Twins Sale - Good or Bad Investment

[Dakota Native]

I’m in the process of finalizing a $6 billion investment in a project in Kansas. During a recent conversation with the investment group, they mentioned they were also close—“at the 10-yard line”—to completing the sale of an American League baseball club. They declined to reveal which team, so I suggested the Minnesota Twins. They immediately responded that the Twins were a poor investment.

They laid out several reasons: too much debt, declining attendance, no meaningful TV deal, and Major League Baseball’s tendency to schedule early-season home games in April—often in cold weather—which depresses ticket sales. The only positive they mentioned was the outstanding ballpark.

That response hit home for me. I’m originally from Minot, North Dakota, and grew up a passionate Twins fan. I still remember the excitement of the 1965 World Series when our school principal played the games over the intercom. Owning the Twins has always been a dream of mine, but based on this feedback, I’d have difficulty assembling the right investment group if the team is seen as financially unsound. The Pohlad family would likely need to reduce the asking price and absorb some of the debt.

It seems Justin Ishbia was wise to walk away.

I now live about 50 miles west of Washington, D.C., and make the trip to Baltimore whenever the Twins visit the Orioles. Interestingly, the Twins’ average attendance over the past five years has been comparable to the Orioles’. Camden Yards is a beautiful stadium, but in my view, Target Field is even better.

This raises the question: how did the Orioles manage to sell 70% of the team for $1.725 billion while the Twins are considered a poor investment? There is much more to say, but let me know your opinion.

[jaimedude]

Lack of a long term media deal both TV and radio makes for unsure revenue sources. Twins ownership the Pohlads have the original investment in the team on the books as debt as well as the stadium debt which was there portion so they have both debts for tax reasons financed on the P&L. From the looks of it they have the debt to buy the radio station they sold at a loss, the Victory broadcasting deal on the books as a loss for depreciation of assets. They also have the commercial real estate the Twins offices for the building nearby on the books. All of that is a big portion of the debt and financing. I'm sure part of that is negotiable. MLB having an uncertain labor contract and the Twins slow attendance do not help. The Pohlad ownership plays a role in the deteriorating attendance, that and the recent crappy weather in the spring. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

2 hours ago, Dakota Native said:

I’m in the process of finalizing a $6 billion investment in a project in Kansas. During a recent conversation with the investment group, they mentioned they were also close—“at the 10-yard line”—to completing the sale of an American League baseball club. They declined to reveal which team, so I suggested the Minnesota Twins. They immediately responded that the Twins were a poor investment.

They laid out several reasons: too much debt, declining attendance, no meaningful TV deal, and Major League Baseball’s tendency to schedule early-season home games in April—often in cold weather—which depresses ticket sales. The only positive they mentioned was the outstanding ballpark.

That response hit home for me. I’m originally from Minot, North Dakota, and grew up a passionate Twins fan. I still remember the excitement of the 1965 World Series when our school principal played the games over the intercom. Owning the Twins has always been a dream of mine, but based on this feedback, I’d have difficulty assembling the right investment group if the team is seen as financially unsound. The Pohlad family would likely need to reduce the asking price and absorb some of the debt.

It seems Justin Ishbia was wise to walk away.

I now live about 50 miles west of Washington, D.C., and make the trip to Baltimore whenever the Twins visit the Orioles. Interestingly, the Twins’ average attendance over the past five years has been comparable to the Orioles’. Camden Yards is a beautiful stadium, but in my view, Target Field is even better.

This raises the question: how did the Orioles manage to sell 70% of the team for $1.725 billion while the Twins are considered a poor investment? There is much more to say, but let me know your opinion.

Depends on the structure of the deal. Is the deal for “the business” or “the assets”?

