The Seidler family is nearing a deal to sell the Padres to a group led by private equity billionaire José E. Feliciano and his wife Kwanza Jones, per Jared Diamond and Miriam Gottfried of the Wall Street Journal. The deal values the Padres franchise at close to $3.9 billion, which would shatter the previous record for a big league franchise in a sale. Steve Cohen’s $2.4 billion purchase of the Mets in 2020 currently stands as the record.
Dennis Lin of The Athletic reported yesterday that the sale process was nearing its conclusion, suggesting that the Seidlers could find a price upwards of $3.5 billion. Per the Wall Street Journal duo, San Diego received multiple bids valuing the franchise at more than $3.5 billion. In addition to Feliciano’s group, the three finalist bidders were groups led by Golden State Warriors owner Joe Lacob, Detroit Pistons owner Tom Gores, and Dan Friedkin, who owns the English Premier League’s Everton club.
Feliciano himself is the majority owner of the EPL’s Chelsea F.C. He’s also the co-founder of Clearlake Capital, a private equity firm with more than $90 billion of assets under management and a focus on the technology, industry and consumer sectors. Jones is the founder and CEO of Supercharged, a media company based in Santa Monica.
Padres ownership has been in a state of relative tumult since late owner Peter Seidler passed away in November of 2023. Seidler’s willingness to spend at aggressive levels well beyond prior iterations of Padres ownership ushered in a new era of baseball in San Diego — one that saw the Friars emerge as perennial contenders and major players in free agency. From 2009-14, the Padres ranked in the bottom six MLB teams in terms of payroll each season. Under Seidler’s watch, payroll soared to north of $200MM, including a record $249MM Opening Day payroll in 2023. The Friars have run a $200MM+ Opening Day payroll in four of the past five seasons.
Since Peter’s passing, there’s been infighting among his widow and siblings. Sheel Seidler, Peter’s wife, filed suit against his brothers Bob and Matt Seidler, alleging that they breached fiduciary duty and committed fraud as successors to his trust. She accused them of selling assets to themselves at below-market prices in an effort to consolidate control of the franchise. Matt countered by accusing Sheel of “manufacturing claims” to secure control of the franchise herself. The allegations were never litigated in full; Sheel’s claims were settled outside of court earlier this year.
In the meantime, Peter’s other brother, John, was approved as the franchise’s new control person in February of 2025. John announced last November that his family had begun “a process of evaluating our future with the Padres, including a potential sale of the franchise.” In the months to follow, as many as five serious bidders emerged. The Feliciano, Lacob, Gores and Friedkin groups were the final four, it seems.
It bears emphasizing that nothing has been finalized just yet. Diamond and Gottfried report that an official announcement could come early next week, however. Even after the deal is agreed upon, Feliciano and Jones won’t immediately take over control of the club. They’ll still need to be approved by 75% of the league’s other owners at the next MLB owners meetings in June. Lin, Ken Rosenthal and Britt Ghiroli of The Athletic add that the final net amount of the deal will need to factor in the approximately $300MM of debt the franchise has accrued. Regardless, it’ll be a record-shattering agreement if the proposed agreement is pushed across the finish line next week.
Time will tell precisely what the ownership transition means for future iterations of the Padres. Eye-popping sticker price notwithstanding, there’s no guarantee that Feliciano and Jones will have the same appetite for spending as their late predecessor, Peter Seidler.
Even in the two years since Peter’s untimely passing, payroll has been scaled back to an extent. The Padres have trotted out $200MM+ Opening Day payrolls in each of the past two seasons, placing them in the top-10 of the league in both instances, but that’s a ways removed from the team’s franchise-record $249MM mark set in 2023. In each of the past two offseasons, reports have surfaced about some degree of financial limitations for president of baseball operations A.J. Preller.
San Diego has made one notable free-agent acquisition in each of those offseasons — Nick Pivetta last year, Michael King this year — but the rest of their additions have all been much smaller in scale. Even Pivetta’s four-year, $55MM contract required a creative structure that paid him only $4MM in 2025 before his salary jumped to $19MM in 2026. The final two seasons of the deal are player options, giving him the right to opt out at season’s end (though his recent injury could very well sway him to forgo that opportunity).
While there are instances of new ownership prompting a radical uptick in spending — e.g. Cohen’s purchase of the Mets and Peter Seidler’s rise from minority stakeholder to majority owner of the Padres in 2020 — that’s certainly not true in every instance. The Orioles have spent more under David Rubenstein than under John and Lou Angelos, for instance, but haven’t pushed payroll beyond the levels previously established by the late Peter Angelos (John and Lou’s father). Jeffrey Loria’s sale of the Marlins to Bruce Sherman hasn’t pushed Miami out of the perennial payroll cellar. The Royals’ payroll under current owner John Sherman, who purchased the team for $1 billion in 2020, hasn’t been all that different than it was under former owner David Glass.
