This is why I get a bit annoyed at the way we lambast ourselves over wages ratios.
Yes ours is far too high and unsustainable, no question. But it is because we (rightly or wrongly) had an ambition to compete with the 6, not the 14, and to do so you need to pay the cost of 'better' players. When it doesn't work it takes years to fix due to contracts, and boy did it not work.
90% is ridiculous, but where spurs are quoted as 45% their actual number is still higher (I imagine), and it definitely is for the others. You can't genuinely compete and sustain without paying what these players cost, but you can't go on paying this unless we got a share of the much higher tv money, commercial etc. that the 6 get.
Try to compete = almost certainly fail and hamstrung for years by psr, don't try to compete = become a 8 - 12 dweller with a nice headpat for 'doing it the right way'.
What's the point.