Minnesota Twins Ownership Update: From “Dismal” to Progressing

[Cody Christie]

Image courtesy of © Bruce Kluckhohn-Imagn Images

As the Minnesota Twins navigate the 2025 season, the potential sale of the franchise by the Pohlad family has become a focal point of discussion. The Pohlads, who have owned the team since 1984, are reportedly seeking a sale price of $1.7 billion. That's the same price the Baltimore Orioles sold for last year. However, this valuation, coupled with the team's financial challenges, has made the sale process complex and uncertain.

One significant hurdle in the sale is the Twins' reported $425 million in debt, one of the highest totals in MLB, which has raised concerns among potential buyers. This financial burden, along with the high asking price, led some local investors to view the prospects of a sale as "dismal” after getting access to the Twins’ financial reports. The Pioneer Press reported that multiple interested parties have pulled out of the running because of cashflow concerns.

Besides the team’s debt, other concerns include the potential for an MLB lockout after the 2026 season. A new owner will want to draw immediate revenue from their investment in the Twins, and a work stoppage could impact all 30 franchises for multiple seasons. Another concern is the team’s loss of revenue from the television contract. For clubs like the Twins, regional sports network contracts are a large part of their revenue—and now, the team is getting significantly less with Twins TV. 

Despite these challenges, the sale process has not come to a halt. The Star-Tribune reported that several potential buyers have visited Target Field over the last 2-3 weeks and met with the Pohlads and team executives, indicating ongoing interest in the franchise. Phil Miller reported that the sale was “closer to the end than to the beginning,” a positive sign for Twins fans. While no formal offers have been made public, these developments suggest that discussions are progressing, albeit slowly.

Initially, there was hope the Twins' sale would be completed by Opening Day. However, the situation was further complicated when billionaire Justin Ishbia, initially a leading candidate to purchase the team, shifted his focus to increasing his stake in the Chicago White Sox. The Twins were forced to reset their sales conversations, and that slowed down the process significantly in recent months.  

The Athletic reported that multiple interested parties have joined the potential buyer pool since Ishbia dropped out of the running.

“We sort of rebooted the process and a number of people came in that were sitting on the sidelines,” The Athletic’s source said. “We’re making good progress with multiple interested parties. Everyone we’re talking with now has the capability of transacting without finding a money source.”

The Athletic also made it clear that there is no specific deadline being put in place by the Pohlads. They clearly want to get the best price for their most valuable asset, and sometimes it takes time for all the pieces to be put in place. From a business perspective, it makes sense to pit these potential ownership groups against one another to get the best price. Big-league teams are in limited supply and there have been few sales of clubs over the last few decades. For many ownership groups, this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. 

As the Twins continue their season, the outcome of the sale remains uncertain. The Pohlads' commitment to their asking price, combined with the team's financial obligations, presents significant obstacles to a swift transaction. However, the ongoing interest from potential buyers suggests that a resolution (while not imminent) is still possible. For fans and stakeholders, the hope is that any future ownership will bring renewed investment and stability to the franchise.

---

What’s your prediction for when the Twins will be sold? How much will the Pohlads be able to get for the team? Leave a comment and start the discussion.

View full article

[Jocko87]

In other news, there is no news. Carry on. 

[bean5302]

More info at SI

Quote

(Miller at Star and Trib) as Miller quoted an anonymous source who said possible buyers "don’t take a couple days out of their schedule to fly somewhere and meet with executives if they aren’t serious about their interest."

https://www.si.com/mlb/twins/minnesota-twins-news/twins-sale-gaining-steam-potential-buyers-reportedly-touring-target-field

I get the feeling the Pohlads are gripping the fact fans are done with them owning the Twins and they're more willing to negotiate the price. If the family comes to the realization they're not going to be able to turn things around with their name on the franchise, it puts them in a big bind.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

It's a lot more complicated than selling a house, so it's hardly surprising that it could take awhile.  Admittedly I was a little amazed when Ishbia was identified so fast.  Fingers crossed that they get it done as quickly as possible and that the new owner is a good one.  In the meantime, Win Twins!

[Fire Dan Gladden]

[The Great Hambino]

Sell or sell not.  There is no progressing

[twinstalker]

I don't understand where the "progressing" comes from.  It sounds pretty much the opposite.