Regardless of what happens with club payroll, the new ownership group should bring about some stability and continuity, ending the tumultuous uncertainty that has surrounded the club over the past few seasons. And the colossal sale price for the franchise — further evidence of the game’s broader financial health — figures to be a number that is routinely cited in upcoming labor talks between the league and the Players Association as the 2022-26 collective bargaining agreement nears its conclusion on Dec. 1.
Padres fans say Feliz Navidad!
You know, Jose Feliciano, you’ve got no complaints.
Peter Seidler was part of the investor group that purchased the San Diego Padres for $800 million in 2012.
Just 14 years later, the team sells for FIVE times that amount or $3.9 billion, then we know that the owners who are part of an elite monopoly that dozens want to join, are scamming the fans and players if they don’t maintain a $200 million annual payroll. The team appreciated in equity by more than $200 million per year! That does not even count cable/tv/internet revenue, ticket and parking proceeds, concessions, stadium advertising, etc.
The owners who are not capable of playing at the big boy table should sell partial stakes in their team to have enough money for cash flow while they take in the equity increases due to the monopoly and demand to join the billionaires club.
If your home appreciates in value does your cash flow also appreciate? Nope. You have to borrow against the equity if you want to put cash in your pocket – but it’s still debt to be repaid.
Great investment return. Here’s another – George Steinbrenner bought the Yankees for $10 million in 1973. The franchise is now valued at 8+ billion.
“The team appreciated in equity by more than $200 million per year! That does not even count cable/tv/internet revenue (…)”
That does not count any revenue. Revenue, enterprise value, and shareholder equity are all entirely separate concepts. Revenue has gone up, so have player salaries and their cost of operations. So too likely has debt. The Padres are one of the top-spending teams in baseball, based on the reported 2024 numbers they were 5th in overall payroll + tax spending and 6th when considering that number as a percentage of revenue, so I’m not sure what you are so upset about? The only teams who outspent them in dollars were the Dodgers, Mets, Blue Jays, and Phillies. Are those not the big boys?
Steinbrenner’s children inherited the team tax free.
What does that have to do with anything?
2010 was the year to die to avoid the estate tax. The exemption was infinity.
Damn. I missed my chance.
Ah but, all these owners have plenty of other money-making investments. Their ball club is just one that will cash out very, very, very well when they’re ready to do so. Let’s not worry about the owners.
Dirty Water
I am complaining about the low spending owners who are scamming the fans. I thought that it was obvious that I do not count the Seidler Padres among those scum. Seidler put the fans first and still made a bundle doing it. In the baseball context, he was definitely one of the good guys.
I’ve got this funky looking car that can take you back in time if you would rather be dead.
You’re such a generous son-of-a-b.
Top 100, thanks for clarifying. I wasn’t following so I thought you were complaining about Seidler rather than doing the opposite.
Dirty Water
No worries, I meant other owners should spend like Seider and you will get your investment money back and more.
must be tough watching the games on radio if you’re Jose, though…
Chico and the man approve that comment.
looking good!
I think he’ll light their fire.
Santa Esmeraldo does not want to be let misunderstood
I think it’s a no brainer for SD to play that song after every home win.
And Theme from Chico and the Man when they lose.
Love it record sale. The best franchise in the league.
I just wanted to thank the Seidler family for the years of all in mentality. Its been a win now, we want to win a championship and I appreciate that. No excuses, we have been close and its been fun. We miss Peter, we appreciate the work his wife and family put in the organization. We also are excited with the next chapter and new ownership group. Lets do this and win a championship
So, can we expect continued spending for player salaries?
If Chelsea’s history of spending is any indication of his plans with the Padres, then abso-fricken-lutely.
If Chelsea’s shoot-fire-aim approach to player procurement and return on said investments is any indication then absolut-frickr-lately.
Truth!
Chelsea cut player spending since Felciano took over. They’ve increased spending on executives by 80% though. Many people blame the lack of spending on why Chelsea had their first losing season in the 2000’s after he bought the team. Do you guys watch the premier league because I’m actually a Chelsea fan and can tell you the best thing about this owner is his focus on cheap talent and development but spending isn’t his plan to get talent
I commented on that below. Chelsea was 19th out of 20 in transfer market spending in 2025-2026. Over the past 5 seasons they are a net profit-making team in the transfer market which I believe means they have transferred out more money in salaries than they have spent on players.
Yeah, agents and the players’ union will be celebrating this a lot more than Padres fans lol
Obviously sometimes people surprise you, but I’d be really, really surprised if they were looking to drop almost $4 billion to buy a team just to slash it all down to the bones. To justify that valuation they’ll need to keep revenue flowing at a level that’s only attainable with consistent playoff runs and sold out stadiums.
Dirty – Exactly! As long as they are competitive, no need to get rid of the great ones like Tatis and Orsillo.
And typically when prospective buyers are ready to purchase a team, if they want to cut payroll they will have the sellers do the dirty work instead of saving it for the buyers.
Chelsea ponzi scheme says hello. Ponzi: when you can’t afford to acquire Fonzie at the top of his game so you attempt to pass off a Frankenstein of a Potsy -Ralph Malph facsimile
I don’t follow soccer so I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about, but I’m going to go out on a limb and guess it wouldn’t be a good implication for San Diego fans trying to guess how he might run the Padres?
