Nashvilletwin

Yes, it is very possible that the Minnesota Twins - inclusive of all revenues and expenses of every entity under that umbrella - are losing money on a cash basis. Who knows what the financial structure of the Twins or the other Pohlad entities is - i.e. what is collateralised, how much debt there is, etc. My only point, which you basically ignored, was: IF, in fact, the Twins are actually losing (substantial) cash on an annual basis, would that possibly give you a better understanding of the decisions they are making? Cash is cash - if you don’t have enough to fund operations, you have to find it somewhere. You can borrow, you can sell ancillary business, you can sell equity, you can improve operations, OR you can cut costs. All I’m suggesting is that if we assume the Pohlads aren’t stupid (which they are not), then why are they taking the actions they are taking? It’s not greed - as much as many on this sight might suggest. Maybe, it’s actually a response to how the business is actually performing.

I do not know if the time frame you are describing is correct. It very well could be. However, my reference was only specfically to the last handful of years. Certainly the Pohlads understand the financial results of their business entities, including the Twins. Management is changed out when they do not perform to the owners’ expectations. I’m pretty sure the Pohlads have been monitoring the performance of their managers.

Certainly tax laws are utilized to maximize objectives. However, let’s just say that, in fact, the Braves are losing cash on an annual basis and the Twins are as well. Would that change anything in terms of how one views the way the team is run and the decisions made?

Great post. Btw, your vision may actually not be that far off from how the team/franchise is currently run.

Thank you for asking. As I mentioned, it’s not something I can prove via publicly available documentation. I do have a bit of insight, though, and I can only leave it at that. This could be wrong, of course. But let’s assume that it isn’t for a moment. Would that change anyone’s thinking on how the Twins as a “business” are operated? I understand my views on this topic are not popular. However, if the Twins are in fact losing tens of millions on a cash basis annually, at least one could conjure up a modicum of understanding as to why the Twins’ owners/managers make some of the decisions they do.

The overall Twins franchise - inclusive of all entities - has supposedly been annually losing over $10MM on a cash basis for several years. Please note the word “cash”. I use “supposedly” because I can’t prove it per se, but have a really good idea. Regardless, no one on this site can prove it otherwise, so just for kick’s sake, open your mind a bit and assume it’s true. I get it - it’s not your cash. And yes, they are certainly making it up on increases in annual equity value. (As an aside, are we all so positive that equity values are rising as much as we all assume? Should a market like that in which the Twins operate have the same equity value growth opportunity and potential upside as others? - The answer to that is no - each of the markets is different, even though a rising or falling tide impacts all ships to some degree). But cash is cash and you still have to fund the business. What is your suggestion? Borrow? Who knows what the current balance sheet looks like or existing leverage. Take cash from the other Pohlad entities? Who knows how complicated that could be on so many different levels. Just write a check from their bank accounts and infuse cash? Is that the best use of their capital? What would you do given your wealth of business experience and acumen? Are the Twins a “community asset” that should be run for the benefit of the Twin Cities and/or state? Many on this site would probably say yes, sadly and unrealistically. The Pohlads must be idiots the way they are running this team and franchise into the ground (which, of course, they are not doing). Are the Pohlad’s perfect? No. Not even close. Are the Twins actually a pretty well run, competitive organization that mostly does the right things in the right way? Yeah, they are. The owners bashing on this site is predictable, yet still nauseating. I understand it and expect it. The Pohlads don’t make all the right calls, but the deluded posters on this site wouldn’t either. I really wish one of you would just take your own several billion dollars, buy the club and run it without a care in the world for the finances. Then the world championships will stack up (yeah, right) and we all can complain about how the clown we paid $500MM over ten years can’t hit his way out of a paper bag,

What a bunch of doom and gloom - and for no reason. Sure, payroll will fall next year, as it should. Farmer, Kepler, Santana and Margot will be gone and replaced by Lee, Julien, Wallner and one other (take your pick between Kiriloff, Rodriguez, or someone else). Plenty of money left over for some extensions. Next year’s lineup with those guys, Lewis, Miranda, Castro, Correa, Buxton, Jeffers, Ryan, Lopez, SWR, Ober, one or two of our young starters and Duran, Jax and Alcala leading the pen is a GREAT lineup. This team will not only win, but be more exciting to watch. Also, the tv deal will get resolved. The combination of those three will drive an increase in attendance. Also, if we get inflation to moderate, that would give fans a little more disposable income to spend on seeing the Twins. The gloomy continuous drivel about ownership’s supposed penury is just nauseating. I know for a fact the franchise loses upwards of tens of millions on a cash basis every year (and, yes, the equity value increases might be equal to or exceed those losses, but cash is cash). The Twins are actually a pretty well run, classy organization, If you don’t like it, either go make several billion yourself and buy the team, or just quit being a fan. I for one think the future is bright and the team’s long term plan is shaping up nicely - and the team continues to be competitive as it does.

Couldn’t agree more

Btw, I did not write “every time”. I wrote seems like “every year”. There’s a big difference. Please be more accurate when casting aspersions. Thank you.

Disagree - the trades you mentioned above were strong trades, but there have been at least three trades (if this trade heads the way some posters are projecting) where we got zippo from the pitchers. Now, the FO gets credit for the good ones. But three absolute zeros in four years is horrible (and giving up legit major leaguers in those deals). I also disagree that DeSclafani was a throw in - the plan absolutely was not for Varland to start the year as the fifth starter. No chance. We were looking for 100 plus innings out of DeSclafani with most of them coming early in the year. And btw we are paying him $4MM. If DeSclafani is truly done, we will find another starter. Let’s hope he’s not.

Lol. 100% predictable. It seems every year we make a trade for a pitcher that turns out just like this. No matter - next man up!

