Aaron Gleeman Leaves the Athletic - Goes back to Independent Website

[Vanimal46]

Pretty big news this morning. Good luck to him continuing his dream of writing about the Twins! 

[Dave Borton]

Tough time to initiate a subscription service, covering the Twins.

Gutsy.

[bunsen82]

The subscription news and forums are sadly a dying breed as is the newspaper industry.  Not sure what the answer is but I don't think this will work out the way he hopes.  

[jaimedude]

Seems like there were some behind the scenes reason's as to why the Athletic wanted to move Gleeman off Twins coverage, more than meets the eye than just offering him the National writers job and it wasn't just National write coverage.  

[Steve J]

Think he's going to finish his top 30 twins of all time list?  He left off like twenty years ago.  

[Richie the Rally Goat]

2 hours ago, Dave Borton said:

Tough time to initiate a subscription service, covering the Twins.

Gutsy.

he started it in 2002, not exactly the pinnacle of interest then either. 24 years later maybe some wisdom with age would come

then again...

[jorgenswest]

I would bet on Aaron. I think his writing talent mixed with his knowledge and passion for the Twins will make it regardless of the success of the season. 

[Mike Sixel]

Good luck!

[tony&rodney]

Stumbled onto Gleeman when he had a counter on his page in his first year blogging.

I'm afraid he became a little overly concerned with payroll and owners. Yes, these are important but we don't get a choice and once one makes their point several times .... move on. 

My unhappiness with Pohlads began in 1984. I have let it go.

Wish him luck. The stories of the smell of Chinese food in his mom's basement were funny.

[Possumlad]

The only way to make meaningful money (enough for it to be your primary income) writing about the Twins is to be hired by a larger publication - Star Trib, Pioneer Press, ESPN, etc.

Very few people will pay a subscription fee to read a single writer's Twins takes, no matter how interesting they are. 

Maybe he should collab here at TD? His writing could be an additional "premium content" carrot for the "Ad-Free Caretaker" tier? 

[garn from vancouver]

i really enjoy the podcast with john and am considering supporting him even if i don't read it regularly. he seems like a good guy and i do enjoy the writing i have read. 

[amjgt]

26 minutes ago, Possumlad said:

The only way to make meaningful money (enough for it to be your primary income) writing about the Twins is to be hired by a larger publication - Star Trib, Pioneer Press, ESPN, etc.

Very few people will pay a subscription fee to read a single writer's Twins takes, no matter how interesting they are. 

Maybe he should collab here at TD? His writing could be an additional "premium content" carrot for the "Ad-Free Caretaker" tier? 

Feels like you might have said something similar when he and John launched their patreon podcast 5 years ago. 

And you'd have been wrong on that one.

I have no idea if it's going to work out for Aaron, but based on a) his initial comments, and b) the number of comments I am seeing on his articles, it seems to be going pretty good 24 hours in. 

Just because YOU aren't willing to pay, doesn't mean many others aren't. 

[amjgt]

11 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Stumbled onto Gleeman when he had a counter on his page in his first year blogging.

I'm afraid he became a little overly concerned with payroll and owners. Yes, these are important but we don't get a choice and once one makes their point several times .... move on. 

My unhappiness with Pohlads began in 1984. I have let it go.

Wish him luck. The stories of the smell of Chinese food in his mom's basement were funny.

I really enjoy 90% of what Gleeman produces, but I agree that he does get hung up on obsessions sometimes. The current one is Target Field attendance. 

[Parfigliano]

17 minutes ago, amjgt said:

I really enjoy 90% of what Gleeman produces, but I agree that he does get hung up on obsessions sometimes. The current one is Target Field attendance. 

I bet the Pohlads are obsessing about the lack of attendance.

[Danchat]

Looks like Aaron has received a lot of support:

 

[Possumlad]

1 hour ago, amjgt said:

Feels like you might have said something similar when he and John launched their patreon podcast 5 years ago. 

And you'd have been wrong on that one.

I have no idea if it's going to work out for Aaron, but based on a) his initial comments, and b) the number of comments I am seeing on his articles, it seems to be going pretty good 24 hours in. 

Just because YOU aren't willing to pay, doesn't mean many others aren't. 

I would have said the same thing, and would have been right. Clearly the Patreon podcast isn't paying the bills, as Gleeman was working at the Athletic when he started it & continued to until now... which was my point. I'm not suggesting he won't get any subscribers at all, just that it would be very tough to pull off as a primary source of income... My guess is we see him sign on again somewhere at some point.

But I enjoy his work, and I'm not sure why you say I wouldn't personally subscribe. I'm the target market & may subscribe. 

[amjgt]

25 minutes ago, Possumlad said:

I would have said the same thing, and would have been right. Clearly the Patreon podcast isn't paying the bills, as Gleeman was working at the Athletic when he started it & continued to until now... which was my point. I'm not suggesting he won't get any subscribers at all, just that it would be very tough to pull off as a primary source of income... My guess is we see him sign on again somewhere at some point.

But I enjoy his work, and I'm not sure why you say I wouldn't personally subscribe. I'm the target market & may subscribe. 

Quick math on the patreon....

3500 monthly subscribers. $8 per month. $28000 per month.

I believe patreon takes about 1/3 of that and assuming Aaron and John split the rest evenly, then that's about $10,000 per month.

I'll leave it to you as to whether that pays the bills or not. 