I could’ve sworn I saw this guy profiled on “American Greed” last weekend. 🤣
I thought a Fonzie-scheme was when someone asks for your leather jacket and promises to pay you back with two leather jackets.
Fans appear to be unhappy with Clearlake Capital’s management of Cheasea FC.
There have been public protests etc…
That’s brutal. I really do wish better for San Diego fans, they’ve had a rough go with the Spanos family and the Padres are (have been) finally fun after many years of being hapless.
Imagine a club that goes out and tries to corner the market on players, but unlike say the Dodgers who have a methodology and a development pipeline, simply go out and order everything. And then proceed to farm out players like a highly leveraged day trader. Imagine if the team wasn’t constrained by a 40 man: signing the MLB equivalent of a 120 man? And cycles through managers like there’s no tomorrow? Chelsea in a nutshell.
Chelsea has cycled through 12 managers in 10 years. The current manager Frenchman Liam Rosenior, whi was promoted from within owner Todd Boehly’s portfolio of teams is sputtering after a promising start. The previous manager Enzo Maresca, despite achieving sucesss by winning the newly created Club World Cup last summer, did not even last half the current Premier League season , getting canned after curiously announcing he had just experienced the “worst 48 hours” of his career in dealing with ownership meddling. Sure it’s apples and oranges, but money not everything. Imagine an Arte Moreno club with a 120 man, overruling the GM and signing 3 Anthony Rendons.
And signing the Rendons to 15 year contracts lol
John Henry is an investment fund guy also.
Seems like he has torn down the Red Sox multiple times to go for lower salaried, drafted players in major rebuilds.
Chelsea FC has run record deficits in that league according to press reports.
They dumped many veteran, expensive players helping the team win and then signed lesser talented, younger players to expensive contracts?!
The had no experience running a European Soccer(football club)
and it shows.
Spending money recklessly is one thing or even foolishly is one thing (it’s their money). What’s irksome was their ability to hoard young players and then stilt their development by placing them in purgatory by parking them on their reserve squad and then loaning them out to 3rd tier squads, without giving them a fair chance at competing for the first team. Chelsea treated US star Christian Pulisic pretty harshly. But more telling is Gaga Slonina, who was the youngest player to debut for the Chicago Fire as a 17 yr old goalie. He exhibited so much promise, the US men’s national team outbid the Polish national team for his services. Since being acquired by Chelsea in 2022 as an 18 yr old, his career has floundered as a largely forgotten 3rd string who’s been loaned out to lower tier Belgian and English teams, jeopardizing his chances at the US world cup roster.
While soccer is not the same as MLB given baseball’s 40 man limit, it’s still a cautionary tale if Clearlake views the Padres as just another “pump and dump” opportunity to add to their portfolio. Chelsea had a successful coach Enzo Maresca who thrived despite the uncertainty, beating the top clubs in the world in winning the club world cup last summer. But after going public with an inauspicious statement that he had experienced the “worst 48 hours” after a run-in with management he was ran off and replaced by another coach plucked from management’s portfolio of European teams. With their loyal manager in place, Chelsea is in the midst of a free fall: 5 game losing Streak with 0 goals, their worst stretch in 114 yrs.
DirtyWater you make the mistake of thinking that running a financially successful team and running a high payroll team are the same. I bet if you looked at the finances of teams like the Pirates, As, Angels, they have better profitability than a lot of the top spending teams. This new owner is a private equity guy. A good comparison for how they likely will be run is the Red Sox.
…..and then, depression set in.
So is Mark Walter of the Dodgers.
No, I fully understand that Black Ace. What I am saying is, the money they would be able to extract from stripping it down and running it like the Pirates or A’s would not be close to enough to justify paying $4 billion for it. Henry is a horrible comparison. He only got cheap and greedy after close to 15 years of dumping vast amounts into payroll, winning 4 championships, and upgrading Fenway Park. They bought the team for a little over half a billion 25 years ago and then did all of that. They already 10X-ed their investment before they decided to just operate as a cash cow, having the cushion of immense equity (both in literal financial terms as well as social capital) to insulate himself from the growing share of Red Sox fans he’s turned against him is the only reason he’s been able to do what he has. A fresh owner setting foot in San Diego has none of that on day one. Comparing the franchises to stages of the business lifecycle, the Red Sox when Henry started financially pulling the plug were a stable, mature publicly traded enterprise and the Padres in 2026 are like a B or C round in venture capital. Private equity guys care about exit strategy. He needs to finish the job Seidler started in San Diego if he wants to be able to one day exit at a sufficiently high multiple to justify the investment, just cash cowing it won’t get him there.
Dirty – Fantastic post, you nailed it! Yes Henry is definitely not a good comparison.
There’s two fascinating questions about the Padres, I really don’t know the answer to either.
