advertising sales – which they claim could net an extra £750m a year – has met with a frosty reception from some of its top clubs.

At last week’s shareholder meeting, the competition told its sides that they were examining the adaptation of a model similar to that used in US sports in which the league would negotiate deals on behalf of clubs.

Those at the meeting were informed that such a move, which would see 60 per cent of pitch-side advertising sold centrally and the number of existing top-tier partners increased from seven to 10, could bring in an additional £750m. Sources have disclosed that the extra revenue would then be split between the 20 clubs in separate amounts dependent upon a number of factors.

However, Daily Mail Sport understands that both Manchester clubs – and others within the ‘Big Six’ – have considerable concerns over the proposal.

None of those in the Big Six – Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham, United, City and Liverpool, would comment. It is understood that while United are willing to listen they remain thoroughly unconvinced that such a move would have any merit for either themselves of the competition.

The ‘Big Six’ have several fears about the US-adopted model which could raise £750million

When asked by Daily Mail Sport none of the ‘Big Six’ (Mikel Arteta pictured) would comment

City also did not comment but are also thought to harbour serious reservations. A common view among elite clubs is that they invest heavily in their commercial departments and simply feel that the level of expertise involved is beyond that found within the Premier League. That view is thought to be shared elsewhere – although some in the big six are open to a conversation. Currently, the Premier League is permitted five minutes of ad space on the boards during the game, three minutes of which goes to the broadcaster if the fixture is being televised.

At the meeting itself, one chief executive raised the prospect of such a proposal creating potential conflicts of interest with existing club sponsors. For example, should the Premier League sign a deal with an automotive partner it would create potential issues with companies from that industry which already have deals.

There may well, however, be support from those with smaller revenues who see this as an opportunity to raise more cash, in what is a fascinating situation.

Smaller clubs may well welcome the opportunity to leverage the pull of bigger sides to their own benefit.

While the Premier League declined to comment, insiders say any move would be for any entirely for the benefit of its clubs. They believe they have robust analysis to back their claims which is supported by internal and club expertise and that they are acting on the back of a duty to explore avenues which may be of advantage to its sides. The competition is expected to continue to liaise with its clubs and would not bring forward any formal proposals which it believes would not be in the interests of its members.

Last season, Daily Mail Sport reported how United and City had formed an unlikely alliance against the Premier League’s attempt to introduce a system of anchoring, which would have seen the introduction of an effective salary cap.

Both clubs lobbied hard against the prospect, which would have limited the amount clubs could have spent on to five times the prize money and broadcast revenue paid to the side that finished bottom.

Despite early support, the proposal was rejected at a Premier League meeting in November.