Where Does Minnesota Twins Payroll Actually Stand Right Now?

[Greggory Masterson]

Some say the Twins’ current payroll is $142. Some say it’s $127. My uncle Lenny says that back in his day, ballplayers paid for a nickel and an opera ticket. In an offseason dominated by payroll discussion, agreeing on a number is probably worthwhile, right?

Image courtesy of Kim Klement Neitzel-Imagn Images

On X/Twitter last week, BrooksGate, a popular account that posts a lot of interesting tidbits and stats of questionable legitimacy, tweeted a graphic detailing year-over-year changes between the payrolls of MLB teams, comparing teams’ current payrolls to last year’s. Strikingly, the graphic showed that the Minnesota Twins have cut their payroll this offseason by nearly $27 million from where it stood in 2024.

 

Among the hundreds of people who responded to the post was Jon Becker of FanGraphs, who pointed out that Spotrac, the source of the figures, does not factor in pre-arbitration salaries (i.e., minimum-salary players who fill out the rest of the roster), only counting the guaranteed salaries.

Our own Matthew Trueblood also pointed out that the two sets of numbers described different types of data: competitive balance tax totals (CBT; which include penalties for spending above certain thresholds) and 40-man roster payroll, making a comparison foolish. Apples and oranges.

Coincidentally, a few hours before these tweets, the Twins Daily Slack channel was trying to answer exactly where the Twins’ payroll figure stood after the team’s 11 arbitration settlements. It’s a pretty important figure for the discussion and narratives this offseason. A difference of a couple of million dollars might be the difference between the Twins adding any outside talent or … no outside talent at all by edict of ownership. And it seems every source that lists a payroll total gives a different number.

As a reminder, here’s the information we’ve been working with this offseason. After slashing payroll ahead of the 2024 season for reasons you might personally find justifiable or egregious, depending on your persuasion, Minnesota's Opening Day payroll was somewhere around $130 million. After the 2024 season, one of the first bits of news about the 2025 season was that the team would not be further reducing payroll.

So we’ve collectively, as a fanbase, been using $130 million as our rough estimate for what payroll will be next year. The problem for the Twins is that their estimated Opening Day payroll for 2025 was somewhere between $130 and $140 million on the day the season ended. Although they shed the salaries of players like Max Kepler and Carlos Santana, veterans Pablo Lopez, Chris Paddack, Carlos Correa, and Randy Dobnak were each due guaranteed raises in their contracts, and 13 other Twins were due raises in arbitration.

There has never been a declarative statement as to what payroll figure the team is looking for, and last week, newly minted General Manager Jeremy Zoll indicated that the Twins do not need to shed salary before Opening Day. However, early-offseason suspicions and subsequent inactivity (I don’t know if you’ve heard this, but the Twins haven’t added an MLB player this offseason) have converged to suggest that they don’t have much room to work with.

Now, “they don’t have much room to work with” might be enough for some people, but the most pedantic among us crave a little bit more information. There are estimates of where the Twins payroll sits, which helps us daydream clearer if we know the official number. However, as mentioned, there are several different sources of this information, each providing a slightly different number — sometimes within the same source.

So why do these numbers vary from site to site? Well, different people find different calculations valuable and meaningful. For example, competitive balance tax totals are important to some teams but meaningless for a team like the Twins. They don’t spend enough to care about those totals. It’s not worthwhile for a Twins fan to check those.

Let’s start with Spotrac, preferred by many for their easy-to-use and aesthetically pleasing user interface. They provide two figures: current payroll allocations ($127,486,190) and projected total allocations ($137,766,190). Neither figure is what we’d typically call an Opening Day payroll.

To calculate current payroll allocations, Spotrac first adds up the guaranteed contracts for players signed through at least 2025 (remember this includes Randy Dobnak). This is a total of 18 players now that the Twins have settled with their arbitration-eligible players. They also add in signing bonuses, which total about $2 million owed to Correa, Buxton, and Lopez. These bonuses are given toward the start of the contract (i.e., they’ve already been paid and aren’t a money factor this year) but on these books they are evenly spread across the whole contract for accounting purposes (mostly for CBT purposes, so it really doesn’t matter for the Twins). They also include contract buyouts in this figure, which is $450,000 to Kyle Farmer and Jay Jackson this year, but buyout money is typically counted the year the contract is signed, so that money also shouldn’t count toward next year’s payroll. You can run over to the Twins Daily payroll blueprint tool to see the slight variation after excluding signing bonuses and buyouts.