1) Does the Padres history (never won a WS in 57 years) fuel fan engagement and therefore revenue? The Red Sox sellout streak began in May 2003, at the time it had not only been 85 years since their last WS title but also 17 years since their last AL championship. For a lot of fans starving for success, they were fully engaged. After the 3rd championship in 2013, not so much. They did not sellout every game any season between 2013-2017, and attendance dipped below 3M for the first time (after 5 consecutive 3M seasons) in 2013 and hasn’t reached 3M since.
2) The Red Sox continue to have strong revenue in large part due to Fenway being a national landmark. Petco is a very nice park in a great location surrounded by a very wealthy population, but would fans still fill the stadium for every game after the Padres win a championship or two? Would tourists and fans of visiting teams attend games just for the stadium?
Interesting points Fever. I certainly look forward to one day finding out if true or not!
But as a long-time Padres fan, I think the energized fanbase we have now is not underdog driven, but more about just simply being a party experience/thing to do, equivalent to attending a festival. Winning isn’t everything to this fanbase, at least not like is in some cities. A lot of city pride has also been developed since the Chargers skipped town, and star players and local guys like Musgrove have really embraced the city and visa versa – like family. There’s plenty else to do in SD, and that’s always been to the detriment of sports franchises, but credit to Seidler for elevating the experience to this level. I honestly think winning a championship will take it all even higher.
Petco Park is one of baseball’s absolute gems, so if the Padres do have one similarity to the Red Sox I would think it’s that their ballpark gives them a pretty strong floor, in terms of revenue potential. They may not be a city that expects or demands championships, but if they keep it a “fun thing to do” like Brew said I also don’t think you’ll ever see the bottom truly fall out in terms of fan interest like you have at certain points with other mid-market teams like the Twins currently, or Baltimore some years ago.
John Henry has been in MLB Ownership for a long time.
He started out owning the Marlins for a time.
The New Proposed Padres Ownership have no experience in running an MLB team.
If they hire the right front office, give them a budget and let them run the team, then it could work.
If they run the Padres like Arte Moreno
and constantly meddle in baseball decisions, then
those Petco Park sellouts will go away before long.
Same thing happened when Red Sox Owner Henry purchased a Soccer Club. Most of his money was going to try to revive the Soccer Club.
Spending on the baseball club was slashed and they went into fire sale and total rebuild mode.
Yes. The Pads are a shining example of “if you build it, they will come”. “Crying-poor” team owners, take notice.
Yup, they are in it to win.
They were in it to win.
We don’t know the intentions of proposed New Ownership of the Padres.
Campy Don’t F Give a D
Nice series win today Fooo. 13 of 15 packin for Mile High
Didn’t he sing with Willie Nelson?
To all the girls I’ve loved before ….
That was Julio Iglesias whose son Enrique went on to have a good career of his own. Jose [don’t know his middle initial] Feliciano was best known for Feliz Navidad.
and Light My Fire.
That was Julio Iglesias — or was it Gabriel Iglesias — or was it Enrique Iglesias———- or maybe it was Jose Iglesias. OMG!!!
Strangely enough, Jose Iglesias had a hit song called “OMG” in 2024 using a stage name.
Maybe this purchase will “light a fire” under the Padres.
They have won 8 straight and 11 out of 12, so if it gets any hotter well, I’ll love it!!!!!
Maybe they learned the details 9 days ago
Highly doubtful, since they were still sifting through multiple offers.
I’m curious how Feliciano and Kwanza Jones plan to continue to invest into the team, and Preller’s role moving forward.
Every year since 2023, I’ve predicted the Padres to falter and every year I’ve been proven wrong. They’ll overtake the Dodgers soon, I can feel it.
I say, even how the team is, we win 90+ games
Unless they micro manage the Front Office, the Team, the dugout etc.
Players Union has to love this. This huge sales price for a team that lacks a large local media market and TV deal really undermines the assertions coming from many owners that they need a salary cap.
@norcalblue
Please explain to me what the sales price of the team has to do with whether there should be a salary cap or not?
There very well might be a correlation between the 2, I just don’t see how it is directly related.
I know the whole situation with the idea of a salary cap is a touchy situation. I lean to the side that believes there needs to be a cap, but that there also MUST be a floor.
Easily done: Because the value of a franchise is a function of its ability to generate a return on investment. Stated another way, the price investors are willing to pay to own the Padres clearly indicates that the team is highly profitable. The union will no doubt point to this sale as further evidence that a salary cap is simply a means of making franchise ownership even more lucrative than it is already.
Braves, valuation for a sale is based in large measure on revenue and profit levels. The ROI of the team. There is not a direct correlation between that and a salary cap, but the sale of the Padres at a $3.9 billion valuation, the highest of any sale in MLB history by a large margin, definitely shows that a small market team like San Diego is making enough revenue and profits to be able to spend far beyond what was thought possible while still making a profit. A good ROI for the investors in the team, the ownership group.
A cap limits player salaries while not addressing the issue of disparity in individual team revenue that is driving the lack of competitiveness by many low revenue teams. A cap will not help teams be more competitive, it will only put more money in the owner’s pockets with a smaller percentage going to the players. MLB and MiLB players already make the smallest percentage of the revenue of the sport they play than the players in any major sport in the world. In the Us and Canada, all the major sports leagues pay players a guaranteed percentage of revenue between 48% and 51% with a small amount of leeway.