[Nashvilletwin]

What this article failed to mention is that it has been reported several potential buyers who have reviewed the Twins financials were surprised to find out the Twins have been losing over $25MM annually on a cash basis.  This significant cash flow problem has been the biggest deterrent to completing a sale.  And the problem isn’t necessarily straight forward to address. Coupled with the debt, it will take a pretty big increase in future equity value to end up making money for new investors.  Also, it’s not clear if the Pohlad’s ask is only for their equity or for the enterprise value (i.e. including the debt). 

A very few of us TDers have been making this claim about the magnitude of the Twins cash flow problems/losses for several years - often to much derision. Oh well. 

[BH67]

$425 million in debt? How? Just how? That requires a heaping dose of irresponsibility.

[Aerodeliria]

If wishes were horses........

[Aerodeliria]

They didn't buy their sunglasses at Walmart....they could've saved some money.

[Mark G]

50 years or so ago my father taught me a lesson I have always remembered.  He asked me "what is that worth"?  And I would try to guess.  Then he found something else and asked me the same thing.  And I kept guessing.  Finally he said "there is no set answer for anything.  What is anything worth?  It is worth what someone else is willing to pay for it at the time it is put up for sale.  What it is worth to you may not be what it is worth to someone else.  That's why they call it negotiating."  

I still think this is going to take a while unless someone comes along who just wants to own a baseball team and isn't worried about the money.  And if that person were out there we would probably already have a sale, so..........I still think this is going to take a while.  🥴

 

 

[Doctor Gast]

 You add that they still want a say on the team after they sell. How can anyone resist?

[CRF]

WHAT? The Twins are for sale? Didn't see that one coming. Yeah, sure, whatever...let me know when someone actually signs on the dotted line. 

[Whitey333]

Nice article although nothing new.  My question has always been is the 425 million in debt due solely to finance baseball related expenses?  Or is the debt from borrowing from the Twins to support the other Pohlad businesses or both?  My feeling is if it is to just pay for the Twins operations that is scary.  Also it begs the question a out why they have t dumped payroll to try to balance the books.  Twins are roughly a little, but not much below league average in payroll and still lead the Central division in payroll.  I'm surprised they are carrying as much payroll as they are.  If they are borrowing from the Twins to support the Pohlad empire that is also scary.  Why would any potential owner want to pick up that much debt that may have been used to support Pohlad businesses?  I would think the Pohlads only chance to sell is if they pay off their own̈ debt and not expect others to.

[bean5302]

11 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

What this article failed to mention is that it has been reported several potential buyers who have reviewed the Twins financials were surprised to find out the Twins have been losing over $25MM annually on a cash basis.  This significant cash flow problem has been the biggest deterrent to completing a sale.  And the problem isn’t necessarily straight forward to address. Coupled with the debt, it will take a pretty big increase in future equity value to end up making money for new investors.  Also, it’s not clear if the Pohlad’s ask is only for their equity or for the enterprise value (i.e. including the debt). 

A very few of us TDers have been making this claim about the magnitude of the Twins cash flow problems/losses for several years - often to much derision. Oh well. 

I have it on good authority from many experts here on Twins Daily that no team ever loses money...

Actually, I don't think the negative cash flow is a problem at all because it's easy to wipe $25MM from the payroll. I suspect it's only an issue for buyers who don't understand the market. The cash flow/operating income for MLB teams are not usually all that positive according to the published estimated numbers.

[amjgt]

12 hours ago, BH67 said:

$425 million in debt? How? Just how? That requires a heaping dose of irresponsibility.

Because the Pohlads borrowed money for their other businesses and used the Twins as collateral. 

Every article should explicitly state this, but most don't. 

The debt piece is infuriating for several reasons.

1) As I said above, most articles don't mention that the Twins didn't directly generate that debt. It was a debt placed on the Twins by the Pohlad family. Essentially a reverse mortgage on a "house" that was already paid off.

2) The debt should have absolutely nothing to do with the sale of the team. It should sell for what it can sell for and then some of the proceeds from the sale can be used to pay off the Pohlad's debt. The same way, when I sell my house, the buyer isn't buying the house at market value PLUS how much I still owe on the mortgage. 

[Linus]

12 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

What this article failed to mention is that it has been reported several potential buyers who have reviewed the Twins financials were surprised to find out the Twins have been losing over $25MM annually on a cash basis.  This significant cash flow problem has been the biggest deterrent to completing a sale.  And the problem isn’t necessarily straight forward to address. Coupled with the debt, it will take a pretty big increase in future equity value to end up making money for new investors.  Also, it’s not clear if the Pohlad’s ask is only for their equity or for the enterprise value (i.e. including the debt). 