Do you see what I mean when I say this is complicated and not necessarily accurate? The buyout money and signing bonuses are counted in this total, but that’s not a factor in practice. Do you know what this number doesn’t include, though? The rest of the guys on the roster. This estimate accounts for the 18 guaranteed-salary players, but there are 26 players on a team. And one of those 18 is Randy Dobnak, so in reality the Twins would fill out the roster with nine additional minimum-salary players (approximately $800,000 to each). Those nine are not represented in the current payroll allocations figure.

If you think that the nine minimum salaried players explains the difference between current and projected payroll allocations, close, but no cigar. The difference between those two numbers is the equivalent of 12.85 minimum-salary players — about four more than you’d need to fill out a roster. Where do those guys come from? Well, players get injured. And when a player is on the injured list, he still gets paid. So if Correa misses a week, he continues to get paid, and a minor leaguer gets called up. Let’s just say it’s Michael Helman. If Correa misses 10 days, the Twins pay both his salary and Helman’s prorated minimum contract salary (about $47,000 for ten days). Those add up during the season, especially for a team as injury-prone as Minnesota. Spotrac assumes they’ll pay the equivalent of about four players’ worth of salary to players filling in for injuries.

And that’s where they get the larger $137,766,190 projected total allocations number. It includes the guaranteed money, the rest of the roster, a guess for how much time is lost to injury, and bonuses or buyouts that don’t actually count for this season’s total. It’s a mess.

Cot’s Contracts similarly projects year-end payroll. Their calculation uses the equivalent of seven additional players from the minors as injury replacements over the course of a year (i.e., an average of seven players on the injured list throughout the season), raising that total money a bit higher. Cot’s, though, also includes estimates for how much players on the 40-man roster will make while playing in the minors, totaling $2,604,000 in additional pay to account for. Cot’s also includes the signing bonuses (which were paid at least a year ago) in their year-end payroll projection total ($141,970,190).

Unlike Spotrac, Cot’s does include an Opening Day payroll figure, which comes in at $134,011,190. This number also starts with the guaranteed contracts, but it actually includes the rest of the roster, fixing that problem. The nine minimum-salary players make up most of the $7,959,000 difference here. However, it still also includes the already-paid signing bonuses, which isn’t helpful. Speaking of unhelpful, Cot’s also has a CBT projection that’s of no use to the Twins, at least until they double their payroll. Moving on!

Finally, let’s look at the figures that FanGraphs’ RosterResource's payroll figure: Estimated 2025 Payroll. For the Twins, that number is $140,181,190, not far removed from Cot’s. Two factors can explain the difference. First, FanGraphs, like Spotrac, includes buyouts, so $450,000 for Farmer and Jackson. Second, they factor in a little less time lost to injury—but still around seven players’ worth of time. There’s also CBT stuff at the bottom of the page, but once again that doesn’t matter for the Twins. Don’t look there. It’s not worth anyone’s time.

So that was a lot. What do we do with this? Well, first, it’s important to recognize that these books are wonky. There’s more than one way to skin a cat here, and we’re not even sure which number Twins decision-makers use as their own guide. There’s a difference between what payroll is on Opening Day and what it is at the end of the year, and that’s before considering midseason subtractions or additions via trade, waiver claim, or free agency.

Given the Twins’ current situation, though, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Opening Day payroll is what matters most right now. Rumors continue to swirl around a potential sale, and even if these hypothetical new owners, whoever they may be, don’t come down from the heavens ready to open up the pocketbook, that’s not really the current owners’ concern. If the sale is as imminent as we expect, allegedly before Opening Day by some rosy estimates, then Opening Day payroll is what we probably care about.

At the very least, we owe it to each other to discuss the team’s payroll on equal terms. If one person cites Spotrac’s $127,486,190 current payroll allocations and another cites Cot’s $141,970,190 year-end projection, you’re not having the same conversation. At 127 anyone would agree there’s immediate room to add at least a little something. At 142 no one is getting their hopes up. The true number that matters here probably lies somewhere in the middle, but closer to 130 than 140.