The solution to the lack of ability by some teams to spend on a consistent basis in an effort to be competitive is obviously much, much greater levels of revenue sharing between the teams. Once that is the case, a salary floor is far more important, and it will need to be very close to 50% of the total revenue of the league divided by 30 teams. Today that figure would be around $215 million.
Even with greater revenue sharing, I think that the MLBPA would still fight against a cap. If a team wants to spend more on a few players and go into deficit spending to increase competitiveness, that should be ok in the union’s thinking. I don’t think the owners would go for 100% revenue sharing without a cap that balances a floor.
As fans, we should not delude ourselves into believing that MLB prioritizes competitiveness, just because we do. They prioritize profitability for all of the owners of MLB. This is accomplished through revenue sharing and the CBT, the latter of which really isn’t about competitiveness so much as shifting more revenue from the wealthiest to the less-wealthy teams. A cap is entirely about ownership retaining a larger slice of the revenue pie for themselves. This is why ownership will always pursue one, and the union will always resist it. Ownership and the players perhaps could come to an agreement over sharing the game’s revenue, which would come come along with some sort of cap, but the owners have never agreed to the financial transparency required to make this a fair and verifiable deal.
Blue, Manfred has been talking about a salary cap being needed to increase competitiveness. As you said, it won’t help.
After MLB retains $5 million to take care of any fine refunds, 50% of CBT fines go to player benefits which in practice means mainly retirement benefits, 25% goes to the IGF which is where any money going to lower revenue teams now would come from, and 25% goes to support international baseball in countries without high school baseball programs.
Manfred works for the owners. When he opens his mouth, their voice comes out.
Arte said the quiet part out loud from an owners perspective when he said that he believes that winning is not in a fan’s top 5 priorities. It’s up there with air to fans. To him its all about money.
@norcalblue I’m not sure I understand your point, but I’m trying. If a would-be salary cap is set by the league’s total revenue, including TV deals, sponsorships, etc…, then how does the purchase price of the team affect that?
I took a swing at that pitch, and made solid contact.
100+ mph into the gap, snow cone catch pending review, stay tuned.
I have to wonder if the new owners of the Padres will profit lucratively, or if the Seidler group ever did – without seeing their books, do we really know?
I do lean towards supporting the players (having once been one) but I also strongly support what’s best for fans across the league.
Brew,
Billionaires continue to pay more and more for teams because those teams make them tons of money. A salary cap would limit expenses, which would make teams even more profitable and thus more appealing to potential owners, driving up prices even further.
I don’t see how a cap is better for fans than owners working amongst themselves to expand revenue sharing.
gbs42,
Yeah, I’m not for cap, but I would like to see expanded revenue sharing, and maybe a set floor.
The economics of baseball hasn’t really been my priority as a fan of the game. I learn a lot about it though here in mlbtr from you and others, thanks.
Brew, the mistake I see a lot of fans making is in imagining that the billionaires who invest in baseball franchises are doing it as a hobby. They have an infinity of places to park their money, and they didn’t get to be billionaires by hobby investing; they got there by being good at making money with money. They are intimately familiar with the balance sheets of the businesses they buy — past, present, and projected. So we have to see these skyrocketing franchise values as a direct reflection of their profitability. We can know this much without seeing the books. And the players do, too.
Blue. I mean that seems reasonable of course. I’m sure the rapidly rising value of the Padres (estimated by Forbes) will be dangled by the players association in the collective bargaining wars next year.
I’m not sure how I feel about our new owner. He sure wears psychedelic pants.
Private equity firms are heavily invested in MLB teams including Arctos Sports Partners and CAZ Investments with the Padres. They have one purpose, making a profit. They are not in it as a hobby. If the Padres were not very profitable, they would not invest in them. Both of those private equity firms are retaining their shares in the team in this sale.
@brew88
You don’t understand how appreciation increases owner profits? There’s no guarantee that a salary cap would be set only by year to year league revenue though the owners would sure love to not count the money they make on appreciation. English premier league didn’t have a salary cap and they’re the most successful league in the world. Now they instituted one that isn’t set by league revenue but individual team revenue so teams like the dodgers and Yankees would still be able to outspend teams like the Padres. It might even increase the gap because a team like the padres couldn’t rack up debt just to get a higher sell price the way the seidlers did with SD.
@War My inquiry wasn’t that broad, but yeah I don’t understand well how team purchase price in and of itself is a clear and direct indicator of how revenue sharing might be adjusted. I have to believe market variables are far more complex and the owners and players union will soon do battle on that.
San Diego is a very unique market and not like most other small to medium sized MLB markets.
A good number of very wealthy and successful people call San Diego home.
CA is the 4th largest economy in the World when compared to countries.
Just because multiple billionaires in San Diego, Southern California
and beyond bid on a billionaire’s play toy a MLB franchise
doesn’t mean the Padres Sale price can be duplicated in at least 15-18 other MLB markets.
