Quite interesting info being shown here, both mathematical and statistical.

Most likely PPS has some high-payers, and I as a F2P player don't have anything against that. I mean, it's their choice, and they help to keep to game alive.
Also, at this point, their cash spendings don't really mean a problem for us F2P guys. It's not like games when your set of whatever (units, resources, cards, etc) goes straight against another player's, with the result of resources being taken from the player who lost (as happens in other games).
I do believe though, when the PVP-style event comes up, then those spenders could cause some uproar 'cause they'll likely become unbeatable. But still, that should affect only our rankings, and nothing more.
I actually think that PPS protects the F2P players quite fairly, compared to other games.

During this event, for example, what got most of us stuck on lower rankings wasn't exactly due to those cash-spenders being at the top ranks, it was the goddamm 8.7m guards issue. Cash-spending gave them the possibility of beat that wall and get better results, I agree, but it's somehow predictable to happen.

I agree with [MENTION=67]Skulkraken[/MENTION] when he says that we'll be able to catch up later on.