Again, we still don’t know on the outside what the magic limit is, but it’s worthwhile to talk about the same numbers as we argue with each other about what moves should be made.

View full article

[Mark G]

Very well written article that told me everything there is to tell, and giving no answers at the same time.

Is it possible to be educated and more confused simultaneously?  🙃

 

 

[DJL44]

Everyone got mad last year when the Twins were honest about payroll. They learned not to be honest about payroll.

[Doctor Gast]

I am ok with not spending a dime in FA. If there has to be a salary dump, I challenge the FO to truly be creative & trade away replaceable Paddack & Dobnak. IMO it's not creative to trade away needed & difficult to replace players, then replace them with inferior players to acquire outhouse players we don't need, blocking deserving inhouse players that desperately need that MLB experience. Only FA move I'd be in favor of was Solano, since he's gone a better solution is Jorge Polanco, who can learn 1B to save his knees & backup Miranda & also can play 2B & DH.

[LambchoP]

I hope we don't waste what little wiggle room we do have on someone like Rizzo, or another Margot for the OF. The only moves is make are on the pitching side. Dump Paddack and sign Quintana. That shores up the rotation. We need another good MLB reliever, preferably a lefty who can also get eighties out. I still say Andrew Chafin would be a good fit.

[Greggory Masterson]

1 hour ago, Mark G said:

Very well written article that told me everything there is to tell, and giving no answers at the same time.

Is it possible to be educated and more confused simultaneously?  🙃

As much as I want to give a clear answer, I know that that would be dishonest. My own calculation for Opening Day payroll comes in around 132M, but I shouldn’t pretend to know that that’s the number the Twins also have OR if it’s the calculation they care about.

[Parfigliano]

Accountants can make the numbers say what their boss wants the numbers to say.  This is neither novel or new.

[Major League Ready]

I don't recall ever seeing an article about payroll spending or finances in general this well written.   Not even close.  Well done!

[Fatbat]

How much does it really matter if its 130 or 140 at this point? Dumping Paddack and or Vasquez is only a temporary solution because you still have to find upgrades and those are expensive.  Seems like their value goes up mid season when another team has an injury replacement need and we have a clearer picture on how our young studs are developing.

[D.C Twins]

The Dodgers at 353 million!!!!!  MLB is not going to be healthy until there is harder salary cap with increased revenue sharing. 

Look at the NFL. The equal playing field in many ways has contributed to their overwhelming popularity and overall growth 

[T.O.]

"Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world
It's a rich man's world"

Sorry, that was stuck in my head.
At my age I can;t add three numbers in my head. These numbers are mind numbing and the lack of signals as to what FO might do is frustrating.

 

If they were going to get rid of the salaries like Vazquez and Paddack you think they would have by now. Could they possibly keep what they have and spend a little more?
 

January and February are the worst months of the year. Like being on a life raft with no idea when, or if, you might be saved and very little to eat.

[Major League Ready]

I think this is an accurate accounting of the opening day payroll.  ($134.7M)

Starters	SALARY
Pablo Lopez	21,750,000
Joe Ryan	3,000,000
Bailey Ober	3,550,000
SWR	800,000
Chris Paddack	7,500,000
Relief Pitchers
Jhoan Duran	4,125,000
Griffin Jax	2,365,000
Cole Sands	800,000
Jorge Alcala	1,500,000
Brock Stewart	870,000
Justin Topa	1,225,000
Michael Tonkin	1,000,000
Eiberson Castellano	800,000
Catchers
Ryan Jeffers	4,550,000
Christian Vazquez	10,000,000
Infielders
Jose Miranda	800,000
Royce Lewis	1,625,000
Brooks Lee	800,000
Carlos Correa	37,333,000
Utility Players
Willi Castro   (SS/2B/OF)	6,400,000
Austin Martin  (2B/LF/CF)	800,000
?	800,000
?	800,000
Outfielders
Trevor Larnach	2,100,000
Byron Buxton	15,142,857
Matt Wallner	800,000
Randy Dobnak	3,000,000
Kyle Farmer	250,000
Jay Jackson	200,000
TOTAL PAYROLL	134,685,857

[arby58]

1 hour ago, Doctor Gast said:

I am ok with not spending a dime in FA. If there has to be a salary dump, I challenge the FO to truly be creative & trade away replaceable Paddack & Dobnak. IMO it's not creative to trade away needed & difficult to replace players, then replace them with inferior players to acquire outhouse players we don't need, blocking deserving inhouse players that desperately need that MLB experience. Only FA move I'd be in favor of was Solano, since he's gone a better solution is Jorge Polanco, who can learn 1B to save his knees & backup Miranda & also can play 2B & DH.