Will he be another John Henry and spend all his money on soccer by robbing from the baseball team profits?
Fire Sale. Who want a Tatis Jr or a Machado?
The new era of Padres ownership has started!
The Puerto Rico Padres, unless he changes his mind and sympathizes with Padres fans by moving them closer to SD in which case, The Mexico City Padres works as well
LOL, racist guy is racist.
He was born in PR idiot. You whites are all the same.
Not all whites are racist. Not all non-whites are not racist.
Saying “you whites (fill in any race) are all the same” is an extremely racist statement.
I’m white and I can legally make fun of my race.
“Now, that’s funny right there. I don’t care who you are.” Larry the Cable Guy.
Wow 3.9 billion dollars for a small market team that invested and became a big player in free agency and the fans rewarded the team with sellouts at the stadium. This is proof that it can be done, so hopefully this new ownership keeps investing in the team and gives Padres fans a continuous flow of competitive baseball.
I guess Peter wasn’t insane after all
That man was a super fan of his team, it’s a shame he didn’t get to see the fruits of his labor.
Yeah. But as far as fruits, he did energize and bring hope to a fanbase that lacked both. But his ultimate goal was to bring a championship to the city and unfortunately, those fruits never ripened under his tenure. Hopefully the new ownership is a step in that direction.
Peter Seidler was a level of legend that 99% of most people even to this day do not fully grasp.
Hopefully the team will do something to commemorate him, so that there will be Always Something There To Remind you.
Same thing Mike Illtich did with the Tigers.
After he died, spending was slashed and they went into a massive rebuild.
Private equity bouta drained the Padres
They own Chelsea FC and their fans are not happy.
Perhaps the groups that missed out on the Pads might be interested in acquiring the Angels… please… pretty please?
Moreno has to show some real willingness to sell.
To be brutally honest the Angels are not in the same league as the Padres in terms of marketability. One is at the absolute top of their game and the other is a complete teardown project.
Don’t confuse any team’s on-field results with their profitability (and thus, market value). If Moreno decided to sell the team, I’d be shocked if the price was under $3B.
Angels draw a lot of fans and in that LA market make good money.
Just imagine how much they would make with an ownership group that has a passion for winning!
LFGSD! 🤎💛🤎💛
I’m just happy this has been resolved. The Seidler family infighting was just uncomfortable. Hopefully this clarity is a major positive moving forward
I don’t see the logic in this.
Some people say we live in a post-truth, post-logic society.
i.e. post-critical thinking
Hmm. And it’s the players who should bend over and agree to limit their earning power?
I know its not direectly related, but if Joe Lacob loses out on the Frairs (which it seems like he will), he becomes the by far presumptive favorite to purchase the Angels if they come on the market any time in the next 4-5 years.
Yeah, well, it depends on the owner. You know, José Feliciano, ya got no complaints.
Waiter!! What’s he deaf?
Feliz Navidad came early!
Ok, but how many tacos is that
Imagine being that Jose E. knowing that people recognize the name of an 80 year old singer over your building of a large capital investment group.
Once he purchases team — I sure hope he rolls out the other Feliz Navidad one on opening day
This should get interesting on many fronts.
“Baseball teams don’t make money.”
– too many owners
Yeah, I’m calling BS on that…again.
But selling the team does.
MLB teams are profit making businesses or there would not be so much private equity ownership involved. Mark Walter, the control person for the Dodgers, is a partner in a private equity firm. Bruce Sherman is a partner in a private equity firm. Peter Seidler was a partner in a private equity firm. Jose Feliciano is a partner in a private equity firm. 18 teams have private equity firms as minority partners with 4, including both the Dodgers and Padres, having the 15% maximum allowed by MLB controlled by private equity firms. All private equity firms are concerned about is profit taking. They don’t make purchases as an ego boosting exercise. Its all about the bottom line. You can be sure that at a minimum, all 18 teams with private equity investors are providing a positive ROI for those investors.
Some would try to say that they hold on to their investments in the team because they make huge profits on the sale of the team, but most PE firms have greater annual growth than the increase in value of MLB teams as a whole. They want to see annual profits, not just increase in the equity value.
Ray Kroc bought the Padres for $12M in 1974
That is about 20 million Big Macs in 1974. I think we were paying 55 cents each then.
National average cost of a Big Mac today is $6.72 so $3.9B will buy 580 million Big Macs. Appreciation!
Lacob can try again to buy the Angels?
Hope Lacob can get an expansion team and pay Fisher for the A’s name/history. I’m sure he has a price, he never was an A’s fan and can use the money.
Then build a new stadium on the site of the Coliseum now that they bought out Fisher.
Some of us can dream. Hopium.
Good time to shout out to the late, great Peter Seidler. None of this happens without his vision. He decided to spend on a team that had never had good financial support, saying fans will come out for a team with an owner spending to improve the team and with a chance to win. He was 100% correct. Other owners should learn from his example.
Got 4 billion to spend on the Padres but still can’t save Chelsea despite spending over $1 billion in transfers , good luck padres fans this guy does not care about winning it’s only about money for him and he lost over 400 million for Chelsea , one of the worst owners in sports
Was reading about their ownership of Chelsea FC.