[amjgt]

... and that doesn't include the revenue they get from ad sales on the free show.

[Dave Borton]

2 hours ago, amjgt said:

...that's about $10,000 per month.

I'll leave it to you as to whether that pays the bills or not. 

Wholely hinges on how long Hormuz hogs the headlines <winks>. Though illiterate, I can be alliterate.

[tony&rodney]

6 hours ago, amjgt said:

I really enjoy 90% of what Gleeman produces, but I agree that he does get hung up on obsessions sometimes. The current one is Target Field attendance. 

Each one of us, unless we have someone amongst us at Twins Daily who has billions of dollars, are merely fans. We cannot change the players or the owners. We are free to praise, criticize, or contribute to this blog.

When I hear people say they will not attend or spend any money on anything Twins related until the Pohlads sell the team, I can respect that opinion. However, one must always consider the consequences of a wider boycott, if that is what it is. Be aware that MLB would  approve a move of the franchise if the Twins were not supported across several seasons and became financially desperate. A judge could enforce the current lease but given the current government in power nobody should be surprised if that did not happen should the worst come to pass. 

The Pohlads have indicated a willingness to sell the team. There are some comparisons around baseball from recent sales as to a fair or reasonable price tag. In the meantime the Pohlads have pushed to extend the lease on Target Field, so I do not believe (even a little bit) there is real concern about the team moving elsewhere. 

The Twins haven't been the big show in Minnesota since the 1960s. The Vikings, Wild, Timberwolves, Lynx, and Loons are all drawing well. Perhaps baseball just isn't that important to the average sports fan in Minnesota. Target Field remains a fine baseball venue and I find parking easy and getting into, around, and out of downtown quite a friendly experience. Maybe some improved public relations and a more positive outlook towards the Twins would help. Either way, I'm a Twins fan. The current squad has some easily identifiable weaknesses but I find this team more interesting than the last two iterations.

If Aaron Gleeman wants to spend his days opining about all things Pohlad and focus on attendance, that is his right. It doesn't seem interesting to me in the least but there are certainly people who like that type of stuff. 

Two tall fellows going tonight, with Eury Perez and Bailey Ober as starting pitchers. Baseball is my interest.

[TheLeviathan]

6 hours ago, Danchat said:

Looks like Aaron has received a lot of support:

 

Good for him.  His price-point was smart, glad he hit his goal!

[Possumlad]

19 hours ago, amjgt said:

Quick math on the patreon....

3500 monthly subscribers. $8 per month. $28000 per month.

I believe patreon takes about 1/3 of that and assuming Aaron and John split the rest evenly, then that's about $10,000 per month.

I'll leave it to you as to whether that pays the bills or not. 

Good data & points, fair enough. I support anyone who wants to love & talk to me about the Twins full time, so I'll just say good luck Aaron! 

[Brock Beauchamp]

On 5/11/2026 at 3:51 PM, jaimedude said:

Seems like there were some behind the scenes reason's as to why the Athletic wanted to move Gleeman off Twins coverage, more than meets the eye than just offering him the National writers job and it wasn't just National write coverage.  

I'm familiar with the story. It really was just national coverage. If you haven't noticed - and many people haven't because baseball fans are generally focused on a single team - The Athletic has been shedding local reporters for several years now.

Which is really disappointing, but also good for us. But still disappointing, they're just morphing into another ESPN over time.

[jaimedude]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I'm familiar with the story. It really was just national coverage. If you haven't noticed - and many people haven't because baseball fans are generally focused on a single team - The Athletic has been shedding local reporters for several years now.

Which is really disappointing, but also good for us. But still disappointing, they're just morphing into another ESPN over time.

I imagine they are cutting cost and coverage like all National publications. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 minutes ago, jaimedude said:

I imagine they are cutting cost and coverage like all National publications. 

Sure, but if they're going to be a relatively expensive subscription model, what exactly are they giving us that we can't get elsewhere? The entire premise of the platform was high-quality, newspaper-style local coverage, and that has completely fallen apart. I think they're down to covering only about a third to half of all MLB teams now.

[jaimedude]

7 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Sure, but if they're going to be a relatively expensive subscription model, what exactly are they giving us that we can't get elsewhere? The entire premise of the platform was high-quality, newspaper-style local coverage, and that has completely fallen apart. I think they're down to covering only about a third to half of all MLB teams now.

Agreed, I no longer subscribe. 

[tony&rodney]

28 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Sure, but if they're going to be a relatively expensive subscription model

The Athletic is a link on The New York Times website. One can negotiate how much to pay each month. You can add on word games for more money. We have paid as little as $4 per month in the past.

The original The Athletic subscription was expensive. I signed up when The Athletic debuted. I canceled when it was bought out and have been continually been able to access the content from my Times subscription. I think we pay $12 a month for that now.

Agree that the model is losing its appeal of local writers. I still enjoy Keith Law.

Since I only watch baseball and just minimally follow other sports it is interesting to read the coverage of other Minnesota teams.

[Recognize]

And

[Dave Borton]

5 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Sure, but if they're going to be a relatively expensive subscription model, what exactly are they giving us that we can't get elsewhere?

Mine comes with my NYTimes subscription. I enjoy a variety of writers/team coverage as my interested in baseball exceeds interest in the Twins.

Trial subscription is now $2/month for 1st 12 months. Suggests they are hurting for subscribers.

Give me the Sporting News of the '50s.