The Twins would have dumped Dobnak long ago if not for his contract. Why would anybody trade for the chance to pay a AAA player well in excess of the league minimum?

[sweetmusicviola16]

Now that LAD has signed Tanner Scott for 4 years maybe Zoll could work out the next deal for who they have to move to make room for Scott.

[sweetmusicviola16]

Not to mention someone will be moved for Sasaki. Make gains where you can and be the team to take advantageous of their mass surplus.

[ashbury]

Very thought provoking article, and if (as one of the early responders stated) it leaves the reader more confused than before, perhaps that is progress! 

We don't know exactly what ownership judges the FO on.  If we try to infer, though, it's got to be at least in part the year-end expenditure of payroll, isn't it?  If so, then all the things we are discussing, such as Opening Day payroll, are just benchmarks along the way, that Falvey and his gang use to guide themselves.  After opening day, they will make all kinds of roster moves that cost money; making a waiver claim puts the team on the hook for the remainder of that player's salary, promoting a prospect to the big club which puts him on the 40-man with the attendant financial obligations, and so forth.  Not to mention, the ability to swing a trade at the deadline that adds a million or two in salary.  These are smaller figures than signing a Buxton or Correa, but if (say) you have a hard limit of $140M at the end of the season, and you have brushed up against $139M already, then it limits your ability to bring up rookies and snap up those waiver-wire gems that we love so much.

But is that year-end payroll number even set in stone?  If Twins attendance picks up, mightn't ownership allot a little more leeway in June or July, affording a chance to swing a trade, etc?

Attendance has been mentioned (maybe unwisely) by Dave St Peter as a gating issue.  Cash flow perhaps is being given less attention by fans than it should.

We have heard over the years that ownership does not "carry over" financial results from one year to another.  It was said in the Terry Ryan era that the FO can't apply the banked savings from the rebuilding years toward a splurge during the contention window.  But even if this is true, the devil is in the details: Accountants!  GAAP!  Accruals!  Cash Flow!  Depreciation!  Revenue Recognition!  In the article, it was mentioned that signing bonuses and option buy-outs are nettlesome issues.  If they are computed one way for baseball's competitive purposes, they probably are dealt with differently by the bean-counters who, at the end of the day, have to make sure the salary checks clear when the players deposit them.  The team has no particular incentive to reveal these internal numbers.

We're confused, after reading this fine article, not because some of the information is unknown by us, but because it's unknowable by us, at least to the degree of accuracy we want.  "The Twins don’t have much room to work with" probably is the best we can do.

[old nurse]

33 minutes ago, arby58 said:

The Twins would have dumped Dobnak long ago if not for his contract. Why would anybody trade for the chance to pay a AAA player well in excess of the league minimum?

The Twins took Margot’s contract by also taking a top 20  team ranking prospect out of their system. 

[old nurse]

The exact number of the budget seems irrelevant. The team has added it pieces during the season. The team rarely adds significant talent during the season as Shannon Stewart might be the last one 

[Greggory Masterson]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

I think this is an accurate accounting of the opening day payroll.  ($134.7M)

Starters	SALARY
Pablo Lopez	21,750,000
Joe Ryan	3,000,000
Bailey Ober	3,550,000
SWR	800,000
Chris Paddack	7,500,000
Relief Pitchers
Jhoan Duran	4,125,000
Griffin Jax	2,365,000
Cole Sands	800,000
Jorge Alcala	1,500,000
Brock Stewart	870,000
Justin Topa	1,225,000
Michael Tonkin	1,000,000
Eiberson Castellano	800,000
Catchers
Ryan Jeffers	4,550,000
Christian Vazquez	10,000,000
Infielders
Jose Miranda	800,000
Royce Lewis	1,625,000
Brooks Lee	800,000
Carlos Correa	37,333,000
Utility Players
Willi Castro   (SS/2B/OF)	6,400,000
Austin Martin  (2B/LF/CF)	800,000
?	800,000
?	800,000
Outfielders
Trevor Larnach	2,100,000
Byron Buxton	15,142,857
Matt Wallner	800,000
Randy Dobnak	3,000,000
Kyle Farmer	250,000
Jay Jackson	200,000
TOTAL PAYROLL	134,685,857