A very few of us TDers have been making this claim about the magnitude of the Twins cash flow problems/losses for several years - often to much derision. Oh well. 

Forbes reported the Twins made $19 million in 2023. I have not seen any estimates for 2024. I find no credibility in your “it has been reported” statement. 

[Linus]

5 minutes ago, amjgt said:

Because the Pohlads borrowed money for their other businesses and used the Twins as collateral. 

Every article should explicitly state this, but most don't. 

The debt piece is infuriating for several reasons.

1) As I said above, most articles don't mention that the Twins didn't directly generate that debt. It was a debt placed on the Twins by the Pohlad family. Essentially a reverse mortgage on a "house" that was already paid off.

2) The debt should have absolutely nothing to do with the sale of the team. It should sell for what it can sell for and then some of the proceeds from the sale can be used to pay off the Pohlad's debt. The same way, when I sell my house, the buyer isn't buying the house at market value PLUS how much I still owe on the mortgage. 

Correct. 

[jmlease1]

2 hours ago, Whitey333 said:

Nice article although nothing new.  My question has always been is the 425 million in debt due solely to finance baseball related expenses?  Or is the debt from borrowing from the Twins to support the other Pohlad businesses or both?  My feeling is if it is to just pay for the Twins operations that is scary.  Also it begs the question a out why they have t dumped payroll to try to balance the books.  Twins are roughly a little, but not much below league average in payroll and still lead the Central division in payroll.  I'm surprised they are carrying as much payroll as they are.  If they are borrowing from the Twins to support the Pohlad empire that is also scary.  Why would any potential owner want to pick up that much debt that may have been used to support Pohlad businesses?  I would think the Pohlads only chance to sell is if they pay off their own̈ debt and not expect others to.

I think that's the big issue: what caused the debt and when was it loaded? If this was added from some of the other Pohlad companies, it will be much harder for a buyer to accept, especially if it's on top of a price tag of $1.7B. Because then the real price is more like $2.1B, isn't it? And if 20% is for things that aren't baseball related...why would they want to take that? I'm sure the Pohlads would love to cash out at top value AND dump a pile of debt at the same time: that will be great for them and make all the heirs very happy (still won't give Joe a big enough check to buy in a managing partner, though) but scarcity won't be enough to make someone pay an extra $400-600M....

It won't be concerning for the new ownership if a majority of the debt came from "related business" rather than baseball operations; that would probably be encouraging! But I suspect their interest in paying off the debt because the Pohalds were using the team for cash flow and equity calls will be reduced.

My read on the two articles about the sale is there are some interested buyers who have deep pockets and real interest, but right now everything is hung up on price: Pohlads want what they want and no buyer is willing to give it to them...yet. We'll see who blinks.

[Jocko87]

25 minutes ago, amjgt said:

Because the Pohlads borrowed money for their other businesses and used the Twins as collateral. 

Every article should explicitly state this, but most don't. 

The debt piece is infuriating for several reasons.

1) As I said above, most articles don't mention that the Twins didn't directly generate that debt. It was a debt placed on the Twins by the Pohlad family. Essentially a reverse mortgage on a "house" that was already paid off.

How do you know this?

There is a reason articles don't explicitly say this and that is because its not a known fact.  

Shout it as loud as you want but that doesn't make it true.  

In the meantime, stop spreading **** you don't have a way to know.  People read and believe it. 

23 minutes ago, Linus said:

Correct. 

 

[Vanimal46]

I trust the reporting of Phil Miller over Charley Walters. Walters is the biggest hack sports writer in the state. 

[gman]

Debt could include future salaries due to players. Such as $140 mil to Correa plus another $75mil for three add on years if he meets his incentives. $50-$60 due Buxton if he plays long enough and another $50 million if he accidentally meets his incentives. $45 due to Lopez after this year. Plus appx $90 million due to the team this for the balance of this year. I am pretty sure they have about 15 years of lease obligations after this year. Not too hard to get to $450mil in debts.

[Nashvilletwin]

1 hour ago, Linus said:

Forbes reported the Twins made $19 million in 2023. I have not seen any estimates for 2024. I find no credibility in your “it has been reported” statement. 

Google Twins sale process over the past several days.  Then you can judge my credibility.  Multiple stories and references to their cash flow issue from people who have reviewed the financials.   Has Forbes reviewed the offering memorandum?   Yeah, didn’t think so.  The derision continues. lol. 