“The business” at the advertised $1.7b is a bad deal because it comes packaged with the Pohlad’s debt and becomes a leveraged buy out. The 425m in debt doesn’t have to come with the sale. Pohlad doesn’t have to come with the sale. I wouldn’t buy The Minnesota Twins LLC. The downside risk of buying the Pohlad family business practices and the legacy of uncertainty is a non-starter for me. The last thing I want is a skeleton in the closet no one knew of, but I bought the LLC, so I get the lawsuit, along with the package of $425m in debt with minimal real estate is a bad investment. The profit would never pay down the debt (if Forbes is remotely accurate)

”the assets” as in the brand, the contracts, rights, could be a good deal at the advertised $1.7b if you believe you are buying the dip.

Target field is a beautiful park, but isn’t “new”. If you believe you can get a big reno or new park over the investment horizon with significant public funds, or a bigger stake in the real estate… that’s an opportunity for growth.

The Twins are currently under the MLB streaming rights deal. If you think you can get a better TV deal, that’s an opportunity for growth.

This team crapped the bed last year and currently in process of crapping the bed this year, if you think you can run a team better, that’s a cost out and playoff revenue growth opportunity.

[howeda7]

3 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Depends on the structure of the deal. Is the deal for “the business” or “the assets”?

“The business” at the advertised $1.7b is a bad deal because it comes packaged with the Pohlad’s debt and becomes a leveraged buy out. The 425m in debt doesn’t have to come with the sale. Pohlad doesn’t have to come with the sale. I wouldn’t buy The Minnesota Twins LLC. The downside risk of buying the Pohlad family business practices and the legacy of uncertainty is a non-starter for me. The last thing I want is a skeleton in the closet no one knew of, but I bought the LLC, so I get the lawsuit, along with the package of $425m in debt with minimal real estate is a bad investment. The profit would never pay down the debt (if Forbes is remotely accurate)

”the assets” as in the brand, the contracts, rights, could be a good deal at the advertised $1.7b if you believe you are buying the dip.

Target field is a beautiful park, but isn’t “new”. If you believe you can get a big reno or new park over the investment horizon with significant public funds, or a bigger stake in the real estate… that’s an opportunity for growth.

The Twins are currently under the MLB streaming rights deal. If you think you can get a better TV deal, that’s an opportunity for growth.

This team crapped the bed last year and currently in process of crapping the bed this year, if you think you can run a team better, that’s a cost out and playoff revenue growth opportunity.

There is zero chance of a new Twins ballpark anytime in the next 25 years. Zero. And Target Field doesn't need major renovations. The Pohlad's haven't done a lot right but keeping Target Field in great shape is one of them.

An argument can be made that no MLB franchise is a great investment due to the declining popularity of the sport. But I don't really see how  the Twins are a worse investment than any other mid-market team would be. Yes, the current TV situation is not ideal, but it's not ideal for any mid-market teams. It will likely work itself out in the next 5 years and have them at least back where they were 2-3 years ago, making $50-75 million/year on the local rights. 

And while the fan support right now isn't good, that's largely BECAUSE the current owners have become toxic. A new owner and a couple goodwill gestures with some lower priced tickets etc. and hopefully a better team will rectify that pretty easily. 

[Jocko87]

I think the answer to this specific question lies in what this specific investment group specializes in.

We see it all the time in real estate, stocks vs bonds, PE vs Buffett etc. One group loves what they invest in and often can't even understand why someone would even look at another similar investment type even though others are doing great at it.

A media savvy individual might look at the lack of TV contracts as a positive (I can build it like I want it) vs these guys who may need the TV revenue to make it pencil. 

The reasons listed are interesting in that most of them are easy (relatively) fixes. There is work to do but that's often where the best investments are. If they want plug and play, they have to pay.

Also, what is their time frame for a good investment? So many investors look at immediate returns when the value is almost always long.

[Vanimal46]

If the new ownership group is looking at this as a long term investment, it will be a really good time to invest in the Twins. The TV subscriptions will never be lower than it is now… Declining attendance is a direct result of people sick of current ownership. A new group and a couple of make good strategies to win back fans will do wonders. 

No ownership group is ever going to realize a 3,000% increase like the Pohlads and other old time ownership groups. However, over a 15-20 year period franchise valuations could double or triple if MLB moves to a national TV broadcast model like the other major sports. 