I’m almost in agreement here, though Correa’s contract should be 1.33M lower, López, should be 250k lower, and Buxton should be 142857 lower. Those figures include signing bonuses, which have already been paid out but are denoted as evenly spread across the books (8M/6 for Correa, 1M/1 for López, 1M/7 for Buxton). I would assume those aren’t actually counted by the team as a payroll expenditure after the sum has already been paid (the most recent payment was the second half of Correa’s bonus ahead of the 2024 season, and now all are paid off)

[PatPfund]

Great article defining the different systems for calculations. Skipping to the nub of the recent series on the Pohlad series (or some basic deduction from the fact the Pohlads' main business is now downtown commercial real estate, and recent stories on how the bottom has dropped out of similar businesses), I think (emphasis on I) what matters to ownership right now is real dollars they have to spend now and this year, not when it was actually spent or how future/past spending accounts for this year. I think they want to keep the value of their for-sale asset as intact as they can (to maximize return) without adding costs they can't recover in a sale as extra value.

That fits with the holding pattern of retaining their arbitration players, while adding nothing substantial. Strip the null words off the statements, and you get a strong sense "we can do this forever" while hoping internally they really, really don't have to.

[Greglw3]

Gregg,

Excellent article, which explores lots of very important nuances! It’s an important topic as nobody really knows if Falvey/Zoll have been directed to a particular figure, nobody really knows what the upper limit they could push is and, as you alluded to in a very revelatory exploration/study, nobody even knows what the Twins salary commitment is as of now.

One thing you touched on, that nobody mentions, is that the Twins are the recipient of what would appear to be significant competitive balance money.  The Dodgers are paying over ~ $103 MM for their 2024 spending, the Mets $97MM and the Yankees 62.5 MM. Also, Phillies, ~14 MM, Braves $14MM, Rangers ~ $11MM, Astros 6.5 MM, Giants 2.4 MM and Cubs 600 K. A record total of 311 MM in luxury tax payments!!! [Credit Reuters Dec 24, 2025

So we talk about, we can free up $12-17 MM by trading Paddack and Vazquez.

But wait, half of the $311 MM is paid to teams needing revenue sharing. Half is paid for player benefits and retirement funds. Straight Arrow News cites ~ $15 per team. Bingo! There’s the $15 MM the Twins need to sign a solid major leaguer, my preference is Jurickson Profar, some disagree with me but it’s a significant factor to consider.

PLUS, teams that lost media revenue are able to collect up to $15 MM out of a total pool of $ 75 MM [awfulannouncing.com]. (Media Disruption Distribution) How much of that are the Twins receiving?

 

It’s not easy to find the Twins exact share of revenue sharing so the documented ~ 15 MM is the best I can do, consistent with the complexities you encountered in your fine analysis!

I appreciate your article, from one Greg to the other Gregg!

 

https://www.reuters.com/sports/report-3-mlb-teams-paying-bulk-record-311m-luxury-taxes-2024-12-24/#:~:text=The tax rate goes up,to $241 million next season.

 

https://san.com/cc/record-9-teams-will-pay-mlb-luxury-tax-totaling-311-million-in-january/#:~:text=The cumulative $311 million tax,revenue sharing to stay competitive.