A lot of very mad fans there.
The team is worse off when Clearlake Capital took it over.
Feliz navidad to Padres fan
Turns out Sheel Seidler was exactly right about the claims in the lawsuit against Matthew and Bob Seidler. The Seidler and O’Malley family did plan to sell the team. Matthew Seidler lied straight up. I would be willing to bet that if they were willing to turn over control of the $3.1 billion Peter Seidler Trust to her in order to have her ok the sale of the team, a trust that also owns the company that pays two of the brothers involved in the lawsuit and Eric Kutsenda, that she was correct about them stealing from the trust by selling items to themselves at under market value. This has turned out to be a huge vindication for her.
Does anyone else find it interesting that Alfredo Harp Helu and two other minority owners not named Seidler or O’Malley are increasing their stakes in the team and Arctos Sports is keeping theirs? Is only the Seidler’s portion of the ownership, both the Seidler/O’Malley’s 19+% and the Peter Seidler Trust’s 24% is being sold to Feliciano’s group? If Feliciano’s group is buying just that 44% ownership at a valuation of $3.9 billion, that means that they are paying $1.716 billion for that stake. The Peter Seidler Trust, meaning Sheel Seidler since she is the sole beneficiary, will come away with $936 million while the Seidler and O’Malley’s will get $772 million.
I have not been able to find out if any other minority partners are selling to Feliciano’s group to put them over 50%. Has anyone heard anything definitive?
Got my answer from Jared Diamond of the WSJ. Nearly all of the minority owners kept their stake and Alfredo Harp Helu increased his.
Feliciano and Jones are making their investment in the team personally, not as part of his private equity firm Clearlake. Private equity firms can hold a total of 15% of a team regardless of if there is one or ten firms invested in the team. Arctos Partners and CAZ Investments are already invested in the Padres and neither are selling their share.
Helu owns the the Diablos Rojos del Mexico that plays in Mexico City and is a media mogul in Mexico in believe. A billionaire in his own right. I am pretty sure that the series between the Padres and Diamondbacks will be held in the stadium named after him in Mexico City this season too. I could be wrong about that though.
Some interesting updates that are leaking out little by little.
The Kumeyaay tribe, the owners of Sycuan Casino, are part of the group of owners put together by Feliciano. Is a Native American nation or a casino part of the ownership group of any other team? I don’t believe so.
A few small minority owners including Greupner that had been trying to sell their shares after Peter Seidler died and decided to hold on to them temporarily, are going to make out quite well if they sell now. 1% at a $3.9 billion valuation is a $39 million payday. Greupner deserves that payday. On the financial end he has been the architect of a drive that has seen the Padres revenue nearly double in his tenure. No word on the others, but what we do know is that combined they hold single digit ownership. 1-9% total.
Alfredo Harp Helu increased his holdings, so he must have purchased a small amount more from one of the minority owners that chose to sell at the higher valuation caused by the sale by the Seidlers and a few other small minority partners. How much does he hold now? That is a great question.
It does not appear that either of the PE firms that owned shares have divested in this sale and they still hold 15%.
The protests in London against Chelsea FC’s BlueCo ownership that includes Todd Beohly, Mark Walter, and Clearlake Capital whose partner include Behdad Eghbali and Jose Feliciano, were insane. More than 2000 people showed up. Google “Protests in London Against Chelsea FC’s BlueCo Ownership”. Then go to YouTube and search it there. Soccer fans are passionate.
A few more tidbits are coming out about the sale of the Padres.
With the Kumeyaay Nation, owners of the Sycuan Casino, being part of the Feliciano group, the numbers that Feliciano and Jones will control is rumored to be between 30% and 40%. I would suspect but am definitely guessing, that Sycuan will control up to 10% and Feliciano will be the control person at 30%. Peter Seidler was the control person while holding 24%.
The Peter Seidler Trust is not fully divesting of its 24% ownership. Apparently, the trust will continue to hold between 4-5%. Rumors are that the trust will sell the same percentage that the rest of the Seidler and O’Malley family own which is known to be less than 20%.
Most of the larger current minority investors including Alfredo Harp Helu, Arctos Partners, and CAZ investments will retain their shares. The Mexico City radio station W Deportes reported that Harp Helu will be investing more than $100 million USD in purchasing additional ownership shares during this sale and that he would be the 2nd largest investor in the team. $100 million++ could be 3% more depending on the actual amount he is investing. 1% = $39 million at a $3.9 billion valuation. I think that it would be bigger news if he was going to become the 2nd largest investor in the team.
A small group of minority investors are selling their ownership shares, but it’s not yet known if Padres CEO Erik Greupner is one of them. The rumors I was hearing earlier was that the total being sold by those minority partners was in the single digits. It may be more than that if Haro Helu is picking up 3% and the PST is retaining 4-5%.