The problem likely arises with private equity being in the equation. They want their return as soon as possible - at the expense of destroying corporations. 

[nicksaviking]

It sounds like the Twins abundance of debt is a Twins-specific issue, likely due to ownership dumping their real estate debts on Minnesota Twins LLC. So the Orioles did not have that baggage.

Also, it's the East Coast. Despite it being a 'small' market for the East Coast, that market still has old-money prestige and more national exposure simply because they are constantly playing and being discussed with their big market division rivals.

But agree with Jocko. Twins current ownership has been really, really bad at marketing and doing TV deals. While most of the league is struggling with these things, the Twins being at the bottom of these metrics should indicate there is financial gain if new owners merely emulate their peers.

[howeda7]

The Pohlads sincerely need to take whatever offer they can get and run. I've never seen interest in the team this low. It's dead. No one cares. And is the most dead-ass team I've ever seen. The attendance and TV ratings will crater. They're nuts if they think the value of the franchise is going anywhere but down over the next 2-3 years.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

14 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

It sounds like the Twins abundance of debt is a Twins-specific issue, likely due to ownership dumping their real estate debts on Minnesota Twins LLC. So the Orioles did not have that baggage.

Also, it's the East Coast. Despite it being a 'small' market for the East Coast, that market still has old-money prestige and more national exposure simply because they are constantly playing and being discussed with their big market division rivals.

But agree with Jocko. Twins current ownership has been really, really bad at marketing and doing TV deals. While most of the league is struggling with these things, the Twins being at the bottom of these metrics should indicate there is financial gain if new owners merely emulate their peers.

Agreed, I also highly doubt that the Twins operating deficits led to racking up $425m in debt, that has to be primarily other business ventures that the Pohlads want to offload as a function of the sale.

[Dave Borton]

15 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

But agree with Jocko. Twins current ownership has been really, really bad at marketing and doing TV deals.

David St Peter's legacy lives on.

[Brock Beauchamp]

17 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

If the new ownership group is looking at this as a long term investment, it will be a really good time to invest in the Twins. The TV subscriptions will never be lower than it is now… Declining attendance is a direct result of people sick of current ownership. A new group and a couple of make good strategies to win back fans will do wonders. 

No ownership group is ever going to realize a 3,000% increase like the Pohlads and other old time ownership groups. However, over a 15-20 year period franchise valuations could double or triple if MLB moves to a national TV broadcast model like the other major sports. 

The problem likely arises with private equity being in the equation. They want their return as soon as possible - at the expense of destroying corporations. 

Exactly this. If you're looking to flip an asset, the Twins aren't a good buy.

But given the stability of the league and the relative low point the Twins are currently in, it's a very good long-term buy.

[nicksaviking]

43 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Exactly this. If you're looking to flip an asset, the Twins aren't a good buy.

But given the stability of the league and the relative low point the Twins are currently in, it's a very good long-term buy.

Is it stable though? 

These extreme payroll disparities suggest contraction will need to be on the table within the decade. There's no way a healthy league can't have 300M payroll teams and 70M payroll teams.

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Is it stable though? 

These extreme payroll disparities suggest contraction will need to be on the table within the decade. There's no way a healthy league can't have 300M payroll teams and 70M payroll teams.

I'd say it's still relatively stable. It's no longer in a boom time, as it was for 20+ years. Some restructuring is needed but the game has gone through these periods plenty of times.

[nicksaviking]

4 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I'd say it's still relatively stable. It's no longer in a boom time, as it was for 20+ years. Some restructuring is needed but the game has gone through these periods plenty of times.

I hope you're right, but I'm skeptical.

Maybe it's just because of the team I follow, but I don't see much evidence that anyone in charge cares about the long term health of this league. Everyone seems to only care about immediate gains.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

7 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

I hope you're right, but I'm skeptical.

Maybe it's just because of the team I follow, but I don't see much evidence that anyone in charge cares about the long term health of this league. Everyone seems to only care about immediate gains.

I think the problem has become so large they can no longer ignore it. They SHOULD have started fixing this a decade ago but went for short-term gains instead, as you said. This CBA negotiation will get ugly but I think the sport will be a lot better when it comes out the other side of it.

