**Both Manchester clubs are said to be holding ‘considerable’ concerns over a new proposal that has been pitched to the 20 Premier League clubs by the top-flight.**
Senior figures at both Manchester City and Manchester United have reservations about the potential impact of suggested changes, particularly in relation to their own existing commercial arrangements.
The matter of pitchsider advertising through electronic boards was discussed at a recent shareholders’ meeting, where opinions across the division are believed to have been split on the matter.
Representatives from clubs with smaller commercial revenues may view the proposal as a mechanism to boost collective income, allowing them to benefit from the global appeal and market strength of the league’s biggest sides.
But according to an exclusive report from [MailSport’s Mike Keegan](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-15567989/Premier-Leagues-750m-new-advertising-proposal-met-resistance-Big-Six-clubs-wary-US-adopted-model-wont-beneficial-cause-conflict-interests-team-sponsors.html), the Premier League proposal to centralise perimeter advertising sales – which they claim could secure an extra £750 million per year – has been met with a ‘frosty reception’ from top clubs.
The proposal would see 60 per cent of pitch-side advertising sold centrally and the number of existing top-tier partners increased from seven to 10, with the aforementioned extra revenue then split between the 20 clubs in separate amounts dependent on factors.
The report has, however, revealed that both Manchester City and Manchester United, alongside others within the traditional ‘Big Six’, have considerable concerns over the proposal, while none of the six clubs would comment on the matter.
It is explained within the same report that at present, the Premier League is permitted five minutes of advertising space on pitchside boards during the game – three minutes of which goes to the broadcaster if the fixture is being televised.
Despite the reservations voiced by some of the division’s most powerful sides, some are likely to feel as though the exploration of new structures is driven by a duty to maximise value for all members of the English top-flight.
But the latest debate follows previous instances of resistance from the Manchester clubs in particular, who last season opposed the league’s proposed ‘anchoring’ system, that would have limited spending relative to the division’s lowest earners.
On that occasion, the measure failed to gain sufficient backing, and whether a similar outcome awaits for the Premier League’s latest proposal remains to be seen as talks continue.