No, that is not necessarily true. At the deadline we hopefully will want a player that will make an immediate impact for the remainder of the season who will help us get to the World Series. That is what we all should hope for.

All could be true, but it could change the definition of “poor performance” a bit. The margin of error, so to speak, may be a little lower for those players. And, btw, trading one or more of those vets would likely mean the return are prospects - not a player looking to be an immediate contributor. Also, sure it’s “pretty easy” to trade anyone if you are just looking to clear a spot and don’t care about the return or would be willing to eat some remaining salary. But getting a good return for any of those vets may be harder to come by than suggested. Of course, it also presumes you want to trade one of them - they all may be performing as or better than expected and are important contributors (oh, and DeSclafani doesn’t count - his spot on the roster would need to be filled by a pitcher).

The first derivative of the Margot trade is that it essentially eliminated Larnach and Martin as contenders to break camp with the team as the last (13th) position player on the roster. The second derivative is that it puts more pressure on Wallner and Kiriloff, and maybe Castro (the pre trade #10-12 position players) as really the only candidates who can be sent down if someone heats up in AAA or is just ready to be brought up. So if Lee is brought up, which we all expect at some point in the not so distant future, then, barring injury, one of those guys will be sent across the river. Moreover, the trade makes the bar that much higher for a Larnach or Martin to be called up because then a second one of those three would need to be sent down as well - assuming Lee is brought up. The Margot trade actually stinks for several of the younger players on the edge of making and/or staying with the big club.

Could be the next Steer or CES….

I think you are right for the time being. But given the depth at AAA, if this team is contending at the deadline, we shouldn’t rule out a Mahle type deal (hopefully it works out better this time). Patience my friend.

Don’t forget Helman and Goodrum too. ERod starts at AA maybe, but he should be banging on the door too. This depth means a Mahle - Steer/CES trade would be very possible at the deadline. Hopefully, with more success.

Yep, that’s it and, unless there are injuries or someone way underperforms, there are really no position battles left. Let’s hope for a boring, predictable spring training breaking camp with that roster and everyone healthy and playing well.

A decent deal overall - pick up a legit “one and done” to more reliably fill a roster need and swap two fairly similar minor league prospects. Two thoughts: 1. This deal fits the FO’s more recent MO - adding veterans with some proven capability on “one and done” deals. This year we have two - Magot and Santana; last year we had three - Martin, Solano, and Gallo. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t really get invested as a fan in these guys - just not worth the effort. 2. This deal should tumble Martin down our prospect board. Barring injury, he’s looking at another full year in AAA. Another year older with new players coming up means it just is a lot less likely he’s in this team’s future plans. He (and Larnach) should be praying for a Steer/CES type deal. If I were his agent I’d be pushing hard for a trade. Boy, his career really hasn’t turned out for him and the Twins really haven’t done him any favors.

I agree! All cool.

Nah, someone needs to keeping pointing out how ludicrous it is for some of my fellow DNers to keep bashing the Pohlads year in and year out for how cheap they purportedly are. 👍

So making decent deals for players is not investing? Is your point that to be considered an “investment” the number has to be higher or needs to be an overpay? So if we had paid more for Buxton or Correa, that would count as full credit instead of 1/2? That’s ridiculous. A dollar is a dollar. Wait until the arbitrations and extensions kick in starting next season - then we will have the ability to keep our talent, instead of wasting it on the one and done types. I’d argue that the team is actually making a big investment in their young talent this year by clearing the way to develop them, and, yes, pay them in the future.

First, I said I suspect that the team is run more or less to earn a small profit give or take. Second, I agree. I do not know. But I point to the Forbes analysis that someone posted supporting that contention. Second, the level of estimated revenues and costs would seem to support the ideas, particularly how payroll fluctuates with revenues. Third, I personally could understand running the team not to lose money, but I’m having a hard time really thinking the Pohlads are looking to take huge cash out of this business of theirs. Fourth, operating expenses, not just payroll, go up every year. Let’s just be a bit kind - the Twins are a pretty well run organization doing a lot of things the right way. And the fam experience at Target Field is pretty much top notch across the board. So, until proven otherwise, I will just stick with my contention that the team is run with a target small margin and the Twins are at the lower end of that spectrum. You are free to keep banging the drum about how cheap the Pohlads are.

First, there are lots of TDers who think that the Pohlads are so wealthy that their only concern should be to deliver a WS win to the community. And no matter how much they spend, it will never be enough. Lots. Second, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You and others don’t seem too excited about this season. Others, including myself, are incredibly excited about the team that has been put together. And way more excited than what we put together at the start of last season - even though last year’s payroll was higher. Third, who says the Twins are done spending? Maybe they have a bit in their pockets to spend at the deadline to try to get us over the top. Fourth, no one on this site - including yourself - has any idea how much the Twins have made or lost over the years. Again, I posit that the Twins probably run the “business” on an annual basis to eke out a little bit of profit with a few years in the red and a few more in the black. Moreover, I posit that relative to the other franchises in the league, the Twins earn lower margins than the vast majority of them. Please, some one prove that wrong so I can jump on the “Pohlads are cheap” bandwagon. Fifth, the Twins have made long-term investments. Lots of them (Correa, Buxton, Lopez) with lots more on the way (with many approaching arbitrations and extensions on the way). Patience my friend, the investments are not only there, but are also in the plan. At the moment, I’ll take the team the Twins have pulled together this season as better and more exciting than last year’s with plenty of great entertainment on the way. And I’ll take the over on the Twins vs. the DBacks and any other small - mid market franchise this season. Would another “big” name or two (with a big contract) have been nice? Yeah, sure. I know you’d prefer to have kept Polanco. But this roster is solid, exciting and should be more than competitive.