 

https://awfulannouncing.com/mlb/teams-payments-lost-media-rights-revenue-15-million.html

[Major League Ready]

5 hours ago, Greggory Masterson said:

I’m almost in agreement here, though Correa’s contract should be 1.33M lower, López, should be 250k lower, and Buxton should be 142857 lower. Those figures include signing bonuses, which have already been paid out but are denoted as evenly spread across the books (8M/6 for Correa, 1M/1 for López, 1M/7 for Buxton). I would assume those aren’t actually counted by the team as a payroll expenditure after the sum has already been paid (the most recent payment was the second half of Correa’s bonus ahead of the 2024 season, and now all are paid off)

Are we talking about cash flow vs expense recognition?  They may have paid them out but does the IRS allow them to recognize the expense when they were paid out?  In other words, was their income reduced by the full amount of the expenditure in year one?  I doubt it but I don't know how this works with MLB teams.   If the asset/contract is not fully deductible in year one which is most often the case, then the expense is recognized over the life of the asset.  Are you aware of special treatment for MLB teams that allows them to fully deduct bonus payments when they are paid?   If not, the appropriate representation of these expenses is to recognize them equally across the length of the asset / contract life.  Cash flow is not relevant.  

[Parfigliano]

1 hour ago, old nurse said:

The exact number of the budget seems irrelevant. The team has added it pieces during the season. The team rarely adds significant talent during the season  Shannon Stewart might be the last one 

Team turned right around when they acquired him.

[JD-TWINS]

2 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

The Dodgers at 353 million!!!!!  MLB is not going to be healthy until there is harder salary cap with increased revenue sharing. 

Look at the NFL. The equal playing field in many ways has contributed to their overwhelming popularity and overall growth 

Just saw on MLB that Dodgers signed Tanner Scott for $18M/yr as well……..a bit nauseating when one considers the health of the game going forward.

[thelanges5]

We should sign Kike. The Dodgers will need him at the trade deadline and we can flip him for one of their prospects. 

[arby58]

2 hours ago, old nurse said:

The Twins took Margot’s contract by also taking a top 20  team ranking prospect out of their system. 

Dobnak had been in the minors for 3 years before the Twins added him last year, with unspectacular results. He has a career WAR of -0.2.

Margot before being traded to the Twins had a 12.2 career WAR, and 0.6 the year before. They are not comparables.

[old nurse]

29 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Dobnak had been in the minors for 3 years before the Twins added him last year, with unspectacular results. He has a career WAR of -0.2.

Margot before being traded to the Twins had a 12.2 career WAR, and 0.6 the year before. They are not comparables.

Yup Margo was at a higher WAR value than Dobnak.  A trade that is a money dump is dependent on 2 factors 1.Talent, 2 Money changing hands. So if the teams are not trying to give up money, a 10 million dollar salary should cost more in prospect value than a 4 million dollar salary.  You bring talent level into the equation .12.32 career war, Margot could e viewed as having some value therefore perhaps it would not take as good of prospect as a totally dead weight player for 10 million. A prospect value would be about even. 

[Doctor Gast]

3 hours ago, arby58 said:

The Twins would have dumped Dobnak long ago if not for his contract. Why would anybody trade for the chance to pay a AAA player well in excess of the league minimum?

Off the top of my head, LAD did not want Margot but to get Glasnow he was added to the deal. SEA didn't want DeSclavani but to acquire Ray & Haniger he was added. We can add Dobnak to a deal that where it fills a big need for a different team & using player's trade values that could cover Dobnak's $3M.

If Dobnak serves no purpose then MN'd eat the $3M. Dobnak is a safety valve that we can bring up in the SP or RP role in a pinch & then DFA him when not needed. MN has one of the best pitching core in MLB, if they can use him then many inferior teams (CO for example) could use him much more after receiving him basically for free.

[Greglw3]

5 hours ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

Now that LAD has signed Tanner Scott for 4 years maybe Zoll could work out the next deal for who they have to move to make room for Scott.

I immediately thought the same thing! It’s gotta be somebody good. I wonder the Twins will sign Austin Hays or Ramon Laureano or trade for Arenado?

[Greglw3]

6 hours ago, T.O. said:

"Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world
It's a rich man's world"

Sorry, that was stuck in my head.
At my age I can;t add three numbers in my head. These numbers are mind numbing and the lack of signals as to what FO might do is frustrating.

 

If they were going to get rid of the salaries like Vazquez and Paddack you think they would have by now. Could they possibly keep what they have and spend a little more?
 

January and February are the worst months of the year. Like being on a life raft with no idea when, or if, you might be saved and very little to eat.

Celebrate the Palindrome! Two lyrical lines that are palindromes from the group that’s a palindrome!