Dual Ownership

Buried in this story on whether or not Todd Greene will have surgery (I don’t know how those Padres bloggers do it with material like this) is a choice nugget about Tom Werner:

Tom Werner, who retained a minority stake in the Padres even after joining the Red Sox board, is no longer part of the Padres ownership structure; this offseason, Padres Chairman John Moores bought out the 10 percent stake that had remained in the Werner sphere.

I know that John Henry sold his stake in the Marlins in order to facilitate his purchase of the Sox, but it’s difficult to find information that discloses Werner maintained a stake in another major league ballclub.  Was it in a blind trust?  How did Werner service this interest? Not much information seems available on Werner’s retention of stake in the Padres.  This doesn’t strike me as an entirely conflict-free asset, and I am surprised this hasn’t (or didn’t) get more attention. 

8 comments… add one

  • Nothing is more limited than a limited partner of the San Diego Padres?
    Over the years, the Pods have been a regular partner of both the Yanks and Sox. Kevin Towers has a pretty good rep, I believe.

    YF February 24, 2007, 9:07 am
  • of course we didn’t know about it. our beat writers have had much more important topics to chase down over the last few years, like dirt on theo and when manny’s showing up to training camp…

    beth February 24, 2007, 10:55 am
  • hmm. I would scream collusion between the Sox and Padres given the number of trades between the two recently, but I think Towers has been getting the better of Theo in those transactions, so I can’t complain (except the Kotteras trade was a very good one for Theo). I wonder how many limited partners have stakes in more than 1 team.

    Nick-YF February 24, 2007, 11:02 am
  • Actually, of the three most recent SD-Boston trades, Boston got the best end of the deal:
    Loretta for Miirabelli (excellent)
    Mirabelli for Bard and Meredith (horrible)
    Wells for Kotteras (good)

    Paul SF February 24, 2007, 11:11 am
  • The Loretta trade was ok, not excellent. He was, when all was said and done, either an average or below average 2nd baseman. I say the Kotteras trade is good for the Sox only because it was a smart move made by a team in a desperate situation. It’s not clear if Kotteras will amount to anything, and Wells (I think he’s planning to pitch for the Pads this year) could very well help SD much more when all is said and done. The Bard and Meredith trade we can all agree is one of the worst made on Theo’s watch. The Dave Roberts trade worked out much better for SD as Jay Payton was unhappy and turned into the rather blah Chad Bradford. Towers has gotten the better of Theo these last few years.

    Nick-YF February 24, 2007, 11:25 am
  • The Red Sox upgraded from Mark Bellhorn at the cost of an aging, poor-hitting backup catcher. Loretta clearly is aging a bit, as he didn’t have the year everyone expected, particularly in the grind of the second half. I’ll compromise and say the Loretta trade was very good. How does a good trade somehow become less good or need a qualifier if it was “only” a smart move? Smart moves still need to be recognized and made, don’t they?
    I’d say the score is more even than anything, tilting toward the Pads when you think of them as Dave Roberts for Chad Bradofrd and Mark Loretta for Bard and Meredith.

    Paul SF February 24, 2007, 12:10 pm
  • In the end, Towers has gotten the better of Theo these last two years. The net sum is positive for him and negative for the Boy Wonder. It’s not more even than anything because the Cla trade and the Roberts trade have so by so much favored the Pads.
    Even Cashman has lost a trade or two and he’s a genius.;)

    Nick-YF February 24, 2007, 12:28 pm
  • he’s a genius.;)
    hahahahaahahahaahaha. You make me laugh, Nick.

    Brad February 24, 2007, 12:37 pm

Leave a Comment