Guesses as to ownership percentages if the sale goes through as expected:
Feliciano/Jones – 30%
Sycuan/Kumeyaay Nation – 10-15%
2 PE Firms – 15% max allowed by MLB
Alfredo Harp Helu – 15%
PST/Sheel Seidler – 4-5%
Other minority partners – 20-25%
Sheel Seidler dropped several other claims against Matt, Bob, and John Seidler from what I can find from reading publicly available portions of the docket. From what I can see you have been correct in your assessment of the case in your comments over the last couple of days. Peter Seidlet’s widow has been awarded at least temporary control of her deceased husband’s trust of which she is the beneficiary and the claims against the 3 Seidler brothers for selling trust assets to themselves for less than market value are still pending. I am curious to see the rest of the fallout and if an NDA was signed to keep dirty laundry from being aired once the sale and lawsuit proceedings are both completed.
Had to look it up. Chelsea FC was 19th out of 20 in spending in the Premier League transfer market this season. The are a net profit-making club in the transfer market over the past 5 years. I think that means they have sold off more player salaries than they have brought in. I have no clue how that translates in MLB spending, but it doesn’t sound good if Feliciano is part of that decision making. The team is in 6th place right now.
It’s not just that they are that low in spending. Chelsea used to be one of those teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, etc where it was unfathomable they wouldn’t be a top 5 team in the league. And they always were willing to spend to win. Once Feliciano’s group bought them that changed. They will operate like the Red Sox letting guys like Betts go instead of paying them. Or like how the Tigers currently operate.
I have been reading and listening to a bit about Premier League football and Chelsea since I found out about the sale of the Padres to Feliciano’s group. It appears that Feliciano is not part of the day-to-day operations with Chelsea. His partner in Clearlake, Todd Boehly, is the Chairman and is the one that runs the team. He is also part of the ownership group for the Dodgers.
Apparently Boehly is not part of the ownership group buying the Seidler family’s portion of the Padres. Hopefully that is a good thing for the Padres.
Just an interesting tidbit, Mark Walter who is part of the Dodgers ownership group is also a director/owner for Chelsea FC.
After the sale will the Seidler brothers go back to LA to be Dodger fans again?
I hope Mr. Feliciano has something left in his change purse to let Preller&Co. bring in a starter.
“Padres ownership has been in a state of *relative* tumult.”
I see what you did there, Steve.
That’s tumult with a capital T.
4 billion to finish second or third in the division every year lol.
If New Ownership with zero experience in MLB Ownerhip does not completely mess things up(hopefully not).
It appears to be working for some teams owned by Investment Funds/companies.
Clearlake Capital’s Ownership of the Chelsea FC has seen debt rise sustantially and performance of the club regress so far.
Teams with known PE (Private Equity) investment include the Boston Red Sox, Los Angeles Dodgers, Houston Astros, and San Diego Padres.
18 teams have investments by private equity firms. The 4 you mentioned have PE investments at the 15% maximum MLB allows.
Maybe Arte Moreno will sell the Angels, now that he’ll get no less than $4B for the Angels.
From your fingers to God’s ears. PLEASE. Arte SELL!!!!!!!!!
Now go get Giolito
Does this mean that the national anthem is going to run 10 minutes before every game?
So is the San Diego team going to be better or a lot worse???
At least the past ownership sure didn’t mind spending the money to go after the top notch players available.
If he runs it like he and his partners have run Chelsea FC,
then they may dump big contracts, get younger and less expensive and go to more of a modified Brewers, Rays, Guardians,Red Sox model
trying to lock in younger players and supplement it with a few lower cost free agents etc.
They could take an attendance hit if they radically change the current business model and do not compete yearly with the Dodgers and others for the playoffs and championships.
Have to wait and see.
If they run it like they are running Chelsea FC, then there could be some regression.
Are they retaining AJ Preller?
If yes, then will Preller be given a budget that pushes spending up to the luxury tax levels?
If they let Preller and other baseball front office pros run it then the present policies and generous spending could continue.
If not, then all bets are off
The Padres are in a unique situation in that they have 5 of 9 positions tied up in long term deals. Even their closer and catchers are controlled for 3 more seasons after 2026. They only have had to fill in around the edges and their GM has done a good job of doing so.
Those long term deals does put them in a position that in 2028 their payroll will be up around $280-300 million. You have to wonder if the team and the groups bidding to buy the team know something about changes coming to the financial situation in MLB that fans are not privy to.
If Chelsea FC Management tactics are any indication,
Padres fans could be looking at end of year trades involving expensive
contracts & players in their 30’s:
Machado, Bogaerts, Cronenworth, Musgrove and some of the pitchers who are not free agents.
They might keep Tatis Jr and Miller because they are still relatively young.
They probably keep CF Jackson Merrill also..
Or they could tear the entire thing down and restock with younger players.
Better have Preller or another experienced baseball Pro doing the baseball deals or they may kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
The value of this franchise rose to this level because the Owners spent money trying to win a Championship and put an exciting product on the field that everyone wants to be a part of.
There is zero reason the Padres should sell more tickets than the Boston,Chicago and New York teams
Let this be a lesson to the owners of teams like CHW, Col,Pit,Mia and TB.