Parachute payments under review as Premier League 'Big Six' fear funds are being pocketed rather than invested 

• e-mail

The amount of parachute payments given to clubs relegated from the Premier League is under review amidst concerns that the system is being misused.

The ‘Big Six’ clubs are questioning whether payments of up to £90million for relegated sides is encouraging them to pocket the money rather than invest in their squads to stay up. 

Informal discussions are expected to take place when chief executives meet at a Premier League shareholders meeting on Thursday.

Clubs fear parachute payments are being pocketed, as seen by Hull selling Robert Snodgrass

Parachute payments were introduced to safeguard clubs who dropped into the second tier having spent heavily on transfer fees and wages. Amounts have risen rapidly in the last decade from £32m to the £91m earmarked over three years for clubs who are relegated.

But there is increasing disquiet that the parachute payments are not encouraging clubs to invest in players to make the Premier League more competitive. 

Hull are being cited as an example, selling Jake Livermore and Robert Snodgrass in January to record an overall transfer profit of £7.7m since winning promotion. 

The departure of Jake Livermore has seen Hull make an overall profit of £7.7m since promotion

Other clubs have been mentioned as ‘playing the system’ and not investing the payments. 

In 2010-11, Blackpool spent only £3.5m on new players when they moved up to the Premier League. 

Getting rid of parachute payments is unlikely but there may be a revised deal to ensure clubs who invest in their squads are better protected than those who do not.

Blackpool spent just £3.5million when they were promoted to the Premier League in 2010