[Jocko87]

23 minutes ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Google Twins sale process over the past several days.  Then you can judge my credibility.  Multiple stories and references to their cash flow issue from people who have reviewed the financials.   Has Forbes reviewed the offering memorandum?   Yeah, didn’t think so.  The derision continues. lol. 

Put a link with someone who has reviewed the financials that has a name.

We do this every time there is a story. People saying things they have no way to know.

[bean5302]

50 minutes ago, gman said:

Debt could include future salaries due to players. Such as $140 mil to Correa plus another $75mil for three add on years if he meets his incentives. $50-$60 due Buxton if he plays long enough and another $50 million if he accidentally meets his incentives. $45 due to Lopez after this year. Plus appx $90 million due to the team this for the balance of this year. I am pretty sure they have about 15 years of lease obligations after this year. Not too hard to get to $450mil in debts.

That "debt" is not guaranteed. It hasn't been earned yet so it's not debt. Trade, death, retirement, violations of player conduct, etc. can all void those potential future expenses. Ohtani would be a different story as he has earned some of the contract which is deferred, but those deferrals were likely pre-funded.

The debt in this case, as was mentioned above, includes other Pohlad Company investments and businesses where loans were taken against the Twins. It's not like businesses (and people) don't do this kind of stuff all the time so I don't get the rage in the comment further above, but it's a major sticking point because the Pohlads want to roll the debt into the purchase which adds $425MM to the real cost of the team. Like trading in a car which has a bunch of negative equity, but the the owner wants full trade in value and for the dealer to pay the loan off.

[jmlease1]

2 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

I trust the reporting of Phil Miller over Charley Walters. Walters is the biggest hack sports writer in the state. 

Truth. Shooter is still desperate to be Sid.

[gman]

20 hours ago, bean5302 said:

That "debt" is not guaranteed. It hasn't been earned yet so it's not debt. Trade, death, retirement, violations of player conduct, etc. can all void those potential future expenses. Ohtani would be a different story as he has earned some of the contract which is deferred, but those deferrals were likely pre-funded.

The debt in this case, as was mentioned above, includes other Pohlad Company investments and businesses where loans were taken against the Twins. It's not like businesses (and people) don't do this kind of stuff all the time so I don't get the rage in the comment further above, but it's a major sticking point because the Pohlads want to roll the debt into the purchase which adds $425MM to the real cost of the team. Like trading in a car which has a bunch of negative equity, but the the owner wants full trade in value and for the dealer to pay the loan off.

I don't know what school of financing you went to, but you get your money back. So you think that none of the player contracts have to be paid? If someone buys the team tomorrow you don't think that the players will get paid? Amazing.

[The Great Hambino]

Future obligations for which you have not yet received the benefit, such as guaranteed contracts and lease obligations, are not debt from an accounting and business valuation standpoint.  They are things that any going concern is going to have.  These items are baked into the value of the business.  Things like future contracts are never considered debt in this context because in paying those obligations, you are also receiving the benefit of player performance or use of the stadium or whatever, and these benefits generate revenue.

Debt in this context is future obligations for which you have already received the benefit - aka loans.  Not every business carries debt on their books - it is a choice to fund your operations (or withdraw the proceeds to use to fund other operations) with debt as opposed to equity.   That is why the assumption debt (not all liabilities, just debt) has to be considered when selling a business.   With loan debt, there's no revenue-generating benefit in the future.  It is a straight-up cash outflow.

Think of it this way: you have two identical companies - same lease, same future contracts, same revenue - only one is free and clear of debt, but the other is carrying significant debt like the Twins.  Their values of their operations are identical, but no way anyone pays the same for the two teams.  Either the prior owners assume the debt, or the purchase price is decreased to account for the additional obligation.

[amjgt]

On 5/29/2025 at 12:15 PM, Jocko87 said:

How do you know this?

There is a reason articles don't explicitly say this and that is because its not a known fact.  

Shout it as loud as you want but that doesn't make it true.  

In the meantime, stop spreading **** you don't have a way to know.  People read and believe it. 

 

First of all, it's been relatively widely discussed. It probably hasn't found it's way into an official article because nobody is willing to go on the record and be like "yep... the Pohlads have been borrowing money against the Twins." Given the Pohlad's portfolio, it certainly makes sense that they might need to borrow money against a fully realized asset (the Twins) to help some of their assets that aren't performing great (Commercial Real Estate)

 

Second of all, it shouldn't actually matter. Just like how much I owe on my mortgage doesn't dictate how much the a new buyer (and the bank that's loaning them the money) will pay for it.