[bean5302]

On 4/7/2025 at 7:27 PM, Dakota Native said:

I’m in the process of finalizing a $6 billion investment in a project in Kansas. During a recent conversation with the investment group, they mentioned they were also close—“at the 10-yard line”—to completing the sale of an American League baseball club. They declined to reveal which team, so I suggested the Minnesota Twins. They immediately responded that the Twins were a poor investment.

They laid out several reasons: too much debt, declining attendance, no meaningful TV deal, and Major League Baseball’s tendency to schedule early-season home games in April—often in cold weather—which depresses ticket sales. The only positive they mentioned was the outstanding ballpark.

That response hit home for me. I’m originally from Minot, North Dakota, and grew up a passionate Twins fan. I still remember the excitement of the 1965 World Series when our school principal played the games over the intercom. Owning the Twins has always been a dream of mine, but based on this feedback, I’d have difficulty assembling the right investment group if the team is seen as financially unsound. The Pohlad family would likely need to reduce the asking price and absorb some of the debt.

It seems Justin Ishbia was wise to walk away.

I now live about 50 miles west of Washington, D.C., and make the trip to Baltimore whenever the Twins visit the Orioles. Interestingly, the Twins’ average attendance over the past five years has been comparable to the Orioles’. Camden Yards is a beautiful stadium, but in my view, Target Field is even better.

This raises the question: how did the Orioles manage to sell 70% of the team for $1.725 billion while the Twins are considered a poor investment? There is much more to say, but let me know your opinion.

An American League baseball club has to be for sale to buy them. Who is for sale? Twins. Ummm.. that's it. That's the only team for sale in the AL right now. 

So I'm going to go ahead and either say this is a typical reddit post where the author makes up a story they want to be true and presents it as a real situation because they want some personal validation or this investment group is headed by the most block-headed people in business.

Making money via cash flow for MLB teams doesn't happen. Operating income for teams typically runs pretty neutral. 10 teams had negative operating income last year according to Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/justinteitelbaum/2025/03/26/baseballs-most-valuable-teams-2025/

IMO, The Twins' debt doesn't matter except when it comes to the Pohlad family's asking price, which is a big sticking point as reports say the Pohlad's have shot down multiple $1.5B offers at this point. Low attendance/declining attendance doesn't matter. In fact, it's a plus. That's called growth opportunity. Any investment group actually looking to potentially make money in the short term on an MLB club's operating income, which seems nuts to me, would not want to buy a club with max attendance because there's no room for revenue increases. Agreed with everybody else. The TV deals are as low as they're going to get.

The biggest problem with the Twins right now? They can't be moved and aren't getting a new stadium. That's an absolute kick to the groin in short term potential profit. That's where owners make money. Buying up real estate around new ballpark locations before the new stadium is built, then selling the land/buildings after they skyrocket in value.

Attendance in April is a problem? LOL. No. The team's drawing power the problem. The Twins averaged like 35k in attendance every April for the first 3 years of Target Field.
 

[Original_JB]

White Sox and A's would both be possibilities (regardless of Reisdorf's claims; for the right money everything is for sale, and both those teams are pursuing new stadiums (ie, development opps)).

[bean5302]

On 4/9/2025 at 11:39 AM, Original_JB said:

White Sox and A's would both be possibilities (regardless of Reisdorf's claims; for the right money everything is for sale, and both those teams are pursuing new stadiums (ie, development opps)).

Fisher is about to get a new stadium and a huge influx of cash. Selling the team seems a lot less likely than than the Tampa Bay Rays given the Rays stadium mess.

Reinsdorf seems to have pulled a bait-n-switch to me. Like he put the word out there about selling to try and reel in an investor to buy out disgruntled minority shareholders. Since then, Reinsdorf has been clear he's not selling. Probably because he's going to make bank with a new stadium. Maybe it'll be Chicago, maybe it'll be elsewhere. It wouldn't surprise me if the Ishbia's are a little annoyed there.